Urban Regeneration policy in Korea

(1)

Urban Regeneration policy in Korea

2019. 2.

Choi, Chang Gyu

([email protected]) Professor, Ph.D Urban Design Analysis Laboratory (UDAL) Graduate School of Urban Studies, Hanyang University

(2)

Urban Regeneration policy in Korea

2. Recent declining of Korean cities

1. Background of current urban regeneration policy

3. Urban regeneration as public policy in Korea

4. Current critical issues on urban regeneration policy

(3)

1.1 Rapid urbanization

❖ Industrialization and Urbanization

Figure. Urbanization rate and GDP (1960-2015)

1. Background of current urban regeneration policy

Year Urbanization

rate(%) GDP

(1 billion won)

1960 27.7 249.84

1966 33.3 1065.87

1970 40.7 2794.80

1975 48.0 10505.10

1980 56.7 39471.30

1985 64.9 87239.60

1990 73.8 197712.30

1995 78.2 428927.10

2000 79.6 635184.60

2005 81.3 919797.30

2010 81.9 1265308.00

2015 81.6 1564123.90

2017 81.5 1730398.50

2018 81.5 -

1960 1966 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2017 2018

unit : Urbanization rate(%) Unit : 1 billion won

GDP

Resource : kosis (http://kostat.go.kr/)

3

- Korea has undergone rapid industrialization and urbanization.

• Urbanization rate (1960: 27.7%, 2000: 79.6%, 2015: 81.6%)

• Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (1960: 70$/capita, 1970: 257$, 2000: 11,865$, 2015: 27,170$)

Urbanization rate

(4)

- Since the 1960s, the population concentration of Seoul has been rapid.

• The proportion of Seoul population to the national (1960: 9.6%, 1980: 22.8%, 1990: 24.1%, 2000: 21.9%)

- From 1990, Seoul's population growth stopped. After that, the proportion of Gyeonggi-do(province) increased.

• The proportion of Gyeonggi-do population to the national (1960: 11.0%, 1990: 14.2%, 2015: 24.4%)

Table. Population of Seoul, Gyeonggi-do, Seoul metropolitan area (1960-2015)

Year

Total population

(persons) (a)

수도권(Seoul Metropolitan area,SMA)

서울(Seoul) 경기(Gyeonggi) 인천(Incheon) TOTAL

population (persons)

(b)

Seoul Population Ratio(%) (b/a)

(c)

Gyeong-gi Population Ratio(%) (c/a)

(d)

Incheon Population Ratio(%) (d/a)

(b+c+d)

Percentage of population in the metropolitan area(%)

((b+c+d)/a)

1960 24,989,241 2,445,402 9.8 2,748,765 11.0 401473 1.6 5,595,640 22.4

1966 29,159,640 3,793,280 13.0 3,102,325 10.6 525827 1.8 7,421,432 25.5

1970 31,435,252 5,685,932 18.1 3,353,272 10.7 803730 2.6 9,842,934 31.3

1975 34,678,972 7,005,007 20.2 4,034,707 11.6 981336 2.8 12,021,050 34.7

1980 37,406,815 8,516,450 22.8 4,930,335 13.2 1253487 3.4 14,700,272 39.3

1985 40,419,652 9,725,447 24.1 4,792,617 11.9 1384916 3.4 15,902,980 39.3

1990 43,390,374 10,473,252 24.1 6,154,359 14.2 1816328 4.2 18,443,939 42.5

1995 44,553,710 10,342,224 23.2 7,637,942 17.1 2304176 5.2 20,284,342 45.5

2000 45,985,289 10,078,434 21.9 8,937,752 19.4 2466338 5.4 21,482,524 46.7

2005 47,041,434 10,028,631 21.3 10,341,006 22.0 2517680 5.4 22,887,317 48.7

2010 47,990,761 10,088,611 21.0 11,196,053 23.3 2632035 5.5 23,916,699 49.8

2015 51,014,947 9,941,162 19.5 12,423,017 24.4 2882868 5.7 25,247,047 49.5

2018 51,635,256 9,721,190 18.8 12,955,219 25.1 2942005 5.7 25,618,414 49.6

Resource : kosis (http://kostat.go.kr/)

