(1/35)
Seoul Metropolitan Region : Growth Patterns and Policy Agenda
October 13. 2004 Hee-Yun Jung Seoul Development Institute (SDI)
(2/35) Contents
Ⅰ. Profile of the SMR
Ⅱ. Growth Patterns of the SMR
Ⅲ. Mobility Patterns of the SMR
Ⅳ. Policy Agenda
1 (3/35)
Ⅰ. Profile of the Seoul Metropolitan Region (SMR)
(4/35) Profile of Seoul Metropolitan Region(SMR)
• Political, economic and cultural center of the Korea - Population : 46% of the national total (21.4mil.) - Area : 12% of total national area (11,753 km2 )
2 Profile of the SM(5/35)R
• Administrative structure - Seoul Capital City - Inchon City - Kyonggi province (25 cities and 6 counties)
• Changes in the population (unit : 1,000 persons)
Concentration in the SM(6/35)R
Share of the SMR (2000)
Share of the Indices • Leading role in the growth SMR Area 11.8% of Korea Population 45.6% - high concentration of population, GRDP 46.4% economic and other activities Bussiness 43.7% Establishments Manufacturing 48.8% • Positive Side: Establishments - growth engine of national Bank Deposits 66.1% economy Bank Loan 61.5% Universites 42.3% • Negative Side: Government 69.4% - overcrowding organizations Public - cause of regional disparity 83.3% Enterprises
3 (7/35) Population Growth Trends of Ⅱ. Growth Patterns of the SMR Major World Cities
unit:1,000 person
12,000
10,000 Seoul Seoul Tokyo 8,000 New YorkTokyo LondonNewYork BeijingLondon 6,000 Paris Paris
4,000 LA Singapore 2,000
0 Year 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
(8/35) Years taken from 1 mil. To 5 mil. Ⅱ. Growth Patterns of the SMR
Seoul 27
Tokyo 50
London 85
NewYork 90
Paris 110 Year 0 50 100 150
4 (9/35) Population Density Ⅰ.Profile of the SMR
Major Metropolitan Regions in the World (2000)
(Based on the administrative area)
Seoul L.A. London Paris Tokyo New (SMR) (L.A, Orange (South East (IIe-de-France) York country) region) (Tri-state) Area (㎢) 11,753 12,500 26,976 12,072 13,494 32,792
Population (mil.) 21.4 12.4 18.2 11.0 33.5 29.3
Population Density(/ha) 18.2 9.9 6.8 9.1 24.8 8.9
(10/35)
Ⅱ. Growth Patterns of the SMR
5 Physical Growth Patterns(11/35) 1985 2000
40km 40km
30km 30km
20km 20km
10km 10km Seoul Seoul Inchon Inchon
Suwon Suwon
• Rapid urbanization of the SMA expanded from Seoul • Dispersed pattern with new development corridors • Leap-frog type urban sprawl beyond the RDZ
(12/35) Population Growth Pattern(’60~’00) Ⅱ. Growth Patterns of the SMR
6 (13/35) Population Growth Patterns Ⅱ. Growth Patterns of the SMR
50km 50km Paju Paju 40km 40km 30km 30km Koyang 20km Koyang 20km
Seoul Seoul Inc hon Inc ho n
Songnam Songnam Yoju Yoju
Suwon Suwon Yongin Ichon Yongin Ichon
Diminish Diminish
0 - 80,000 N 0 - 40,000 N 80,000 - 160,000 40,000 - 80,000 Over 160,000 W E Over 80,000 W E S S 0 1020304050Kilometers 0 1020304050Kilometers
(14/35) Estimated Population of the SMA in 2020 Ⅳ.Policy Agenda
Projected to Add approx. 4mil. More in next 20 years
● 21.4 mil. (2000) 25.5 mil. (2020) (source : Office of Statistics)
Estimated Land to Accommodate Increased Population
● About 300km2
(If 120 persons/ha is taken as a guide)
* Demand about half of Seoul’s Total Administrative Area
7 (15/35) Net In-migration by Regions Ⅱ. Growth Patterns of the SMR
500 Seoul 400 Inchon Kyonggi 300
200
100
0 1982 1985 1990 1995 2000 (1,000 Person) -100
-200
-300
-400
(16/35) No. of Employment by Regions Ⅱ. Growth Patterns of the SMR
8,000
7,000 6,658 6,000 5,000
4,000 3,575 3,000 2,416 2,000 1,000 667 - 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000
Seoul Inchon Kyonggi SM R
8 (17/35) Employment shares of the SMR Ⅱ. Growth Patterns of the SMR by Region
100%
90% 19.5 24.8 27.0 32.0 80% 36.3 70% 60% 50% 40% 71.9 65.6 62.9 30% 58.1 53.7 20% 10% 0% 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000
Seoul Inchon Kyonggi
(18/35) Employment of Population Ⅱ. Growth Patterns of the SMR by Sub-regions
