[Thinking of Seoul While Walking] 15-Minute City Seoul and Workplace Decentralization

Seoul from the Perspective of a ‘15-Minute City’

Among the keywords frequently appearing in the media since the 2020s is the ‘15-minute city.’ The changes in cities brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic unfolded very rapidly. As remote work increased, the floating population in the heart of cities, once filled with office workers, decreased, causing significant damage to numerous industries. Although the situation began to stabilize in the latter half of 2022 and cities showed signs of recovery, interest in urban changes and the future did not diminish. Within this context, the ‘15-minute city’ has been frequently mentioned.

The ‘15-minute city’ is one of the solutions proposed since the 2000s to overcome the palpable climate change crisis. In short, it aims to limit the living area of city residents to roughly within 15 minutes. By doing so, people would use transportation methods like cars less frequently for distant travel, thereby reducing fossil fuel emissions. With reduced travel time, people can spend more time with family or on hobbies and exercise, thus improving their quality of life.

The effect is even greater in large cities with long commuting times. Some argue that it helps reduce disparities in living infrastructure caused by wealth gaps. There is also hope that as travel distances shorten, residents will develop a stronger attachment to their neighborhoods, deepening community spirit, and that it will create a better environment for raising children.

The ‘15-minute city’ concept first emerged in Europe and gained momentum as it crossed over to the United States. Except for a few large cities, Europe generally has shorter travel times and higher population density compared to the U.S. Neighborhood commercial facilities are relatively well maintained in Europe, and urban disparities are not as severe as in the U.S. Nevertheless, Europe adopted climate change policies earlier than the U.S. and engaged in active discussions about urban challenges and the future in the context of climate change. The ‘15-minute city’ emerged as part of these discussions.

In the U.S., discussions about the ‘15-minute city’ intensified after the COVID-19 pandemic heightened interest in urban changes and related challenges. The ‘Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement,’ which gained momentum in the summer of 2020, also played a role by increasing awareness of various social disparities.

A dense area of office buildings in downtown Seoul. Photo by Younghan Heo younghan@

Except for cities like New York, many U.S. cities have very low population density. Jobs are dispersed over wide areas, making access by public transportation difficult and travel times long. Without a car, life can be quite challenging. Cities with a high proportion of low-income Black residents often lack large supermarkets. Residents must rely on convenience stores, which are more expensive than large supermarkets, or travel far to reach a big supermarket. The ‘15-minute city’ concept emerged as an alternative to address these issues.

What if we look at Seoul from the perspective of a ‘15-minute city’? Seoul has a high population density and many neighborhood commercial facilities in each district. Apartment complexes have shopping areas, and residential neighborhoods have numerous small and large stores or traditional markets. However, Seoul is not quite a ‘15-minute city.’ Redevelopment accelerated since the 2000s has deepened polarization, increasing disparities between regions. In some ways, it resembles U.S. cities. Areas redeveloped with apartments tend to have large supermarkets and chain stores with strong price competitiveness. In contrast, older or ‘awaiting redevelopment’ areas have few large supermarkets and many closed neighborhood commercial facilities. If there is a market nearby, it is fortunate, but nowadays markets are shifting from selling groceries to becoming dining areas, which has its limitations. Residents rely on expensive convenience stores or supermarkets or must travel far to shop for daily necessities.

Apartment-dense areas also have many hospitals, but this is not the case in general residential neighborhoods. The more specialized the hospital, the farther one must travel. Kindergartens and academies are mostly concentrated within apartment complexes. Many parents believe that living in an apartment is necessary for their children’s education. Living in a general house is not considered a very practical choice.

The population of Seoul, including the metropolitan area, reached about 26 million as of 2022. In terms of scale, it is larger than many metropolitan areas in Europe or the U.S. Most companies are concentrated within the Four Major Gates area and Gangnam. Although there are sub-centers like Yeouido, many white-collar and managerial jobs require commuting to the Four Major Gates area or Gangnam. Numerous citizens commute long distances. Even with an excellent public transportation network, there are limits to reducing absolute travel time. It would be ideal to live close to work, but the high housing prices make this difficult. However, it is not impossible. Seoul’s public transportation network is excellent, which is a great advantage for convenient travel. In places where car dependency is much higher and public transportation is lacking, aiming for a ‘15-minute city’ is necessary, but in Seoul, aiming for a slightly more relaxed ‘20-minute city’ is acceptable. If the goal is to have living convenience facilities and neighborhood commercial facilities within 20 minutes from every citizen’s home, many daily disparities can be significantly reduced. For example, creating public markets with large supermarkets in each urban area or considering public support systems for the distribution of medical and educational facilities are worth considering.

The most difficult issue is workplaces. Forcing companies or institutions to relocate and disperse is impossible. However, it is not entirely without solutions. Actively considering direct or indirect support when additional offices are established in other areas is one approach. Developing new office and research complexes like the Digital Media City (DMC), developed in the 2000s, or the G-Valley in the southwestern area, which began development in 2010, would help disperse employment. Gradually, more citizens will live closer to their workplaces, reducing long commuting times. Wise policies alongside public investment are, of course, necessary. It may be challenging, but if Seoul’s government sets its mind to it, what could be impossible? Expecting Seoul’s resilience to achieve what seems impossible is not unreasonable.