[Infrastructure, From Construction to Renewal]⑬"Even the Three Major Mega-Projects Are Unrealistic Without Infrastructure... It's Time to Change the Paradigm"

Dialogue Between the President of the Korean Society of Civil Engineers and the President of the National Land Safety Management Institute

The Importance of Preventive Management Using Data

Korea Excels at Infrastructure Planning, but Lags in Inter-Ministerial Coordination

Facility Maintenance Costs Projected to Exceed 1,000 Trillion Won by 2050

During South Korea's period of rapid industrialization in the 1970s and 1980s, expanding infrastructure as quickly as possible was the government's primary objective. Now, more than a generation later, experts point out that qualitative management is more important than quantitative expansion. As infrastructure is directly linked not only to national economic growth, but also to the safety of every citizen, there is a growing consensus that strengthening preventive management systems is more effective than reactive measures. In other words, as the socioeconomic environment has changed compared to the past, there is a need to approach the role and significance of infrastructure differently.

The Asia Business Daily interviewed Han Seunghun, President of the Korean Society of Civil Engineers, and Park Changgeun, President of the National Land Safety Management Institute, both recognized as leading experts in public and private sector infrastructure management in Korea. The Korean Society of Civil Engineers is considered the largest group of experts on infrastructure in the country. The National Land Safety Management Institute is a specialized agency under the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport that directly and indirectly manages approximately 180,000 class 1–3 facilities nationwide. According to the experts, “Reducing the number of infrastructure blind spots will lower the financial burden,” emphasizing, “The nation needs to establish a responsible control tower.”

Park Chang-geun, President of the National Land Safety Management Institute (left), and Han Seunghun, President of the Korean Society of Civil Engineers, are having a discussion with infrastructure experts at Dalg-aebi in Jung-gu, Seoul. Photo by Jo Yongjun

187,000 Facilities Under Management... More Than 460,000 Including Blind Spots

SOC Budget Focused Solely on New Construction – Need for Control Tower Coordination

Why is it necessary to raise concerns about aging infrastructure now?

△Park Changgeun (Park) : Old infrastructure is not automatically dangerous. The real issue is the speed and scale of aging. Facilities intensively built during the compressed growth period of the 1980s and 1990s are now reaching old age at the same time, presenting a structural problem. Rather than generating vague anxiety, we need a preventive management system that uses data to determine which facilities to prioritize, and promotes timely repairs, reinforcement, and performance improvements. The key to addressing aging infrastructure is not fixing more, but accurately identifying what requires management first and directing limited resources toward the most urgent needs. Infrastructure that is not managed, rather than simply old, is what poses the real risk.

△Han Seunghun (Han) : The current system for managing outdated infrastructure is focused on each facility as an individual unit, with an emphasis on post-hoc remedies, and lacks a comprehensive asset management perspective. We should thoroughly evaluate how much value and lifespan can be increased through improvements, and whether interventions can be safely delayed. There are around 187,000 publicly managed facilities, but if we include those outside oversight, the number exceeds 460,000. The total maintenance cost for all these facilities is estimated to exceed 1,000 trillion won by 2050. As this will inevitably become a significant burden on society, we need to prepare in advance, but we are currently not doing enough. Timely rebuilding is crucial to help alleviate the financial burden.

How does our infrastructure management compare to other countries?

△Han: According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Korea excels at planning infrastructure projects, but ranks in the lower-middle tier for resolving disputes between ministries and for checks and balances from the private sector. To use a forest analogy, we plant trees well but lack a system to oversee the forest as a whole. Management tends to focus on large-scale infrastructure, so small-scale facilities are often neglected, and there is insufficient legal enforcement or financial means to implement policies.

△Park: While the legal and institutional foundations for inspections and management systems are established to some extent, 89% of facilities are currently rated A or B, yet there are constant risk factors, such as rapid deterioration and growing climate threats, which could quickly lower their safety ratings. In the U.S. and Japan, infrastructure is seen not just as a maintenance target but as a national asset, and is supported by long-term investment and maintenance plans. The next step for Korea is to develop a system to digitize inspection results, determine which facilities to prioritize for investment, and ensure the findings are incorporated into policy.

In April 2023, on the Jeongja Bridge in Seongnam-si, Gyeonggi Province, one of the pedestrian walkways installed on both sides of the bridge suddenly collapsed, causing one death and one injury. Firefighters and other officials are actively responding at the scene. Photo by Yonhap News Agency

Reducing Redundant Investment, Verifying Policy Effectiveness

The Need to Build a Data-Based Evaluation System

How does last year's pilot National Land Infrastructure Evaluation System differ from traditional assessments?

