The death of Korean cities

Amid the flurry of interest in the upcoming presidential election, a new issue is emerging: the death of Korean cities.

The results of a recently developed “Decline Index” showed that of the 144 cities and districts in the country, 96 are experiencing decline. The index was based on twelve components, including population growth and change in the number of businesses over the past five years. The degree of decline was more apparent in large regional centers, such as Busan and Daegu. In Seoul, by contrast, decline was most noticeable on the edge of the city.

As with all indices, the validity of the “Decline Index” is debatable. To close watchers of Korean cities, however, the index confirms what they already know: city centers are hollowing out as people and businesses leave for the new city centers that have developed since the 1990s.

The rise of “redevelopment projects” in the 2000s has exacerbated the problem as large swaths of central cities were allowed to deteriorate as plans for redevelopment went forward. Recent weakness in the real estate market has put many projects on hold, but not cancelled them. The holding pattern creates a situation that contributes to further deterioration because nobody wants to invest in maintenance.

The problem for Korea is that a declining city center can spread further out and eventually overwhelm an entire city as has happened in some cities in the U.S. The most extreme case of urban decline is Detroit which has lost more than half its population over the last 50 years and suffers from high unemployment, a weak tax base, and a high crime rate. Cities with vital city centers, such as New York, San Francisco, and Boston have growing populations and growing economies. They are magnets for entrepreneurs and highly educated workers.

A map of the “Decline Index” shows that Busan and Daegu are on the edge of rapid decline. The entire central area of Busan, including many areas that are mostly residential, is in decline. In the case of Daegu, the central business district and entire northeastern part of the city is in decline. Gwangju and Daejon show similar patterns with large sections around the central business district in decline. Of these cities, Busan is the most likely candidate to become the Detroit of Korea because population decline and industrial hollowing out began there earlier than in other cities.

Korea needs a serious discussion on declining cities to raise awareness of the problems that post-industrial societies with aging populations face. Rapid growth in the recent past, however, makes it difficult for Koreans to view their country as a post-industrial society. Many still do not view Korea as an “advanced country” and assume that economic progress toward that goal will continue. According to this mindset, the post-industrial stage follows the achievements of advanced country status.

To date, policy makers have focused on building new commercial centers and even new cities. Central areas of cities have received attention in the context of slash-and-burn redevelopment that puts new buildings in older areas. Except for hanok preservation efforts in Seoul and Jeonju, policy makers have ignored the existing cityscape.

In the Korean paradigm of large-scale development projects, balanced development based on small-scale updating is a time-consuming distraction that lowers profit margins. Korea has many creative architects who can develop innovative alternatives, but the current paradigm constrains their creativity.

Aside from precipitating decline, the decline of city centers makes Korean cities boring for residents and tourists alike. Across the advanced world, urban areas with vital central cores have stronger economies and offer better cultural and educational opportunities than areas that do not. By extension, a nation with a number of thriving urban areas is better off than one with fewer. Germany and Japan are obvious examples, but so is the U.S., despite glaring failures like Detroit.

By comparison, Korea will suffer greatly if Seoul is the only city with a vital urban core. The concentration of people, power, and money in Seoul will accelerate. The new city centers of the 1990s have failed to fill this gap because they are sterile and boring as planned cities around the world tend to be. They serve the needs of everyday life, but little more. Vital cities derive their energy from the sense of discovery amid the jumble of organic interactions that emerge over time in an urban environment.

With few exceptions, this is difficult to create through “planning.” The first step in developing a policy to reverse the decline of city centers, then, is to recognize the inherent value of organically derived spaces in promoting the life of cities.

The writer is a professor at the Department of Korean Language Education at Seoul National University. Email him at fouser@snu.ac.kr. <The Korea Times/Robert J. Fouser>