1.1 Rapid urbanization.

regeneration policy 4

❖ Population concentration to Seoul

(5)

po p 60 30000 - 25000 - 2999 9 20000 - 2499 9 15000 - 1999 9 10000 - 1499 9 5000 - 9999 - 4 999 Ad m in 60

0 5 10 Kilom eters

N

A T E L I E R K A H N G , K O R E A 1 9 9 7

pop7 0 3000 0 - 2500 0 - 29 999 2000 0 - 24 999 1500 0 - 19 999 1000 0 - 14 999 5000 - 999 9 - 499 9 Ad m in70

0 5 10 Kilometers

N

[1960] [1970]

Figure. 1960 and 1970, Seoul city developed area

❖ Seoul was not prepared to cope with rapid urbanization.

- In the Joseon Dynasty, Seoul was a small city with a radius of 2km.

- There were some planned urban expansion during the Japanese occupation, but it was not big.

5

po p 60 30000 - 25000 - 2999 9 20000 - 2499 9 15000 - 1999 9 10000 - 1499 9 5000 - 9999 - 4 999 Ad m in 60

0 5 10 Kilom eters

N

pop7 0 3000 0 - 2500 0 - 29 999 2000 0 - 24 999 1500 0 - 19 999 1000 0 - 14 999 5000 - 999 9 - 499 9 Ad m in70

0 5 10 Kilometers

N

1.2 Urbanization and Slum

(6)

Figure. Cheonggyecheon stream slum in 1960s

Source: Seoul Policy Archives, https://seoulsolution.kr/ko / Source: Seoul History Archives, http://www.museum.seoul.kr/archive/NR_index.do

6

❖ Slum begun to spread in Seoul's stream and mountains.

- After the Korean War (1953) and industrialization from 1960s, a large number of population who moved to Seoul has started to reside in slums.

- These slums were concentrated on the streams or hills.

1.2 Urbanization and Slum

regeneration policy

(7)

Figure. Slum on hills (1970s)

Source: namu. Wiki, https://namu.wiki/w/%EA%B8%88%ED%98%B8%EB%8F%99(%EC%84%9C%EC%9A%B8 /

lifelog.blog,http://lifelog.blog.naver.com/PostView.nhn?blogId=s5we&logNo=150138196258&parentCategoryNo=&categoryNo=&viewDate=&isShowPopularPosts=false&from=postList

7

❖ Most of the hills surrounding Seoul's old city center are covered with slum.

- Most of them are now disappeared and apartment complexes has replaced them.

1.2 Urbanization and Slum

(8)

Figure. Gwangju complex uprising (1971. 8.)

Source: Seoul History Archives, http://www.museum.seoul.kr/archive/NR_index.do / Open Archives, http://db.kdemocracy.or.kr/ / Seoul History Archives, http://www.museum.seoul.kr/archive/NR_index.do

8

❖ Since the late 1960s, the Korean government has pursued slum clearance and migration.

- Gwangju complex uprising (1971).

• Since the beginning of 1969, the city government had forced to move people who lived in Cheonggyecheon area to Gwangju complex at Chungbu-myeon, Gwangju-gun, Gyeonggi-do (30km away from Seoul’s downtown).

• Land purchase and residential land development had simultaneously been processed.

• With the unreasonable plans and financial deficits, a group of residents in Gwangju complex uprised (1971. 8. 10)

1.3 Direct involvement by the Korean government (until 1980s)

(9)

Figure. Mokdong demolition and repulsion (mid of 1980s)

Source: Open Archives, http://db.kdemocracy.or.kr/

❖ The conflict between the government and the evictees had continued.

- Mokdong Development (mid of 1980s).

• Seoul city government directly removed slum of Mokdong area, and promoted large-scale development.

• It is suffering from strong opposition of the people who have been removed.

• The Seoul Metropolitan Government does not directly promote development projects after the event.

1.3 Direct involvement by the Korean

9

government (until 1980s)

(10)

Figure. property owner, govenments, and construction company in Joint Redevelopment Programme (JRP)

Source: 장세훈 저, 김형국 편 (1989), 불량촌과 재개발, 229p. 수정

❖ Projects led by existing landowners are proposed and promoted.

