For Regional Universities, Creating Conditions for Survival Takes Priority Over Three Campuses and KRW 100 Billion Each

The Ministry of Education announced a “Plan to Foster Local Talent Linked to Growth Engines,” presenting it as a solution to revive regional universities by selecting three out of nine flagship national universities for concentrated investment. Among the nine institutions excluding Seoul National University, three will receive approximately KRW 100 billion in additional financial support—more than the KRW 30 billion per year allocated to the others. This is said to be a scaled-down version of the “Creating 10 Seoul National Universities” campaign pledge, reflecting a strategy of selection and concentration in light of budget constraints.

The Ministry of Education also pledged to establish branded colleges to support growth industries and foster AI hubs. These branded colleges refer to specialized colleges aimed at regional strategic industries, such as a College of Mobility or a College of Renewable Energy. However, unless companies actually settle and take root in the region, such branded colleges will struggle to fulfill their intended role.

The vision may look impressive on paper, but can this “flagship national university project” really solve the crisis facing regional universities? The survival of regional universities still depends fundamentally on creating a self-sustaining environment in which they can strengthen their own competitiveness. A system in which the central government “designates” leading universities and concentrates money and authority in them risks distorting the true nature of the regional university crisis.

◆ Selective support relying on the trickle-down effect

The Ministry of Education says it will create a successful model and spread it, but this trickle-down approach of concentrating the budget on three universities is insufficient to revive the entire regional university ecosystem. The crisis facing regional universities stems from a complex mix of factors, including the decline in the school-age population, concentration in the Seoul metropolitan area, and various regulations and institutional discrimination. Yet the government is reducing the problem to strengthening the competitiveness of a few national universities. A support structure that pours KRW 100 billion into flagship national universities while limiting other universities to KRW 30 billion only widens disparities within the regions. If top professors, students, and corporate projects are pulled into the selected universities, other regional universities will inevitably hollow out even more quickly.

◆ Universities need freedom more than money

This plan focuses on injecting trillions of won in fiscal support, but says little about expanding university autonomy. If regional universities are to survive, they must be free to pursue various strategies such as merging or abolishing departments, jointly operating programs with outside institutions, and developing university assets. University restructuring reforms in Finland and Norway granted autonomy along with accountability, and Japan’s regional revitalization policies supported the entire network regardless of whether institutions were public or private. By contrast, financial support that emphasizes performance management and KPIs while leaving regulations intact is unlikely to lead to sustainable innovation.

◆ A national university-centered mindset narrows the market

The crisis facing regional universities is not a problem for national universities alone. In many regions, private universities are responsible for youth education, vocational training, and lifelong education. If support and regulation are designed mainly around national universities, regional private universities lose the opportunity to compete fairly, and the regional higher education ecosystem becomes even weaker. Simply reducing the slogan of “10 Seoul National Universities” to “3 Seoul National Universities” does not produce balanced development. It merely replicates the central hierarchy in the regions.

◆ Creating a self-sustaining regional university ecosystem capable of strengthening its own competitiveness

Rather than concentrating fiscal support on certain universities, the key to the survival of regional universities lies in regulatory reform and stronger market incentives. First, fair support based on performance is needed. Regardless of whether an institution is national or private, budgets should be allocated competitively based on criteria such as local youth employment rates, performance in industry linkages, and contributions to lifelong education. Opportunities should be open to all, but support should be cut off where there are no results.

Second, autonomous integration between universities in the Seoul metropolitan area and non-metropolitan universities, along with deregulation, is urgently needed. In an era of declining school-age populations, mergers and alliances between universities cannot be confined to the same region. Regulations should be relaxed so that metropolitan and regional universities can freely choose joint degrees, joint campuses, or integrated corporate entities, and regional universities should be allowed to establish footholds in the metropolitan area and make use of their assets. This is the way to strengthen regional universities’ market access and revenue models.

Third, private-sector partnerships should be expanded. Tax incentives for donations and investment should be strengthened so that businesses, alumni, and private capital flow into regional universities. If universities are transformed from institutions dependent on public finance into investable innovation platforms, regional industries and universities can grow together.

At first glance, the Ministry of Education’s policy of intensively fostering three flagship national universities appears to be an innovative measure for regional strategic industries and talent development, but in reality it is merely selective support premised on the hope of a trickle-down effect. The essence of the regional university crisis is not money, but structure and autonomy.

Pouring in trillions of won without creating an environment that restores competition and freedom will only expand another hierarchy and widen regional disparities. The goal should not be “three government-dependent Seoul National Universities,” but “many regional universities that survive.” Only free competition and market-friendly institutions can save regional universities.

Gwang yong Go

Policy Director, Center for Free Enterprise (CFE)

---

Original title: 지방대 해법, 3개·1천억원씩 보다 생존 환경 조성이 급선무

Author: Gwang yong Go

Date: 2026-04-23

Source: https://www.cfe.org/bbs/bbsDetail.php?cid=press&idx=28828