[비즈한국] Concerns are rising over the government's plan to conduct a comprehensive survey of farmland. The government's position is to identify land held for speculative purposes through this survey and take action in accordance with the Farmland Act. However, farmers are worried that they could be wrongly categorized as speculators if they are unable to farm due to unavoidable circumstances. Opposition parties are also voicing criticism regarding the survey.
The Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (MAFRA) announced that it discussed the progress and future measures of the comprehensive farmland survey at a government-party consultation meeting held on the 21st. The government and the ruling party stated that they would dispose of land where speculation is clear in accordance with laws and principles, while regularizing and legalizing ownership and usage for customary violations occurring in rural realities, ensuring that farmers can continue their work without inconvenience.
According to MAFRA, this survey is aimed at preventing speculative acts where farmland is acquired or owned for the purpose of market profits or development gains without any real intention of farming. Notable examples include cases where false farming plans are submitted in land transaction permit zones to acquire farmland, followed by unauthorized fallowing or illegal leasing. Furthermore, cases where agricultural corporations engage in real estate business after acquiring farmland, or where only shares of farmland are acquired through auctions and then left fallow or illegally leased, are also considered speculative acts. Once speculative behavior is detected, measures such as disposal orders will follow under the Farmland Act.
MAFRA explained that the survey is intended to identify speculative farmland to return it to actual farmers, and to grasp the status of farmland nationwide to improve systems and policies suited to rural realities. The basic survey utilizing administrative information and aerial photography has been completed, and in-depth, on-site verification by investigators has been underway since August. In cases where farming is difficult due to old age or inheritance, the plan is to defer disposal through voluntary adjustment or entrusting the land to the Farmland Bank.
Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Song Mi-ryung stated, "The comprehensive farmland survey is the starting point for accurately grasping the reality of farmland and changing the farmland system to fit current conditions, thereby revitalizing agriculture and rural areas." She added, "We will ensure there are no disadvantages or inconveniences to well-intentioned farmers and the public, so please do not be anxious and actively cooperate with the investigators."
Nevertheless, voices of concern persist. There are fears that even those fallowing land due to unavoidable circumstances might be classified as speculators, or that in non-capital regions, where farmland transactions are infrequent, owners may be unable to find buyers even if they wish to sell. There is also concern that if disposal orders are issued for some land following the survey, overall farmland prices could drop, damaging the asset value of owners.
The Korean Peasants League argued, "If there is no place for elderly farmers who are unable to continue farming to sell their land, and no reliable place to entrust it, the survey will inevitably become another burden." They added, "We must secure sufficient purchase budgets and an effective public purchase system so that elderly farmers who have spent their whole lives in agriculture can sell their land at a fair price and retire with stability."
The Korean Peasants League further added, "The survey must never degenerate into a tool for restructuring farmers. The farmland information secured through the survey should be utilized primarily to correct speculative farmland and provide it steadily to actual farmers who need it."
Opposition parties are also critical. Representative Kim Seon-kyo of the People Power Party pointed out at a party meeting on the 22nd, "The lives and properties earned with the blood and sweat of farmers are not subjects for the Lee Jae-myung government's reckless policy experiments." He urged, "The government must re-examine the comprehensive farmland survey from scratch, protect elderly farmers and tenant farmers, and prepare fundamental supplementary measures after closely reviewing the impact on farmland prices and rural finance." Kim Joon-hyung, floor leader of the Rebuilding Korea Party, also stated at a general meeting of lawmakers on the 22nd, "While I sympathize with the purpose, we must not repeat policy confusion that is pushed without fully examining reality and supplemented late." He added, "The government should listen more deeply to voices from the field and prepare clear relief plans to create policies that the public can trust."
Despite various concerns, the government maintains that it will proceed with the survey as planned. Minister Song Mi-ryung stated on social media (SNS) on the 23rd, "There is only one reason for conducting the farmland survey: to ensure that farmland is used properly for agriculture and to increase the income of farmers." She added, "I will ensure that in the future, people will say, 'It was good that they conducted that farmland survey. Farming has become much better.'" President Lee Jae-myung also shared the Minister's SNS post, stating, "The comprehensive farmland survey is absolutely necessary for preventing farmland speculation and proper utilization of farmland." He added, "The principle of 'land to the tiller' and the government's efforts to protect it are the Constitution, which is the command of the people."
- Gyeongja-yujeon (Land to the Tiller)
- The principle that only those who actually cultivate farmland can own it.
Despite the government's announcement of its position, concerns have not subsided. Jang Dong-hyuk, leader of the People Power Party, retorted on SNS on the 24th, "They don't uphold the Constitution, yet they use it only when it suits them. The Constitution also specifies the property rights of citizens. Nowhere in our Constitution does it say that the President can take away farmers' land as he pleases."