IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ijurrs/v49y2025i3p708-723.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

New Urban Governance and the Dilemma of Participatory Planning in South Korea

Author

Listed:
  • Se Hoon Park

Abstract

The national urban regeneration policy in South Korea, launched in 2013, has been hailed as a milestone in the history of the country's urban planning as it has introduced extensive measures for strengthening citizen participation in the planning process. By drawing on the perspective of post‐politics and agonistic planning theorists, this article examines how citizen participation in the new urban governance has been practiced and orchestrated by a diverse array of players, including government officials, intermediary organizations, and civil society actors. The empirical analysis demonstrates that, first, the participatory planning system is controlled by the government and arranged to produce consensus while avoiding any dissensus, and second, intermediate organizations/actors are invited/trained to guide citizens to the government‐defined participation practices. Therefore, the current form of participatory governance in South Korea can be seen as a form of post‐politics where the political is ruled out and controlled through de‐politicization measures. Building on these findings, this article discusses how the current integration of the state and civil society creates the unique dilemma of participation, and how the Korean experience can enrich the global debate on post‐politics.

Suggested Citation

  • Se Hoon Park, 2025. "New Urban Governance and the Dilemma of Participatory Planning in South Korea," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(3), pages 708-723, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:ijurrs:v:49:y:2025:i:3:p:708-723
    DOI: 10.1111/1468-2427.13310
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.13310
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1468-2427.13310?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:ijurrs:v:49:y:2025:i:3:p:708-723. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0309-1317 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.