Megacity projects: reform for balanced development or political strategy?

Cities and provinces in Korea's non-capital areas are moving toward sweeping regional administrative integration in pursuit of "balanced national development."

Creating more special megacities through the integration plan is part of the Lee Jae Myung administration’s flagship national development agenda known as “5 mega-regions, 3 special provinces."

The initiative seeks to move beyond the Seoul-centric development model through restructuring the country into five broad economic zones alongside three special autonomous provinces.

The government announced earlier this year that it will provide up to 5 trillion won ($3.45 billion) a year for up to four years to each integrated city, adding that each city will be granted status equivalent to that of the Seoul Metropolitan Government and have more fiscal autonomy.

The legislative process for the project has already started, with the National Assembly's Public Administration and Security Committee approving three bills on Thursday for the integration of Daejeon and South Chungcheong Province, Gwangju and South Jeolla Province, and Daegu and North Gyeongsang Province into new “special metropolitan cities.”

The ruling Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) plans to pass the bills at a plenary session immediately after the Lunar New Year holiday, with the goal of holding the June local elections under the integrated special metropolitan city framework.

Lawmakers hold discussions over three bills aimed at administrative integration during a plenary session of the Public Administration and Security Committee at the National Assembly in Seoul, Thursday. Yonhap

Regions under merger plans

Under the proposed integration, Daejeon-South Chungcheong special city will seek to secure funding to foster advanced industries, including physical artificial intelligence (AI), future mobility, semiconductors, biohealth, defense, display technology and energy, as Daejeon already hosts many science-related state institutes and research labs.

Plans also include expanding railway and road networks within the envisioned Daejeon-South Chungcheong city, along with strengthening medical and educational infrastructure, enhancing disaster response systems and investing in underdeveloped areas.

The Daegu-North Gyeongsang region is likewise seeking to bolster its industrial competitiveness through the integration. Proposals include deregulation from labor rules, special status for national high-tech strategic industries, incentives for the secondary battery sector and the creation of special deregulation zones for AI, drones and autonomous vehicles. The strategy aims to transform the existing industrial belt spanning Pohang, Gumi and Daegu into a hub for emerging industries.

The Gwangju-South Jeolla plan incorporates special support for the electricity sector and state support for renewable energy grid infrastructure, laying the groundwork for an industrial ecosystem in the era of energy transition. It also includes measures to improve metropolitan transportation networks and support the relocation of a military air base, providing institutional momentum to address long-standing regional development issues.

While Busan and South Gyeongsang Province are also seeking a merger, they are taking a cautious stance, insisting that any integration must be subject to a local referendum. South Gyeongsang Province Gov. Park Wan-su, citing adverse effects from the earlier Masan-Jinhae-Changwon merger within the province, has argued that procedural legitimacy must first be secured, suggesting that a vote be held alongside the 2028 general elections.

Busan Mayor Park Heong-joon, left, and South Gyeongsang Province Gov. Park Wan-su jointly announce a statement on administrative integration between Busan and the province at the Dongwon Global Terminal inside Pusan Newport in Changwon, South Gyeongsang Province, Jan. 28. Yonhap

Efficiency and competitiveness: upside of integration

The government argues that administrative consolidation will enhance efficiency, eliminate redundancies, achieve economies of scale and strengthen regional competitiveness. By integrating local governments and economic systems, the government envisions the creation of “super municipalities” with populations of 5 to 8 million, which is large enough to compete more effectively with the Seoul metropolitan area.

Shin Jeong-hoon, chair of the Assembly's Public Administration and Security Committee, framed the legislation as a matter of national survival rather than regional favoritism.

“This is not preferential treatment for certain regions, but a survival strategy for the country,” he said, emphasizing that all three regions are intended to move forward together.

Local governments advocating integration also argue that broader administrative units would allow for more strategic budget concentration, increased local tax revenue, higher gross regional domestic product (GRDP) and long-term cost savings through streamlined public services and reduced staffing.

In addition, larger administrative units could offer advantages in addressing environmental challenges as well.

“Greenhouse gas emissions and environmental pollution do not follow administrative boundaries, so responding in an integrated manner at a broader administrative level would likely be more effective,” Han Beetsnara, head of the Research Institute for Climate and Society, told The Korea Times. “Energy transition efforts — such as expanding renewable energy — may also benefit from planning at a larger scale, particularly in terms of site selection and improving regional energy self-sufficiency.”

Members of civic groups headquartered in Daejeon hold a press conference at the Daejeon City Council, Friday, criticizing the integration of Daejeon and South Chungcheong Province as too hasty. Yonhap

Backlash over rush, structural disparities

However, with local elections approaching, critics worry that the integration is hurriedly being pushed as an electoral strategy rather than a carefully designed national restructuring effort.

