Debate over ministry move reflects Korea’s regional divide

Local leaders from South Korea’s central region urged President Lee Jae-myung’s administration on June 19 to “act wisely to avoid fueling regional conflict” amid growing tensions over the proposed relocation of the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries from Sejong to Busan.

South Chungcheong Governor Kim Tae-heum, North Chungcheong Governor Kim Young-hwan, Daejeon Mayor Lee Jang-woo and Sejong Mayor Choi Min-ho gathered in Sejong to oppose the move. They argued that relocating the ministry would do little to advance national development and called instead for the swift transfer of the presidential office and National Assembly to Sejong.

In Busan, however, opinions sharply diverged. Mayor Park Heong-joon welcomed the relocation, identifying the city’s North Port as a suitable site. He also proposed transferring additional maritime-related functions from other ministries to bolster Busan’s status as a maritime hub.

The controversy began when President Lee directed his Cabinet on June 5 to start preparing for the move. Supporters say making Busan a leading maritime city will help achieve balanced regional development. Critics argue relocating the ministry again after its earlier move to Sejong would increase inefficiencies and undermine Sejong’s role as the nation’s administrative capital.

While the ministry’s relocation might seem limited in scope, it reflects the desperate efforts of struggling regions to regain vitality. Busan’s population has declined by 200,000 over the past decade, with more than 100,000 young people moving to the capital area. Its total fertility rate stands at just 0.66, one of the lowest in the country. These issues are not unique to Busan but common across most non-capital regions.

At its core, the debate is not just about where to locate a ministry. It exposes deeper structural challenges facing South Korea, including capital region overconcentration, rural depopulation, low birthrates, and an aging population. Asking “Where should the ministry go?” is essentially asking “What kind of future should Korea build?”

Ironically, even the argument for completing Sejong as the administrative capital, often cited by opponents of the move, shares the same goal of decentralization and national balance. President Lee’s campaign pledges to relocate the National Assembly and presidential office to Sejong were based on this rationale.

Lee has also proposed a “5 plus 3” strategy to establish five mega-regions around the capital, central, southeast, Daegu-Gyeongbuk, and Honam areas, along with three special autonomous provinces: Jeju, Gangwon, and North Jeolla. As the first president to have served as both a city and provincial leader, public expectations for regional equity remain high.

Yet despite every administration’s pledge to promote balanced development, the capital region has only grown more dominant. According to Ministry of the Interior and Safety data, the population of the Seoul metropolitan area rose by over 30,000 last year to 26.04 million. In contrast, the non-capital region population dropped by 870,000 to 25.16 million, marking the widest population gap to date. Youth continue to flock to the capital in search of jobs, while falling birthrates have pushed 57 percent of local districts, 130 out of 228, into extinction risk. Some areas have lost up to 70 percent of their young workforce.

The capital region itself is also under strain. Soaring housing prices and job insecurity have led young people to forgo marriage and children. In the second quarter of last year, Seoul’s total fertility rate dropped to 0.56, the lowest in the nation.

Even without citing statistics, the outlook is grim. But imagine if another city comparable to Seoul were created. It could ease many of the country’s most urgent problems, including population decline, housing shortages, job scarcity, low birthrates, and education challenges. With three urban centers like Seoul, South Korea would be a very different place.

To truly empower local regions, the first step must be financial autonomy. Currently, local taxes make up just 25 percent of all national tax revenue. This so-called “30 percent autonomy” leaves local governments dependent on central government subsidies. In advanced countries such as Canada, the United States, and Germany, local taxes account for 45 to 55 percent of total tax revenue. A tax reform aimed at increasing local revenues is long overdue.

This year marks the 30th anniversary of South Korea’s full launch of local autonomy, which began with nationwide local elections on June 27, 1995. While there have been meaningful improvements in infrastructure and local policy development, the capital region still dominates the country, and many provinces face decline. Decentralization is no longer simply a reform issue. For South Korea, it is a matter of survival.