[Issue] Gwangju-Jeonnam Integration as a "Special City": What Will Happen to Gwangju's Authority and Status?

Political Disagreement Over Concurrent Special Mayoralty
Choi Hyungsik, Former Damyang Governor, Raises the Issue
Debate Shifts to Administrative Structure After Consensus on Integration
Seeking Common Ground Between Urban Identity and Administrative Efficiency

On the 21st, citizens are watching the live broadcast of President Lee Jae-myung's New Year's press conference in the Seoul Station concourse, Yongsan-gu, Seoul. 2026.01.21 Photo by Yoon Dongju

Debate continues over the administrative structure and allocation of authority for Gwangju City after the proposed administrative integration of Gwangju and Jeonnam in the form of a "special city." While there is a growing consensus on the necessity of integration, the main issues have shifted to the method of integration and the status of Gwangju following the merger.

Concerns Over Administrative Structure and Distribution of Authority After Integration

The first issue raised concerns the power structure after integration. Choi Hyungsik, former governor of Damyang County in Jeonnam, recently stated in a press release that the integrated special city mayor and the Gwangju mayor should be elected separately and simultaneously. He argued that dismantling Gwangju City and having the integrated special city mayor concurrently serve as the Gwangju mayor would create significant institutional, political, and administrative challenges.

Choi explained that the integrated special city mayor would be the head of a supra-regional government overseeing all of Gwangju and Jeonnam, responsible for national balanced development, industry, transportation, environment, finance, and negotiations with the central government. In contrast, the Gwangju mayor would be responsible for urban self-governance directly tied to citizens' daily lives, such as housing, transportation, welfare, and education. He maintained that it would be both a conflict of interest and practically impossible for one person to perform two entirely different roles simultaneously. He also stated that dismantling Gwangju City is not simply a matter of adjusting administrative districts, but an issue of citizen sovereignty and urban identity, and that restructuring without citizen consent cannot be justified.

On the 16th, at the Gwangju Kim Dae-jung Convention Center, Mayor Kang Gijeong of Gwangju, Governor Kim Youngrok of Jeonnam, and the joint representatives of the council performed the launch performance at the inauguration ceremony of the "Gwangju-Jeonnam Administrative Integration Promotion Pan-City and Province Residents' Council." Provided by Gwangju City

There have also been criticisms regarding the efficiency of the administrative structure. Kim Hyunseong, former CEO of the Gwangju Economic Promotion and Win-Win Job Foundation, stated on social media that integration in the form of a special province could entrench a dual administrative structure. Maintaining Gwangju City as a separate entity could institutionalize unnecessary duplication, and as the number of administrative layers increases, decision-making costs rise and administrative speed inevitably declines. He emphasized that the core of the integration discussion should be the simplification of the administrative system and the elimination of overlapping functions.

Differing Perspectives on Integration Method and Administrative Model

The debate over the method of integration is also ongoing in academic circles. Choi Youngtae, professor emeritus at Chonnam National University, stated on social media that the integration of Gwangju and Jeonnam should be considered in the form of a "special province" rather than a "special city." He expressed concern that the current special city model under discussion could lead to the dismantling of Gwangju as an urban unit during the integration process, resulting in administrative confusion and inefficiency. He also pointed out that although the shared living sphere of Gwangju and Jeonnam is cited as the basis for integration, dismantling Gwangju City, which has long functioned as an independent living area, lacks logical persuasiveness.

In response, Park Byunggyu, mayor of Gwangsan District, argued that sharing a living sphere does not necessarily mean maintaining a single administrative unit. He explained that the core of integration is not the name or the unification of administrative units, but rather at what level administrative functions and responsibilities are redistributed. He stated that maintaining Gwangju City under the Gwangju-Jeonnam Special Province could be one option, but if the distribution of authority is not clearly designed, inefficiency may arise due to overlapping administrative layers.

Similar concerns have been raised in civil society discussions. At a recent Gwangju civic society forum, Cho Jinsang, professor emeritus at Dongshin University, warned against weakening Gwangju's status and identity as a central hub and representative city of the Honam region. He stated that while the distribution of administrative functions may be possible, Gwangju's core functions and symbolic role must be preserved.

Gwangju Mayor Kang Gijeong (left) and Jeonnam Governor Kim Youngrok are posing for a commemorative photo after announcing the "Joint Statement for the Launch of Metropolitan Local Governments" at the Gwangju Kim Daejung Convention Center on the 9th. Photo by Song Bohyun

Meanwhile, the Gwangju-Jeonnam Research Institute's final report on discussions regarding the administrative integration of Gwangju and Jeonnam, published in January 2023, presented two main alternatives: the (tentatively named) "Gwangju-Jeonnam Special Metropolitan City" and the (tentatively named) "Gwangju-Jeonnam Special Self-Governing Province (including Gwangju as a special city)." The report concluded that specific details such as the name and location of the government office should be finalized through a public consensus process that incorporates residents' opinions during the integration process.

In surveys of residents and experts included in the report, the main issues identified for integration discussions were the adjustment and reorganization of administrative districts, streamlining overlapping administrative functions and reducing administrative costs, and mediating conflicts between local governments.