9 (19/35) Employment /Job-Housing balance Ⅱ. Growth Patterns of the SMR
Employment density (’97) Trend of Job-Housing balance
Index 1.2
1.15
1.1
1.05
1
0.95
0.9
0.85
0.8 1980 1990 1995 1997
Seoul Inchon Kyonggi
(20/35) Urban Hierarchy System Ⅱ. Growth Patterns of the SMR
Metropolitan Center Seoul 3,241 Metropolitan Inchon 388 Sub Center Suwon 156 Songnam 103 Puchon 101 Anyang 91 Regional Center Yangpyong 79 Ansan 92 Pyongtaek 82 Koyang 75 Benison’s Method
10 (21/35)
Ⅲ. Mobility Patterns of the SMR
(22/35) Mobility Patterns Ⅲ. Mobility Patterns of the SMR
Proportion of Trip Purpose Proportion of Interregional Trip in the SMR Purposes in the SMR
Private Private Matters Matters Entertainment 12.1% Entertainme 14.4% commuting 6.5% nt 31.9% Shopping Commuting 8.5% 3.8% 48.9%
Shopping School 8.4% 8.0%
School Business Business 20.1% 16.8% 20.5%
11 (23/35) Mobility Patterns Ⅲ. Mobility Patterns of the SMR
Modal Shares of Trips in the SMR Mode shares of Interregional Trips in the SMR
Other Modes Other Modes Taxi 6% 19% Car 5% Walk 26% 19% Car 42% Subway 22%
Taxi 9% Bus Bus Subway 29% 25% 11%
Mobility Patterns(24/35)
Interregional work trip patterns of Interregional work trip patterns of the SMR in 1980 the SMR in 2000
Seoul Seoul
2.8 14.2 11.4 79.9 2.5 8.7 4.0 35.0
1.2 9.2 Inchon Kyonggi Inchon Kyonggi 0.8 5.3
1980 2000
12 (25/35)
4만 이상 동두천시 4만 이상 동두천시 2만 이상 4만 미만 2만 이상 4만 미만 포천군 포천군 1만 5천 이상 2만 미만 1만 5천 이상 2만 미만 1만 이상 1만 5천 미만 1만 이상 1만 5천 미만 5천 이상 1만 미만 양주군 5천 이상 1만 미만 양주군 가평군 가평군 파주시 파주시
의정부시 의정부시
김포시 김포시 고양시 고양시
도봉구 도봉구 노원구 노원구 남양주시 남양주시 강북구 은평구 강북구 은평구
성북구 성북구 중랑구 중랑구 구리시 구리시 종로구 서대문구 종로구 동대문구 서대문구 동대문구 강서구 양 강서구 양 마포구 중구 강동구 마포구 중구 강동구 성동구 평 성동구 평 광진구 군 광진구 군 인천시 용산구 인천시 용산구 영등포구 하남시 영등포구 하남시 양천구 송파구 양천구 송파구 부천시 동작구 부천시 동작구 구로구 구로구 서초구 강남구 서초구 강남구
관악구 관악구 금천구 금천구 광명시 광명시 과천시 과천시 광주군 안양시 성남시 안양시 성남시 광주군 시흥시 시흥시 의왕시 의왕시
군포시 안산시 군포시 안산시
수원시 수원시
0 km 2.5 km 5 km 10 km 15km 용인시 0 km 2.5 km 5 km 10 km 15km 용인시 화성군 화성군
(26/35) Commuting Patterns Ⅲ. Mobility Patterns of the SMR
Commuting Trip in SMR (’97) Commuting Ratio to Seoul (’97)
#
# # 50km
# # 40km # Uijongbu 30km # # Koyang # Namyangju 20km # #
Seoul # Seoul Inc ho n # Inchon # # # Hanam #
# # # # # # # Songnam # # # # Suw on Suwon # Hwasong Yongin # # #
# #
N N Under 10,000 Trips W E Under 5% 10,000¡- 20,000 Trips 5 - 10% S W E 20,000¡- 50,000 Trips 10 - 20% S Over 50,000 Trips 0 1020304050Kilometers 20 - 30% Over 30% 0 1020304050Kilometers
13 Commuting Patterns(27/35)
Commution Ratio to Seoul by Distance from Seoul CBD
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
Commuting Ratio to Seoul(%) 10.00
0.00 0.00 10.00 20.00 30.0040.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 90.00 Distance From CBD(km)
(28/35) Interregional Commuting Trip Pattern Ⅲ. Mobility Patterns of the SMR
Trends in Commuting to Seoul (’90~’97)
%
80
70
60 Koy ang 50 Shortest Distance Kwangmyong from Seoul Namyangju Under 20km 40 20-30km Puc hon 30-40km 30 Songnam Over 40km Any ang
20 Uijongbu In c h on 10 Suw on Yongin Pyongtaek Ans an 0 1980 1990 1995 1997
14 (29/35) Traffic Modal Patterns Ⅲ. Mobility Patterns of the SMR to Seoul (’97)
Mode Shares of Trips to Seoul by Regions
100% 90% 80% 20.6 38.8 70% Other Mod Walk 60% 28.4 Taxi 50% 10.1 Subway 40% bus 30% Car 20% 45.3 42.6 10% 0% Inchon to Seoul Kyonggi to Seoul
(30/35) Traffic Volume on the Ⅲ. Mobility Patterns of the SMR Main Interregional Roads
Interregional Traffic Volume (’98) Prospect of V/C in SMA (’96 → 2011)
15 (31/35)
Ⅳ. Policy Agenda
(32/35) Major Policy Responses of Central Gov’t Ⅳ.Policy Agenda
Major Policies and Control Measures
● The Restriction of Population Growth in Seoul (1964)
● A Comprehensive Decentralization Policy for Seoul (1969)
● Designation of Greenbelt around the Seoul (1971)
● Regulation of factory and higher education institutions
● The Capital Region Management Law enacted (1984) - The First Capital Region Management Plan established
