The South Korean Government’s Housing Policy Tanks Its Approval Ratings

A Presidency Under Pressure

The administration of South Korean President Lee Jae-myung is confronting a significant political crisis, as its aggressive housing policies have triggered a sharp decline in public support. According to polling data from mid-August, the president’s approval rating has fallen below the 50 percent mark for the first time since his term began, a critical threshold for any South Korean leader navigating the country’s notoriously volatile political landscape. The precipitous drop, which is particularly pronounced among young residents in Seoul—where approval stands at a dismal 31 percent—signals a profound disconnect between the government’s policy prescriptions and the lived realities of the electorate.

The sources of discontent are twofold: the ongoing controversy surrounding prosecutorial reform and, more prominently, the administration’s handling of the housing crisis. The latter has proven to be a political minefield, alienating both tenants and homeowners in the capital simultaneously. The government’s urgency is understandable, given that real estate speculation has distorted the national economy for decades, but the specific measures implemented have created a new set of problems that threaten to undermine the administration’s broader agenda.

The Mechanics of a Policy Backlash

The Lee administration’s approach to cooling the overheated property market has centered on a two-pronged strategy, both prongs of which have generated significant public opprobrium. First, the government moved to shrink the proportion of a loan that homebuyers can secure relative to the total property value. This tightening of loan-to-value ratios was intended to curb speculative purchases, but its practical effect has been to force prospective buyers into the rental market. The resulting surge in demand for leases has driven up both monthly rents and the substantial upfront lump-sum payments, known as jeonse deposits, that characterize Korea’s unique rental system. The policy has been so effective in shifting demand that the market now faces a critical shortage of available lease properties, leaving many families in a precarious position.

Second, the government proposed increasing the cap on the real estate holding tax and raising the market valuation rates used to assess property value for tax purposes. While designed to penalize multi-home owners and speculators, this measure has stoked anxiety among ordinary homeowners who fear their tax burdens will become unsustainable. The combination of these policies has created a paradoxical situation where both those who own property and those who do not feel aggrieved. Homeowners worry about the erosion of their primary asset’s value and rising tax liabilities, while tenants face a rental market that has become both scarcer and more expensive. This broad-based alienation explains why the president’s approval rating has suffered so severely, as the policies have managed to unite disparate demographic groups in their dissatisfaction.

The Yongsan Park Controversy

The most explosive element of the housing debate, however, concerns the government’s proposal to build apartments within the hallowed grounds of Yongsan Park. In mid-August, a senior economic advisor to the president floated the idea during a radio appearance, suggesting that the park’s vast expanse offered opportunities for housing development. The land and infrastructure ministry subsequently announced it would survey areas within the park for potential construction, particularly sections that had been razed by the U.S. military during its decades-long occupation. This proposal directly contravenes the 2007 Special Act on the Creation of Yongsan Park, which legally binds the government to develop the land into a natural and ecological space for leisure and relaxation, explicitly barring any other form of development.

The controversy is deeply rooted in the site’s complex history. Yongsan Garrison, which occupies 630 acres in the heart of Seoul, served as the headquarters for the United States 8th Army from 1953 and later the United Nations Command, creating a "little America" in the capital. The land’s return to Korean control has been a painfully slow process, with Washington having transferred only about 30 percent of the territory, pending negotiations on compensation and environmental cleanup. The park’s historical significance extends far beyond the American presence, encompassing Mongol occupations in the 13th century, Qing Dynasty quartering in the 17th century, and Imperial Japan’s military use during the first half of the 20th century. For many Koreans, the site represents both the trauma of foreign domination and the resilience of national identity, making any development proposal deeply symbolic.

Seoul’s Mayor and the Public Push Back

Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon has emerged as the most prominent opponent of the government’s plan, framing the issue in generational and historical terms. In a video filmed at the park, Oh declared, "History won’t forgive me for allowing even a small portion of the park to be turned into apartment sites," adding that "We need to preserve Yongsan’s history and nature for the future generations." The mayor’s stance reflects a broader public sentiment, with a survey released on August 24 indicating that two out of three Seoulites oppose the government’s proposal. The Seoul Metropolitan Government has entered into a series of discussions with the central government, seeking to persuade officials to pursue alternative approaches to the housing shortage.

This is not the first time that the park has been the subject of political controversy. In 2016, the administration of President Park Geun-hye proposed building museums within the park, a plan that was met with such intense public outrage that the government was forced to back down. The current administration appears to be facing a similar dynamic, though the stakes are arguably higher given the severity of the housing crisis. The government has attempted to assuage concerns by insisting that the vast majority of the park will remain untouched, but critics argue that even partial development would set a dangerous precedent and compromise the park’s integrity as a unified green space.

Historical Precedents and the Greenbelt Dilemma

The Lee administration’s willingness to consider development in Yongsan Park is part of a broader shift away from the historical stance of liberal governments regarding greenbelt preservation. Successive progressive administrations had maintained a firm position against bulldozing the greenbelts that ring Seoul and other major cities, viewing them as essential to environmental protection and quality of life. The current government has signaled a willingness to reconsider this position, arguing that the housing crisis demands a more flexible approach to land use. This represents a significant ideological departure that has unsettled the liberal base that forms the core of the president’s support.

The government’s pledge to lay the groundwork for approximately 1.5 million new publicly funded flats during Lee’s term is an ambitious goal that requires substantial land acquisition. The urgency is driven by demographic realities: in a country where owning an apartment is widely considered a prerequisite for marriage, the exorbitant cost of housing has been identified as a major factor contributing to the nation’s declining birthrate. The increasing inequality in wealth, largely determined by real estate ownership, has created a social reality that is widely recognized as untenable. Yet the solution proposed for Yongsan Park strikes many as a shortsighted response to a complex problem that requires more innovative urban planning.

Toward a Sustainable Urban Vision

The debate over Yongsan Park illuminates a fundamental tension in South Korean urban policy between the immediate need for housing and the long-term imperative of creating livable, sustainable cities. Seoul, a metropolis of over nine million people, suffers from a cramped landscape that has been shaped by decades of rapid, often uncontrolled development. The park, once fully transferred from U.S. control, could serve as the city’s equivalent of New York’s Central Park or London’s Hyde Park, providing crucial green space that mitigates heat waves, supports biodiversity, and offers a shared natural environment for residents. The fact that the land was preserved from development by its very use as a military base is a historical irony that urban planners should not squander.

What Seoul requires, according to urban planning experts, is not the traditional model of housing reconstruction and redevelopment that has characterized Korean urban policy for decades. Instead, the city needs a comprehensive regeneration plan that organically connects residential, commercial, and recreational spaces. This would involve incorporating dilapidated housing in low-density areas into large-scale mixed-use developments, moving some commercial and recreational needs underground, and connecting these spaces through innovative infrastructure and transportation planning. Such an approach would address the housing shortage without sacrificing the city’s precious green spaces or its historical heritage. In the meantime, the government would be well advised to expedite negotiations with Washington for the quicker transfer of the remaining land within Yongsan Garrison, a promise that has remained unfulfilled for over three decades.

This article was produced with AI-assisted research and editorial support. Sources: The Diplomat, Chosun Ilbo, The Korea Times, Seoul Economic Daily.