• Redevelopment associations made by landowners led the redevelopment projects

• The government supported the laws, permissions and demolition

• Capital and technology supported by construction companies

* Access to real estate development business

1.4 Joint Redevelopment Program (JRP)

10

introduction

재개발조합 가옥주

세입자

서울시 건설업체

주거공간의 해체

사회복지정책

행정지원

개발수익분배

개발수익의 제도적 보장 _갈등관계 ^{잠재된 갈등관계}

우호적관계

(11)

Figure. the evictees uprising

* Source: Open Archives, http://db.kdemocracy.or.kr/

** Source: Hani news, http://h21.hani.co.kr/arti/society/society_general/28538.html

❖ Though the protesters continued to resist, the government continued to provide indirect support.

1.4 Joint Redevelopment Program (JRP)

11

introduction

(12)

12

도 시 환 경 정 비 예 정 구 역 재 개 발 정 비 예 정 구 역 재 건 축 정 비 예 정 구 역 균 형 발 전/재 정 비 촉 진 지 구 뉴 타 운 지 구New Town Business District

Balanced Development District Housing Renewal Area Housing Rebuilding Business

City Residential Renewal Figure. Designated Area of Seoul (2008)

도 시 환 경 정 비 예 정 구 역 재 개 발 정 비 예 정 구 역 재 건 축 정 비 예 정 구 역 균 형 발 전/재 정 비 촉 진 지 구 뉴 타 운 지 구

- Beginning from the New Town policy of Seoul in the early 2000s

- Promote large-scale redevelopment by bundling previous development units

* Access to real estate development business

1.5 Special act on the promotion of

urban renewal and its and projects (2006-)

❖ Though the protesters continued to resist, the government continued to provide

indirect support.

(13)

- Eliminating old and shabby physical environments

- Do not consider social and housing welfare, cultural and historical resources, and communities important

❖ Focus only on old physical environment

- More than 70% of tenants in redevelopment district - Continuing conflicts between landlord and tenant

❖ Increased social conflicts

- Returning rate(再定着律) is less than 20%

- Most of the existing tenants and small land owners can not come back

❖ Insufficient consideration of housing welfare

- Maintained by private businesses that depend on the real estate market and its expectations on price increase

- Government involvement in residential and social welfare needed: social justices

❖ Public and government roles required

2.1 Reflection on slum clearance

2. Recent declining of Korean cities 13

(14)

- Empty city centers due to suburban development and centers blight.

- Five major metropolitan areas (Seoul, Busan, Daegu, Gwangju, Daejeon) have experienced the donut effect since '85

- Elderly population ratio - Gross Domestic Products - Increasing rate of GDP

classification 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 aging population

ratio (%) 8.7 9.5 10.3 11 11.8

classification 1990 2000 2010 2012

Gross Domestic Product

(1 Trillion) 192 636 1,173 -

GDP Growth Rate %) 9.3 8.8 6.3

14

Total Population

(1000percon) Growth rate (%)

-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10

0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 1,400,000

1970년 1980년 1990년 2000년 2010년 2012년 국내총생산(십억 원)Gross Domestic Product GDP 성장률(%)

(billion) GDP Growth Rate

(%)

2.1 Reflection on slum clearance

2. Recent declining of Korean cities

(15)

Population

Current population is reduced by more than 20 percent compared to peak population in recent 30 years or the population has decreased for three consecutive years in the last 5 years or more.

Industry

Decreased by more than 5 percent over the last 10 years to the total number of businesses or the total number of businesses declined for three consecutive years or more over the last five years

Old buildings

More than 50 percent of all buildings over 20 years old

City decline (2012)

2.1 Reflection on slum clearance

- As a result of analysis of three indicators including population, total number of businesses, and old-age building ratio, 2,239 out of 3,470 towns and villages (65%) in the nation declined (more than 2 indicators)

(16)

16

❖ Reflection on physical redevelopments until the 1970s

- 1950s urban reconstruction after the World War II)

- 1960s~70s urban renewal and urban redevelopment only for physical dev.

