1) Changes in spatial strategy
A) Spatial Strategy of the 1st CNTDP (1972~1981)
The 1st Comprehensive National Territorial Development Plan (CNTDP) promoted unbalanced development, such as growth-pole development and regional development. The plan presented strategies such as establishing a large-scale industrial base, maintenance of transport·communication·water resources·energy supply chains, and enhancement of regional functions to develop backward regions. To this end, the plan suggested the planning areas divided into 4 large regions, 8 medium regions, and 17 small regions, stratifying the whole country into large, medium, and small regions based on the size of the influence of connected areas. The 4 main large central regions were based on the river basins: the Han River Basin, the Geum River Basin, the Nakdong River Basin, and the Yeongsan River Basin. The 8 medium regions were metropolitan areas: Taebaek region, Chungcheong region, Jeonju region, Daegu region, Busan region, Gwangju region, and Jeju region. This division was to predict population and industry for the proper use of territorial space, measure the logistics between production space and consumption space, estimate income level by understanding regional economic variables, and identify national characteristics, etc. The plan intended to establish a harmonized national spatial order for each region, by using the above factors as indices. As such, the growth pole development method of the 1st CNTDP was a strategy that expected the spillover effect of the growth poles to spread to the surrounding areas. However, there was no investment in eight growth pole cities in the medium 8 regions except Seoul and Busan, resulting in polarization centered around the Gyeongbu axis.
Table 15 Planned Areas in the 1st CNTDP
4 rivers 8 medium
regions main function Scope
Han River Basin
Metropolis Central
management Seoul, Gyeonggi, Gangwon-do (Cheorwon) Taebaek Resources &
Industry
Gangwon-do, Chungbuk (Chungju, Jungwon, Danyang, Jecheon)
Geum River Basin
Chungcheong Agriculture &
industry
Chungbuk (excluding areas including Taebaek), Chungnam (excluding Seocheon-gun) Jeonju Agriculture &
industry
Jeollabuk-do (excluding Namwon and Sunchang), Seocheon-gun, Chungnam
Nakdong River Basin
Daegu Industry &
agriculture Daegu, Gyeongbuk
Busan Commerce &
industry Busan, Ulsan, Gyeongnam
Yeongsan River
Basin Gwangju Agriculture &
industry Jeonnam, Jeonbuk (Namwon, Sunchang) Jeju area Tourism &
commerce Jeju
Figure 24 Spatial Structure Concept of 「The First CNTDP (1972~1981)」
<Region division and
central city system> <Industrial location plan>
Source: Government of the Republic of Korea. 1971. Comprehensive National Territorial Development Plan
B) Spatial Strategy of the 2nd CNTDP (1982~1991)
In the 2nd CNTDP, a spatial strategy was presented, aiming to address regional imbalances and induce the settlement of the population to regions outside the greater Seoul area.
Although the growth pole development method was maintained, the 2nd plan promoted the distributed development pole method which was different from the 1st CNTDP. To this end, the whole country was divided into 28 regional living zones under three categories : metropolitan living zones (5), regional urban living zones (17), and rural-urban living zones (6). The metropolitan living zones were areas where the population of the central city was over 1 million or was expected to increase to over 1 million by the target year. The regional urban living zones were areas where a city-level urban areas are the center of the region, and the rural-urban living zones were defined as rural and mountainous areas centering around county-level urban areas. In addition, 15 regional urban areas with high growth potential were additionally designated as growth pole cities out of the 28 regional living zones.
The plan presented development strategies such as the formation of a multi-nuclei structure of the national land and the creation of regional living zones, growth inhibition and management in Seoul and Busan, expansion of social overhead capital such as transportation and communication for strengthening regional functions, and promotion of development in backward regions. However, as the plan designated many regional living zones, the investment was dispersed, undermining the effectiveness of the growth pole strategy. With the failure to enact a special law for fostering growth base cities, concrete enforcement measures were also lacking.