“Administrative integration is a matter of national importance. How can there be no side effects when legislation is expedited at the president’s behest and forced through on a political timetable?” main opposition People Power Party (PPP) floor leader Song Eon-seog said, calling it a “hollow integration.”

PPP lawmaker Kang Seung-kyoo also accused the ruling DPK of using the integration drive as a political tool ahead of the local elections.

Political watchers and civic groups also point out that the bills still lack an effective framework to allow meaningful administrative integration between urban cores and rural counties.

Under the integration plan, even residents of small rural townships would become citizens of a “special city,” potentially placing them under different tax regimes and regulatory frameworks. While this shift could create new opportunities, it may also dilute local identities, raising concerns that long-established community names and traditions could be overshadowed by broader metropolitan branding.

For instance, South Jeolla and South Chungcheong provinces include many non-urban areas, so their respective merger with Gwangju and Daejeon could bring disparities in economic foundations, infrastructure and fiscal capacity. Unless administrative authority and public resources are allocated equitably, larger regional cities could effectively exploit smaller towns — facilitating the placement of locally unwanted facilities or energy infrastructure in less populous areas while marginalizing the voices and rights of rural communities.

About 30 funeral wreaths are placed in front of the Daejeon City Council in Daejeon, Tuesday, bearing messages opposing the administrative integration of Daejeon and South Chungcheong Province and calling for a local referendum. Yonhap

Democratic legitimacy and fiscal concerns

Critics also contend that residents have been excluded from the decision-making process and insist that regional referendums be held prior to any final approval of integration.

Professor Shin Yul of Myongji University noted that opinion polls show roughly 35 percent public opposition to such mergers. “This is not about rejecting integration outright,” he said. “It’s about ensuring sufficient public consultation. It feels hurried.”

Shin also warned that expanding already large regional constituencies could make it more difficult for citizens to access administrative centers or convey political demands to decision-makers. This would end up weakening democratic representation of small rural towns.

Skepticism has also emerged over the financial underpinnings of the plan. Political commentator Lee Jong-keun said that discussions of megacities have been meaningful because both conservative and progressive parties have sought integration as a way to help struggling local governments facing extinction due to declining population. Yet, he pointed out that before various systems and bottom-up demands have matured, there appears to be excessive reliance on financial incentives before the elections.

“Arguments for megacities have been repeated until now, but the reason it seems to be moving quickly this time is because of the 20 trillion won support related to Gwangju-South Jeolla integration," he said. "Other regions are competing, saying ‘Give it to us too and we’ll integrate.’ But is there a budget? The budget is already exhausted, and suddenly there are four such proposals. How do you come up with 80 trillion won? Even the Ministry of Economy and Finance is expressing reservations.”

He also raised the concern that if such large-scale local governments are to be operated based on huge financial incentives, they would need to ensure a far higher level of administrative transparency than currently exists. It remains unclear to what extent local government heads would be willing or able to disclose their decision-making processes with comparable transparency.

In regions such as Daegu-North Gyeongsang and Gwangju-South Jeolla — where single-party dominance in both local governments and councils is already pronounced — administrative integration could instead legitimize an expanded concentration of power in the hands of local leaders.

Participants hold placards and chant slogans, calling for a halt to the rushed legislation of the administrative integration bills, during a press conference at the Citizens’ Coalition for Economic Justice in central Seoul, Tuesday. Yonhap

Based on these concerns, the Citizens’ Coalition for Economic Justice called for reconsideration of the three special laws, arguing that they contain numerous cases of populist development measures and the transfer of fiscal authority without appropriate checks. The civic group noted that pursuing integration in this way could undermine the foundation of the national administrative system and lead to reckless development and fiscal waste.

“Looking at the bills' articles, most are for development privileges rather than genuine decentralization that enhances local autonomy and responsibility,” it said. “This is not true decentralization or balanced development.”

The group said that an integration model reliant on centrally driven compensation measures lacks sustainability and risks fueling competition among regions for special treatment. Such an approach could stoke tensions with areas excluded from the benefits and ultimately undermine balanced national development.

People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy also issued a statement on Friday, condemning what it described as a hasty push for administrative integration.

“We denounce the attempt to railroad administrative integration according to a preset timetable — passing the bill through committee on Feb. 12 and seeking plenary approval on Feb. 26 — aligned with the local election schedule, without sufficient social consensus or deliberation,” the civic group said.

It criticized the move as a politically driven, unilateral decision made without adequate public consultation, despite the far-reaching impact administrative integration would have on citizens’ lives.

“We cannot help but ask who this integration is truly for,” it added. The group further warned that administrative integration without accompanying reform of the local electoral system could, in fact, weaken local autonomy rather than strengthen it.