→ Social problems, questions about effectiveness, need for integrated approach - Growth of civil society

❖ Recent movement and approaches

- Business Improvement District (BID) in US and UK -Town Center Management (UK, European Countries) -Community Development(まちづくり) (Japan, US)

-New deal for communities (1998) by the Labour Administration (UK)

2.2 Finding alternative cases

(17)

Source: National daily news, https://m.blog.naver.com/PostView.nhn?blogId=seouldesks&logNo=221060752862&proxyReferer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.co.kr%2F / Source: hanion, http://www.hanion.co.kr hanion, http://www.hanion.co.kr

2.2 Finding alternative cases

❖Jansu village, Seoul

(18)

18

- be based upon a detailed analysis of the condition of an urban area;

- be aimed at the simultaneous adaptation of the physical fabric, social structures, economic base and environmental condition of an urban area;

- attempt to achieve this task of simultaneous adaptation through the generation and implementation of a comprehensive and integrated strategy that deals with the resolution of problems in a balanced, ordered and positive manner;

- ensure that a strategy and the resulting programmes of implementation are developed in accord with the aims of sustainable development;

- align the regeneration strategy to other initiatives in a local area, such as health and well-being activities;

- set clear operational objectives which should, wherever possible, be quantified;

- make the best possible use of natural, economic, human and other resources, including land and existing features of the built environment;

Source: Urban Regeneration, Roberts, Peter W,SAGE

2.3 Principles for urban regeneration

(19)

-seek to ensure consensus through the fullest possible participation and co-operation of all stakeholders with a legitimate interest in the regeneration of an urban area

-recognise the importance of measuring the progress of strategy towards the achievement of specified objectives and monitoring the changing nature and influence of the internal and external forces which act upon urban areas;

-accept the likelihood that initial programmes of implementation will need to be revised in line with such changes as occur;

-recognize the reality that the various elements of a strategy are likely to make progress at different speeds;

- acknowledge the importance of making provision for the long-term management of an area which has been regenerated- this implies the need for a succession strategy and progression arrangements.

-

19

2.3 Principles for urban regeneration

(20)

Environmental Analysis

e.g. urban physical quality, environmental resource use, waste management, pollution, designed, features, landscape

Internal Drivers of Change

e.g. existing strategies, availability of resources, preferences of residents, status of partnerships, leadership and champions

Neighbourhood Strategies

e.g. community action,

inner area renewal, local social facilities, community-led planning, local environmental schemes

Training and Education

e.g. skills enhancement, community training,

enhanced R&D, support for schools and school-based facilities

Physical improvements

e.g. city-centre improvement, estates action, housing

improvement, enhanced

urban design and quality, heritage

Economic Development

e.g. support for new and existing firms,

improved infrastructure, innovation, economic diversification

Environmental Action

e.g. waste management, energy efficiency, urban greening, company based action, stimulating green growth

External Drivers of Change

e.g. macro-trends in economy, European and national policy, strategies of competitor cities

INPUTS

20

Social Analysis

e.g. analysis of social stress, deprivation, skills and capabilities, community facilities, ethnic and other minority issues

Application to an individual urban area:

ㆍcity-wide analysis

ㆍneighbourhood characteristics ㆍexisting plans and policies ㆍspecified goals and aims ㆍfuture requirements

Economic Analysis

e.g. structure of local economy, income flows, employment, output, economic linkages

OUTPUTS

2.3 Principles for urban regeneration

(21)

- Urban Regeneration Research & Development (R & D) from the end of 2007

• Extensive research and advanced studies on overseas and domestic case.

- Establishment of the special law (2013)

- Purpose

• to contribute to enhancement of the quality of life of the people, such as the expansion of the base for sustainable growth of cities, improvement of competitiveness of cities, and recovery of local community,

• by strengthening the public role and support for the economic, social, and cultural revitalization of cities.