Table 16 Living Zones, Central and Surrounding Cities of the 2nd CNTDP
Seoul, Incheon, Suwon, Seongnam, Uijeongbu, Dongducheon,
Gwangmyeong, Songtan. Anyang, Bucheon (10 cities), Yangju, Namyangju, Yeoju, Pyeongtaek, Hwaseong, Siheung, Paju, Yeoncheon, Goyang, Gwangju, Pocheon, Gapyeong, Yangpyeong, Icheon, Yongin, Anseong, Gimpo, Ganghwa, Ongjin (19 counties)
2. Busan Living
Area Busan Busan, Masan, Jinhae, Chungmu, Ulsan, Changwon, Gimhae (7 cities), Uiryeong, Changnyeong, Miryang, Ulju, Haman, Uichang, Yangsan, Geoje, Tongyeong, Gimhae (10 counties)
3. Daejeon
Living Area Daejeon Daejeon (1 city), Daedeok, Yeongi, Gongju, Buyeo, Seocheon, Geumsan, Nonsan (7 counties) 4. Gwangju
Living Area Gwangju, Gwangju, Geumseong (2 cities), Gwangsan, Damyang, Gokseong, Hwasun, Naju, Hampyeong, Yeonggwang, Jangseong (8 counties)
5. Daegu Living
Area Daegu, Daegu, Gimcheon, Gumi, Yeongcheon (4 cities), Gunwi, Dalseong, Yeongcheon, Gyeongsan, Goryeong, Seongju, Chilgok, Geumneung, Seonsan, Cheongdo (10 counties)
Regional urban living zone
6. Chuncheon
Living Area Chuncheon Chuncheon (1 city), Cheorwon, Hwacheon, Yanggu, Inje, Chunseong, Hongcheon (6 cities)
7. Wonju Living
Area Wonju Wonju (1 city), Wonseong, Hoengseong (2 counties) 8. Gangneung
Living Area Gangneung, Gangneung, Donghae, Sokcho, Taebaek (4 cities), Goseong, Yangyang, Myeongju, Samcheok (4 counties) 9. Cheongju
Living Area Cheongju Cheongju (1 city), Cheongwon, Boeun, Jincheon, Goesan, Okcheon, Yeongdong (6 counties)
Living Area Suncheon, Suncheon, Yeosu (2 city), Gurye, Gwangyang, Yeocheon, Goheung, Boseong, and Seungju (6 counties)
Living Area Pohang, Pohang, Gyeongju (2 cities), Yeongil, Wolseong, Ulleung, Yeongdeok, Uljin (5 counties)
20. Yeongju
Living area Yeongju Yeongju (1 city), Yeongpoong, Bonghwa (2 counties) 21. Jinju Living
Area Jinju, Jinju, Samcheonpo (2 cities), Jinyang, Hadong, Goseong, Namhae, Sacheon (5 counties)
Living Area Yeongwol, Yeongwol, Pyeongchang, Jeongseon (3 counties) 24. Seosan
Living Area Seosan, Seosan, Dangjin (2 counties) 25. Hongseong
Living Area Hongseong, Hongseong, Cheongyang, Boryeong (3 counties) 26. Gangjin
Living Area Gangjin, Gangjin, Jangheung, Wando (3 counties) 27. Jeomchon
Living Area Jeomchon Mungyeong, Sangju (2 counties) 28. Geochang
Living Area Geochang, Geochang, Hapcheon, Hamyang, Sancheong (4 counties)
Figure 25 Spatial Structure Concept of 「The 2nd CNTDP (1982~1991)」
<Regional living zone
concept> <Industrial location plan>
Source: Government of the Republic of Korea. 1982. 「The 2nd CNTDP」
C) Spatial Strategy of the 3rd CNTDP (1992-2001)
The 3rd CNTDP presented a strategy to enhance large regional cities' distributed territorial framework and central management functions. The plan's primary purpose was to pursue balanced territorial development by suppressing the growth of the Seoul metropolitan area and nurturing the regional economy. To this end, the plan divided the whole country into nine regions based on the provinces but also including adjacent special cities and cities under direct control. The nine regions include the Seoul metropolitan area (Seoul, Incheon, Gyeonggi-do), Gangwon-do (Gangwon-do), Chungcheong-do (Chungcheongbuk-do), Daejeon/Chungnam-do (Daejeon, Chungcheongnam-do), Jeollabuk-do (Jeonbuk-do), Gwangju/Jeonnam (Gwangju, Jeollanam-do), Daegu/Gyeongbuk area, (Daegu, Gyeongsangbuk-do), Busan/Gyeongnam (Busan, Gyeongsangnam-do), and Jeju (Jeju-do). The regional division was not based on functions as in economic zones and living zones but an administrative division for establishing regional plans led by local governments. Some of the key development strategies suggested in the plan were: to promote regional development and suppress concentration in the metropolitan area, create new industrial zones and upgrade the industrial structure, establish an integrated high-speed exchange network, expand investment in people's livelihoods and environment, enhance the execution of national territorial plans, and reorganize national land use-related systems. However, development was limited as the regional division was based on administrative boundaries, not in conjunction with the functional division of the regions.
