Tourism outdated, unbalanced and unstainable

The priority should be how tourism revitalization in Seoul will make the city better for local residents, what Seoul will look like ten years into the plan, and what the long-term picture is.

Kim Eun-mee

The author is a professor of communication at Seoul National University.

Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon recently announced the launch of an all-out tourism campaign aiming to attract 30 million tourists. The target number is 10 times the total number of tourists in 2022. This is great if the number of visitors increases and they experience various parts of Korea. But Oh’s description of Seoul as a “tourism city” and designating the campaign as a “urgent task” does not sound very future-oriented.

Throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, the world centered policy choices around “sustainability.” We have come to realize that we should stop pursuing quantitative expansion, unconditional growth and short-term visible outcomes, and calmly think about the harmony of people and nature while taking care of the quality of life to protect all of us in the long run instead.

Major developed countries are avoiding developing tourism in an outdated way and increasing tourist numbers even before Covid-19 and are also considering various impacts on the region. Tourism cannot be the purpose itself. It is only meaningful when it is consistent with creating a better city for the residents. For example, the Copenhagen Tourism Authority declared that it will not designate attractions or mark recommended routes from 2018 onwards. Rather than aiming for a record tens of millions of visitors in a short period of time or working towards a target for tourism revenue, the city pursues the coexistence of the local community with tourism.

The shift in the tourism paradigm is particularly important as unique residential districts rather than traditional tourist destinations increasingly become “hot spots.” The so-called alley tourism has become the trend. However, whether it is Bukchon in Seoul or the Hanok Village in Jeonju, the designation renders the villages identical. When tourism maps are diligently distributed and tourists are guided to visit a certain set of places, local residents who have long made the villages their home have no choice but to leave. After the locals leave, the region stops evolving and loses its original charm. To ensure the roots of local culture are solidly planted, local issues should be resolved quietly and consistently rather than pursuing development or promotion. That is the public’s role.

Major tourist cities outside Korea strictly limit the number of visitors per day or impose fines for taking selfies in places that cause traffic jams. To protect the residential environment of local residents, the public sector faithfully plays its original role to protect residents. Promotion and publicity may boost tourists in the short term, but the residential environment and culture cannot be restored once they are ruined. Korea cannot avoid the “overtourism” that is being reported overseas.

Competent and diligent public servants in local governments are handling projects that should be left to the private sector. Many officials are tasked with producing various types of reports and project plans with “cool” names, spending precious time drafting them. They are overworked as they produce works that are visible but end up neglecting their original task.

The plan for Seoul to be a tourism city includes an active partnership with global accommodation sharing platform Airbnb. Large cities around the world have seen the expansion of this business model have an adverse effect on the existing housing market and have tightened regulations. As short-term guests enter residential areas, more homes are used for short-term rentals which produce relatively higher income yet leads to a shortage of rental properties and increases housing prices. It is based on the mindset that the economic benefits of tourism revitalization should not come at the cost of the quality of life for locals. Development that is not backed by strict awareness of reality and without thorough action plans will create more adverse effects than benefits.

The priority should be how tourism revitalization in Seoul will make the city better for local residents, what Seoul will look like ten years into the plan, and what the long-term picture is. In the streets of Bukchon, where the number of local residents has significantly decreased within the past decade, tour guides still faithfully direct tourists into the allies inhabited by locals. Seoul’s performance indicators may be all about tourists but sadly are not about the local residents’ quality of life.

Translation by the Korea JoongAng Daily staff.