South Korea went through industrialization and urbanization at a pace with few parallels anywhere in the world. Over a few decades, large numbers of people moved from the countryside to cities, and homes, factories, roads and schools went up in rapid succession. That compressed urbanization was the engine behind the country's compressed growth. According to the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport's 2024 urban planning status report, 92.05% of the registered population lives in what is designated as urban land under the zoning system. But urban land in this sense does not mean only the built-up areas that come to mind. It is a legal category that covers green-belt zones as well as residential, commercial and industrial ones. Green zones account for 71% of the 17,639 square kilometers classified as urban land.
A different measure makes the concentration of urban space far clearer. Urbanized areas, defined by population density and land-use patterns, cover 2,595 square kilometers, just 2.62% of the national territory. Some 44.58 million people, or 87.1% of the total population, live in that space. Nine out of 10 Koreans, in other words, are packed into urbanized land that accounts for less than 3% of the country. It is not only people who are concentrated there. Good jobs, universities and hospitals, cultural and commercial facilities and transport networks are clustered in the same places. High density is not in itself a problem. UN-Habitat points to a density of at least 15,000 people per square kilometer as a benchmark for sustainable cities. The average density of South Korea's urbanized areas is about 17,179 people per square kilometer. Cities need a certain degree of density for people to meet often and for knowledge and information to move quickly. Well-designed density is, if anything, a source of urban competitiveness.
The problem with Korean cities is that desirable functions are concentrated too heavily in a handful of places. More than half the population lives in the greater Seoul area, and within that area demand shifts again toward Seoul, and within Seoul toward a few sought-after districts that offer good jobs along with education, transport and cultural amenities. People move in search of better opportunities, and companies move to where the people are. Once concentration takes hold, it reinforces itself. In such a structure, Seoul's home price problem cannot be solved as a housing problem alone. What people want is not simply a place to live but an entire living environment — easy access to a good job and convenient use of education, health care, culture and shops.
If this concentration continues, a hierarchy forms among cities as well. Talent in the provinces moves to larger cities and then on to the capital region and Seoul, and good jobs and companies flow in the same direction. Where people and jobs move in only one direction, it is difficult for regions to generate a virtuous cycle of self-sustaining growth. Good urban space must be created in each region as well, so that people stay, companies have somewhere to choose, and talent and jobs circulate within the region.
Urban space is not good simply because it is large, nor sufficient simply because it holds many homes. If jobs are scarce, education and health care are inconvenient and commutes are long, people will not choose that city. A good city requires housing and jobs, education and health care, culture and commerce, transport and green space to work together. Solutions must differ according to both the quantity and the quality of urban space. Where the shortfall is one of quality, aging infrastructure in existing cities must be upgraded and missing functions filled in. Where good urban space itself is in short supply, new urban space needs to be provided. Whether to repair existing cities or build new ones should be decided by which approach better protects the public's freedom of choice.
South Korea has succeeded in gathering people into cities. The next stage is to build cities where people want to live. What matters in the end is the quantity and quality of good urban space. It is time to think through and carry out the work of building cities that are innovative and livable at once.