Figure 26 Spatial Structure Concept of 「The 3rd CNTDP (1982~1991)」
Source: Government of the Republic of Korea. 1992. 「The 3rd CNTDP」 」
D) Spatial Strategy of the 4th CNTP (2000~2020)
The 4th CNTP presented growing regions and nurturing them as a forward base for globalization commensurate with the metropolitan areas and forming a decentralized and balanced national structure as its primary goals. To this end, in addition to the existing Seoul and Busan axes, the plan proposed a total of 6 axes, including 3 coastal axes and 3 inland axes for balanced development of open land and inland areas, and designated 10 metropolitan areas nationwide, centered on large cities and industrial zones.
Table 17 Planned Areas in the 4th CNTP
National axis and region Area
National
northern inland axis Pyongyang-Wonsan (considered long-term after unification)
Region
Asan Bay Area Logistics function sharing base in preparation for increased exchange with China
Jeonju/Gunjang-area Formation of an international production base in the Pan-Yellow Sea economic zone
Gwangju/Mokpo area Fostering international exchange bases with China and Southeast Asian economies
Fostering Northeast Asian ports, logistics and international trade hubs
Daegu and Pohang area Strengthening international exchange bases in the Pan-East Sea Economic Zone
Gangwon-dong coastal
area Cultivation as an international base for recreation and tourism Central inland area Exploring a new route in inland underdeveloped areas using
tourism and cultural resources
Daejeon/Cheongju Distribution of national administrative central functions and inland international exchange base function
Jeju Island areas by linking the east and west of the country and spreading development opportunities and progress to inland areas, maximizing the synergistic growth effect. The plan sought regional development by establishing regions that could spearhead local growth, centering around regional hubs and the adjacent areas as well as new industrial zones, and to
drastically improve the overall balance of the country, and build a foundation for stronger national cohesion and regional competitiveness at the same time by actively nurturing regional areas. However, there were limitations to implementing major spatial strategies such as coastal national axis, development of metropolitan regions, and autonomous regionalization.
Source: Ministry of Construction and Transportation. 1999. 「The 4th CNTP(2000~2020)」
E) Spatial strategy of the 4th CNTP (2006~2020)
There were two revisions of the 4th CNTP. The first revision was to upgrade balanced territorial development as the core agenda of the national development strategy and establish a regional innovation system (RIS). To solve the problem of concentration in the Seoul metropolitan area, the plan promoted nodal development by constructing a multi-functional administrative city, innovative cities, and enterprise cities. To this end, the plan suggested three open national axes and a 7+1 economic zone for the formation of a multi-nuclei interconnected national territorial structure. The economic zones consisted of the metropolitan area, Gangwon area, Chungcheong area, Jeonbuk area, Gwangju area, Daegu area, Busan area, and Jeju Island. The plan aimed to build an open national land development axes oriented to the Eurasian continent and the Pacific Rim externally. If the previous balanced development policy had a regulatory nature that inhibited concentration in the metropolitan area, the 4th CNTP was the most active balanced development policy aimed to promote regional development by dispersing the functions of the Seoul metropolitan area to other regions. However, there were limitations in that the nodal development was ineffective in distributing the progress of the development evenly to all regions, and that the top-down implementation method did not efficiently meet the development demand.