△Park: Conventional diagnoses focused on whether individual bridges or tunnels were safe or needed repair, making it difficult to assess the overall condition of the infrastructure or determine where budgets should be concentrated. The newly introduced “Health Report” last year provided a broader perspective by assessing entire facility groups. It evaluates their current performance and management, while also forecasting future trends. However, its purpose is mainly as reference for policy, based on expert opinions, rather than having legal authority. Last year, it was piloted on eight types of road infrastructure, but it needs to be expanded in stages to include railways, airports, and other facilities. It is crucial to establish a feedback system where objective diagnosis leads to improvements in actual policy, budgets, and management standards.

△Han: The American Society of Civil Engineers produced notable impacts by publishing facility assessments as a “Report Card,” which later led to the enactment of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA; $1.2 trillion). Just as referees and players have distinct roles, it is ideal for inspection to be conducted by the private sector, but for maintenance to be managed publicly. This approach leverages the expertise of the National Land Safety Management Institute, reduces the administrative burden, and ensures the objectivity and credibility provided by academic organizations, resulting in user-centered, sustainable infrastructure management strategies.

On the 26th, at the Seosomun Overpass demolition site in Seodaemun District, Seoul, the bridge deck collapsed, and firefighters are carrying out rescue operations. 2026.5.26 Photo by Kang Jin-hyung

It is said that silos between ministries and agencies inevitably create blind spots. What's your view?

△Park: Local governments face structural difficulties as they have many facilities to manage, but limited budgets and personnel. Rather than acting separately by agency, we need a system where information on each facility is shared and managed collaboratively. Instead of simply addressing facilities that generate complaints or are highly visible, prioritization should be based on risk, usage, and the potential impact of accidents. The performance improvement reserve fund system can be a key mechanism for ensuring stable financial resources. This is a preventive approach, where resources are secured in advance, rather than reacting after an accident occurs.

Many local governments have poor fiscal conditions.

△Han: Even when the budget is specifically for social overhead capital (SOC), the focus is usually on new construction. Local governments are inclined to invest resources in new SOC to produce tangible results. For railways, maintenance for regional lines is the only area supported by the national budget; for other types of infrastructure, even if they receive some central government funding, each local government is left to handle management independently. This is why a comprehensive control tower is necessary to coordinate overall responsibilities and enhance government accountability, instead of leaving everything up to local governments.

What is needed for the Framework Act on National Infrastructure to operate effectively?

△Park: In an era when high-tech industrial infrastructure is interconnected, it is not enough for individual ministries to plan separately. To have substantive meaning, the Act must be aligned with existing laws, secure the necessary resources, and be efficiently linked with investment priorities. A data-based evaluation system is needed to reduce redundant investment and verify policy outcomes. While the Framework Act on Infrastructure could serve as a long-term strategic and coordinating mechanism, the separate Special Act for Strengthening the Safety of Aging SOC, which is currently being pursued, could provide a more direct means of implementation.

Park Changkeun, President of the National Land Safety Management Institute (left), and Han Seunghun, President of the Korean Society of Civil Engineers, are having a discussion with infrastructure experts at Dalgaebi in Jung-gu, Seoul. Photo by Jo Yongjun

The importance of infrastructure is emphasized for enhancing competitiveness in high-tech industries. Why?

△Han: Infrastructure requires significant money and time from conception to operation. Without careful planning, there is a risk of unilateral decision-making or populism. Coordination and cooperation between ministries, along with constructive external oversight, are essential. Only with such processes in place can government budgets be saved and project timelines be reduced. For example, at the Yongin Semiconductor General Industrial Complex currently under development, the power transmission lines were installed underground to minimize local resistance in the area, which was only possible due to comprehensive infrastructure planning. Without infrastructure, even the “three major mega-projects” would remain nothing more than pipe dreams.

△Park: While business investment decisions are made quickly, approvals for power grids, roads, water supply facilities, and environmental infrastructure take much longer, often due to resident acceptance and securing budgets. Administrative confusion is also frequent, since the jurisdiction over infrastructure is divided among different ministries. While it is important to create new infrastructure for high-tech industries, it is equally vital to explore ways to utilize existing facilities. By accurately assessing their condition and improving their performance to meet the demands of high-tech industries, we can reduce both the time and administrative confusion required for new construction, as well as address the deterioration of existing infrastructure.

A view of the construction site at the Yongin Semiconductor Cluster General Industrial Complex in Yongin, Gyeonggi Province. Photo by Yonhap News Agency

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.