South Korea Should Free Farmers From Outdated Land Ownership Rules

Farming in Korean is described as "building" — planting seeds, waiting, and nurturing crops encompasses both cultivation and management. Yet current agricultural land policy remains trapped in landlord-centered logic focused on ownership rather than actual farming activities. It is time to shift the discussion from who owns farmland to how we can utilize it to create agricultural value.

President Lee Jae-myung's remarks on selling speculative farmland have sparked controversy, emerging as a key issue ahead of local elections in three months. This reflects Korean society's unique sentiment toward agricultural land. A leading ruling party candidate for Seoul mayor has been labeled a "rich landowner's son," while a presidential secretary faces allegations of farmland speculation through plot-splitting schemes. Regardless, these remarks will likely lead to discussions on reforming the farmland system in the government and National Assembly.

The "land-to-the-tiller" principle emphasized by President Lee is enshrined in Article 121, Clause 1 of the Constitution. Though first appearing in the 1987 Constitution, its spirit dates back to the 1948 founding Constitution, which stated that "farmland shall be distributed to farmers." The 1949 land reform of "compensated confiscation and compensated distribution," promoted by then-Agriculture Minister Cho Bong-am, was based on this principle.

Today's reality is different. Less than half of Korean farmers work their own land. Tenant farmers account for 47%, and nearly half of all farmland is owned by non-farmers. Article 121, Clause 2 of the Constitution permits leasing and contract farming, while the 1994 Farmland Act allows agricultural cooperatives and corporations to own farmland. Effectively, about half of all farmland falls under exceptions to the land-to-the-tiller principle.

This effectively defunct principle has resurfaced because of land prices. The president's concern that "land prices have risen so much that even rural hillsides don't go for less than 10,000 won" led to orders for the first comprehensive farmland survey since the republic's founding and a review of forced sales of speculative land. High farmland prices are indeed problematic. They create barriers for young people seeking to farm or full-time farmers wanting to expand. Even rural villages 400 kilometers from Seoul command over 300,000 won per pyeong (3.3 square meters) simply because they are accessible from provincial roads. According to the Korea Farmland Bank, the national average farmland price in 2025 is 42,314 won per square meter. Given that average farm household income is around 50 million won annually, this is burdensome.

But farmers who own land see it differently. Farmland is an asset that neither appreciates quickly nor sells easily due to limited development potential and low transaction frequency compared to urban areas. According to the Korea Real Estate Board, the national land price index rose 31.9% from 2016 to 2025, but farmland in county-level areas increased only 17.1%. Many areas have so few transactions that prices effectively don't form. Is forced sale realistic under these conditions? Under current law, even if land is subject to disposal after investigation, immediate action is impossible if the owner claims they will farm it. Even if listed for sale, full-time farmers can hardly afford it.

The concern that speculative demand blocks people from returning to farming and rural areas is valid. But the solution need not be re-emphasizing the land-to-the-tiller principle. Practical systems ensuring farmland is actually used for agriculture matter more.

In rural areas, elderly farmers commonly lend out land while receiving direct payments without formal lease contracts. A comprehensive survey won't reveal everything. It may only provoke backlash against regulations. Creating incentives for long-term farmland holding and improving lease management systems would be more realistic alternatives.

The root cause of farmland speculation lies in the institutional structure that maintains the land-to-the-tiller principle while creating numerous exceptions. With tactics of "just don't get caught" added to the mix, farmland became a speculative target. The focus must shift from ownership to utilization. Japan revised its Farmland Act in 2014 to allow non-agricultural companies to lease farmland. It also pursued policies to purchase or lease idle farmland and redistribute it to farming enterprises. As a result, farming enterprises doubled their cultivated area, young farmers increased, and rural aging rates remain lower than Korea's.

Agriculture is an industry. Farmland is not merely something to preserve. This is why the comprehensive farmland survey must go beyond detecting speculation or illegality to become data for designing agriculture's future structure.