Figure 28 Spatial Structure Concept of 「The 4th CNTP (2006-2020)」
Source: Government of the Republic of Korea. 2006. 「The 4th CNTP (2006~2020)」
F) Spatial Strategy of the Revision of the 4th CNTP (2011-2020)
The second revision of the 4th CNTP divided the whole country into 5+2 metropolitan economic zones for the regions' self-reliant development. The plan induced the autonomous development of the regions by fostering growth poles centering around the 5+2 metropolitan economic zones and through collaboration and cooperation between the regional economic zones. This revised plan adopted a three-dimensional spatial development strategy of 5+2 metropolitan economic zones, supra-regional development belts, and basic settlement areas. In addition, the plan promoted a strategy of enhancing regional cooperation to foster strategic growth poles, such as nurturing metropolitan areas and urban areas centered on KTX stations and strengthen national competitiveness.
Although the strategy of enhancing metropolitan cooperation was pursued to improve national competitiveness, there were limitations such as the absence of a leading agent for metropolitan development and the lack of local governments' capacity to develop the basic settlement areas.
Figure 29 「Spatial Structure Concept of 「The 4th CNTP (2011~2020)」
<Regional division and national axis> <Leading industries in the regional economy and regional strategic industries>
Source: Government of the Republic of Korea. 2011. 「The 4th CNTP (2011~2020)」
G) Spatial strategy of the 5th CNTP (2020-2040)
Solidarity and cooperation were emphasized in the 5th CNTP. As the nature of a comprehensive national territorial plan is to reflect the values and circumstances of the times, the 5th plan aimed to create a territorial space where regions could lead and coexist and cooperate. The plan presented a strategy to form a national territorial space emphasizing solidarity and cooperation between regions with the basic direction of developing a national space suitable for the needs of the people.
Figure 30 Spatial Structure Concept of 「The 5th CNTP (2020-2040)」
Source: Government of the Republic of Korea. 2019. 「The 5th CNTP (2020-2040)」
2) Implications
From the 1st CNTDP to the 5th CNTP established in 2019, the key concept of the national spatial structure presented in the plans can be summarized into the following: The efficiency of land use in the 1st CNTDP (1972~1981), the inducement of regional settlement of the population in the 2nd CNTDP (1982~1991), the formation of a decentralized national territorial framework in the 3rd CNTDP (1992~2001), response to current trends such as globalization and the environmental sustainability in the 4th CNTP (2000-2020), the emergence of a balanced development policy in the Revision of the 4th CNTP (2006~2020), mega-city region development and green growth in the Revision of the 4th CNTP (2011-2020), solidarity and cooperation in the 5th CNTP (2020-2040).
Korea's Comprehensive National Territorial Plan started out based on the unbalanced development theory, and the balanced development policies were later implemented in a complementary manner (Hyeongbaek Lim, 2013). After the Participatory Government took office, balanced development policies came to the fore, and the balanced regional
development policy was upgraded to the national balanced development policy. The planning area was usually divided into metropolitan regions. In particular, the 1st CNTDP and Revision of the 4th CNTP (2011~2020) had a characteristic of setting up multi-layered planning areas. The primary purposes of this were to alleviate the polarization of the national territorial structure due to excessive population and industrial concentration and improve balanced national territorial development significantly by actively nurturing local regions. The concept of economic zone was suggested in the 1st, 4th, and 4th revision plans but was not established as a policy or ended up as a short-lived policy, without effective implementation.