- Organization of plans and projects

• Urban regeneration strategic plan

• Urban regeneration revitalization plan

• Urban regeneration project

- Classification of the plans

• Urban economy-based revitalization plan

• Neighborhood regeneration revitalization plan

3.1 The Special Act on Promotion and

21

Support for Urban Regeneration (2013)

3. Urban regeneration as public policy in Korea

(22)

❖ Vision

- Recreating a competitive city where people are happy

❖ Purpose

- Creating jobs and strengthening city competitiveness

- Improvement of quality of life and realization of life welfare - Creating pleasant and safe settlement environment

- Cultural values based on local identity

- Strengthening resident capacity and revitalizing community

3.2 Basic policy for national urban regeneration (2013)

3. Urban regeneration as public policy in Korea 22

(23)

23

Source: http://ur.auri.re.kr/consulting/monitoring1.asp / http://www.molit.go.kr/USR/WPGE0201/m_35396/DTL.jsp / http://ur-jeonjutb.org/we/tb/tb_2_1.php

The test-bed (2010-14) The frontier project (2014-2018)

3.3 The test-bed (2010-14) and the frontier project (2014-2018) for national-level urban regeneration

(24)

24

Jeonju test-bed, Residents’ workshop

3.4 More Urban Renewal Projects:

General Area (2016 -)

(25)

Source: Gimcheon Urban Renewal Support Center, https://es-la.facebook.com/gchcenter/posts/

- Kimcheon frontier project

Kimcheon project

3.4 More Urban Renewal Projects:

25

General Area (2016 -)

(26)

Urban Regeneration General Area

Source: http://www.city.go.kr/index.do

Classified `14 frontier

area `16 General

area `18 Newdeal

project Total area

Seoul 1 3 - 4

Busan 1 4 4 9

Daegu 1 2 3 6

Incheon - 2 5 7

Gwangju 1 2 3 6

Daejeon - 1 4 5

Ulsan - 3 3 6

Sejong - - 1 1

Gyeonggi - 4 8 12

Gangwon 1 1 4 6

Chungbuk 1 2 4 7

Chungnam 2 1 4 7

Jeonbuk 1 2 6 9

Jeonnam 2 2 5 9

Gyungbuk 1 2 6 9

Gyungnam 1 1 6 8

Jeju - 1 2 3

Total 13 33 68 114

3.4 More Urban Renewal Projects:

26

General Area (2016 -)

(27)

Source: http://www.aurum.re.kr/Policy/PolicyOffice.aspx?pcode=C01

3.4 More Urban Renewal Projects:

27

General Area (2016 -)

(28)

Source: snvision.seongnam,http://snvision.seongnam.go.kr/8955

Seong-nam-shi Urban Regeneration General Area

3.4 More Urban Renewal Projects:

28

General Area (2016 -)

(29)

Source: http://www.city.go.kr/portal/business/businessInfo/14/link.do

- The 2017 Presidential election Commitment (Urban Regeneration New Deal)

• Plan to invest 10 trillion won (61 billion CNY) every year for 5 years (total 300 billion CNY)

-The 2017 Presidential election Clarify differentiations of project targets and area characteristics

Saving our neighborhood: Small-scale residential area

Residential neighborhood support: Residential neighborhood

General neighborhood: Commercial back-street

Commercial districts: Central area

Urban economy-based revitalization: Industry center

3.5 Urban Regeneration New Deal for

Presidential election Commitment (2017)

3. Urban regeneration as public policy in Korea 29

(30)

Adjust investments and projects’ progress speed Clear diagnosis

Social integration vs. Physical regeneration

Partnerships between local and central, and private and public sector (governance)

Needs various generation approaches and program development

Participation and process-oriented approaches needed

4.1 Current issues of Urban regeneration

urban regeneration policy 30

(31)

How much can governance be strengthened?

Could the urban regeneration project create jobs?

Will the capacity of the residents be improved during the period?

Is not it just wasting time and taxes?

Would the gentrification problem be solved?

4.2 My concerns always in urban regeneration plan and projects

4. Current critical issues on urban regeneration policy 31

(32)

If we can proceed with the textbooks and principles, there is nothing to worry about.

In the reality of urban planning and regeneration,

there are always more complicated interests and relationship.

We need time and effort to solve them.

Strong pressure move conflicts into the future, it leaves damage to the socially weak.

4.2 My concerns always in urban regeneration plan and projects

4. Current critical issues on urban regeneration policy 32

(33)

Urban Regeneration policy in Korea