sueddeutsche.de
South Korea's Airport Expansion: Economic Viability Questioned
South Korea's plans to build ten new airports, including one in Saemangeum, are raising concerns due to the unprofitability of many existing airports, such as Muan which lost \$14.09 million in 2023, with only three of fourteen airports currently profitable.
- What are the economic and environmental consequences of South Korea's ambitious airport construction plans?
- South Korea is building many new airports despite questions of economic efficiency and environmental impact. Ten airport projects are in various stages, including a new airport in Saemangeum, even though only three of the country's fourteen airports are profitable in 2023.
- How does the profitability of existing airports in South Korea inform the decision-making process for new airport construction?
- The profitability of South Korea's airports varies significantly; three are profitable (Incheon, Gimpo, and Jeju), while others, such as Muan (losing \$14.09 million in 2023), are not. The planned Saemangeum airport is near another loss-making airport in Gunsan, raising concerns about economic viability.
- What are the long-term implications of South Korea's airport expansion strategy, considering the financial performance of existing facilities and potential environmental impacts?
- The focus on building new airports in South Korea, despite the unprofitability of many existing ones, highlights a potential misallocation of resources. Local politicians often see airports as regional boosts, but this perspective overlooks the need for economic viability and efficient management of existing infrastructure.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the issue by highlighting the financial losses of several airports and the questionable need for new construction. The headline question itself suggests skepticism towards the number of airports. The focus on losses and the use of words like "baufreudigen" (construction-happy) and "Zweifel" (doubts) create a negative bias against further airport development.
Language Bias
The article uses words like "baufreudigen" and "Zweifel" which carry negative connotations toward airport construction. The description of Muan airport's losses ("umgerechnet 14,09 Millionen Euro Verlust") is presented without context of its size or overall cost. The repeated emphasis on financial losses of various airports, while factually accurate, creates an overall negative tone.
Bias by Omission
The article omits discussion of potential economic benefits of new airports beyond regional stimulation, such as job creation during construction and operation, or increased tourism revenue. It also doesn't explore the strategic military implications of airport locations. The perspective of those who support the new airports beyond local politicians is largely absent.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by implying that the only options are either building new airports or improving existing ones. It overlooks the possibility of a more nuanced approach involving a combination of both strategies, or prioritizing investment in specific airports based on need and economic viability.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights the construction of numerous airports in South Korea, despite many being unprofitable. This excessive infrastructure development contradicts sustainable consumption and production patterns, leading to wasted resources and environmental damage. The focus on building new airports rather than improving existing ones indicates inefficient resource allocation.