● The Capital Region Management Plan was revised (1997) - Discriminated zoning, Ceiling system on factory establishment - Controlling large size of development activities, - Congestion charges (applied to Seoul only) etc.
Currently, Capital Relocation Policy is in progress and in dispute.
16 Current Policy Framework of the SM(33/35)R
Zonal Division of the SMR
(34/35) Management Strategies for the SMR Ⅳ.Policy Agenda
Zonal Location Strategies Division
Core areas covering Seoul, - Regulation of population concentration Congestion Inchon, Suwon and 13 - Dispersal of factory, university, public offices Relief Zone other cities surrounding - Prohibit new establishment of industrial site, new Seoul City university and new public office
Fringe areas of the outer - Prevention of water pollution in Han River Basin Environmental ring of Seoul located in the - Natural resource preservation and promotion of Conservation basin of upstream Han recreational activities Zone River (7 cities, 8counties)
Growth Suburban areas located - Relocate facilities from congestion relief zone Management Southern and Northern of - New town development and expansion of existing Zone the Capital Region sub-regional centers (3 cities, 5 counties)
17 (35/35) Challenges to the Policy Responses Ⅳ.Policy Agenda
● The Common Goal of Regional Policy since 1960s: - to steer people and industries away from Seoul to local provinces
● Major Criticism - After 4decades, regulatory policy is not quite effective in achieving intended policy goal - the containment policy is generally defined as the number of population and major facilities - the true nature of concentration in the SMR is not just the volume of population itself but the social cost that it entailed (e. g. congestion, pollution, land price etc.)
● Challenges for the SMR - More deliberated and direct solutions need to be developed - More collaborative growth management system at regional level is needed (Devolution of central power + Capacity building of local authorities, Corporate Sector, NGOs)
Implementing regional solutions at the local level seem to be key
(36/35) Policy Agenda for the SMR Ⅳ. Policy Agenda
● Seoul-Oriented and Mono-centric Spatial Structure
● Urban Sprawl Along Major Arterial Roads
● The Urban Consumption of Agricultural Land and Environmentally Sensitive Area
● Job-Housing Mismatch
● Lack of Interregional Functional Mix
● Automobile Dependent Traffic System and Congestion
● Lack of Interregional Cooperative System
18 Spatial Structure of the (37/35)SMR
Toward Decentralized City with Multi-Nuclei
(38/35) Key Issuse for Discussion
● Spatial Restructuring - What policy measures would be effective in implementing sub-regional centers in the metropolitan areas? - What measures would be used to encourage employment in residential centers in the metropolitan areas?
● Land Use Planning - What criteria is used to differentiate land-use categories such as urbanized land, developable land and conservation area? - What kind of measures could be effective to conserve environmentally sensitive areas at the metropolitan level?
● Transportation Planning - How do you cost and fund metropolitan-wide transport service system? - What kinds of policy tools are effective to encourage more transit-oriented development?
19 (39/35)
● Region-wide public facilities - How do you ensure balance in the provision of public facilities and services at the metropolitan level? - What kind of measures are effective to secure site for NIMBY facilities? (e.g. disposal facilities, waste treatment facilities)
● Policy implementation - What are most important factors and issues in setting up cooperative mechanism among various interested parties such as central government, local authorities, corporate sector and NGOs? - Who should fund the required region-wide urban infrastructure and public services?
20