JEONNAM-GWANGJU — Land has been locked up in the name of national parks, but the budget to buy it is disappearing. The budget for purchasing private land inside South Korea's national parks, intended to ease restrictions on residents' property rights, has fallen by nearly 77% in three years. Large tracts of private land remain inside the parks while government funding drops sharply, raising concerns about both prolonged disputes with residents and setbacks to ecosystem conservation.
According to data released during a parliamentary audit of government agencies on the 15th by Rep. Shin Jung-hoon of the Democratic Party of Korea, a member of the National Assembly's Climate, Energy, Environment and Labor Committee representing Naju and Hwasun in the Jeonnam-Gwangju area, the budget for buying private land in national parks fell from 70 billion won ($50.5 million) in 2023 to 16.3 billion won ($11.8 million) in 2026. The decline amounts to 53.7 billion won, or 76.7%.
The 2026 budget is less than a quarter of the 2023 figure. Annual budgets stood at 70 billion won in 2023, 20 billion won in 2024, 27.3 billion won in 2025 and 16.3 billion won in 2026.
The problem is that private land remains widespread inside the parks. Private holdings account for 19% of the total area of national parks nationwide. Excluding marine areas, the share of private land on land rises to 31.6%.
Conditions are worse at some parks. Among the 18 mountain national parks, Geumjeongsan had the highest share of private land at 79.1%. Palgongsan followed at 69.6% and Mudeungsan at 60.7%. Gayasan stood at 58.1%, Naejangsan at 56.4% and Gyeryongsan at 46.6%.
Marine national parks were no exception. Private land made up 78.5% of the land portion of Hallyeo Marine National Park and 66.1% of Dadohae Marine National Park, more than double the national average.
The issue was especially pronounced at parks close to urban centers. Geumjeongsan in Busan, Palgongsan in Daegu and North Gyeongsang Province, and Mudeungsan in the Jeonnam-Gwangju area all had shares of private land far above the national average.
Because these areas sit where urban expansion meets residents' daily lives, disputes are likely to drag on.
The program to buy private land inside national parks began in 2006. It was designed to ease property rights restrictions imposed by park designation and to systematically protect wildlife habitats and natural ecosystems. With purchase budgets falling sharply, critics say both goals — compensating residents and conserving ecosystems — could be undermined.
"The government locked up the land as national parks but cut the budget for actually buying private holdings to a quarter of what it was," Shin said. "Residents' property rights should not be sacrificed one-sidedly for the public good of environmental conservation." He added: "A systematic purchase plan should start with areas that have high conservation value and large shares of private land. The government must take active steps to resolve disputes with residents and protect natural ecosystems."