This article is not about booking a tour to North Korea. That’s a topic for another day. Rather, this is a study of how articles on tourism in the primary Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) economic journals—Kyo’ngje Yo’ngu and Hakpo (the Journal of Kim Il Sung University (Economics))—reflected and possibly played a role in the regime’s thinking about economic policy between 2012 and 2020. A recent government daily editorial endorsing the cabinet’s leading role in the economy called for: “continuously researching, perfecting and applying optimized economic management methods” by “carrying out discussions broadly and in-depth between academia and functionaries on the ground.” This suggests that the ideas being put forward in North Korea’s economic journals carry policy significance and are intended to have a practical impact.
Broadly speaking, these articles on tourism can be separated into two categories: the first, and by far the smaller, was concerned with tourism as an ideological issue; the second was purely practical explorations of how to make tourism successful and, most of all, profitable. Naturally, some articles were a little of both, with authors starting with a nod to ideological orthodoxy and then halfway through casting that off to concentrate on pragmatic approaches.
Background
Between 2012 and 2020, the two aforementioned journals published nearly 60 articles dedicated to tourism. The topics ranged from general discussions about the nature of “socialist tourism” to areas such as hotel service work, tourism advertising, the impact of tourism on the economy and international trends in tourism. This focus went well beyond the South Korean-financed Mt. Kumgang tourist area in Kangwon Province.
Despite the oft-repeated description of North Korea as being isolated and closed to outsiders, tourism was not a new concept to the DPRK when Kim Jong Un assumed power after his father, Kim Jong Il, died in December 2011. The elder Kim had devoted much attention to tourism, especially near the end of his rule, when North Korea signed several agreements with the People’s Republic of China (PRC), easing visa requirements for Chinese tourists, whose numbers had increased to tens of thousands per year. Kim Jong Il himself made on-site inspections to tourist hotels and sites around the country to check on new construction and upgrades to existing facilities. Money was spent on infrastructure improvements, including rail lines to get tourists to various sites, especially in the northeast.
What changed under Kim Jong Un was how tourism became part and parcel of the extensive push for new economic policies. The DPRK introduced its tourism initiative in the midst of researching and testing various economic reform ideas that spanned from incentivized farming and greater autonomy to enterprises to revitalized commercial banks. All of which suggested that tourism was part of Kim’s new economic policies. His first public endorsement of tourism and economic development districts came at the March 2013 party plenum, simultaneously with his broad guidelines on the “economic management methods of our style,” which was code for the aforementioned economic reform initiatives. In the months that followed, North Korea started to actively promote tourism, holding knowledge-sharing conferences and promulgating relevant laws. Eventually, tourism became seen as an “economic activity” in its own right. As such, it required consideration in the context of a full range of economic issues rather than simply as an ornament or ideological-propaganda tool to influence the thinking of foreigners. For that reason, discussions about tourism in the country’s economic journals should be seen as bearing increased policy significance.
Read the full analysis on 38 North.
Understanding Kim Jong Un’s Economic Policymaking: Tourism as an Industry
By Robert Carlin • Rachel Minyoung Lee
Korean Peninsula
Originally published on 38 North.
This article is not about booking a tour to North Korea.1 Note: 38 North has launched the second phase of the “Understanding Kim Jong Un’s Economic Policymaking” series, which will focus on the external elements of North Korea’s economic policies. This is the first in this series. To review the first phase of the “Understanding Kim Jong Un’s Economic Policymaking” series, which dealt with North Korea’s domestic economic policies, see https://www.38north.org/2022/03/understanding-kim-jong-uns-economic-policymaking-a-review-and-implications/. For those interested in more background on tourism in North Korea, see Dean J. Ouellette, “Understanding the ‘Socialist Tourism’ of North Korea Under Kim Jong Un: An Analysis of North Korean Discourse,” North Korean Review 16, no. 1 (Spring 2020): 55-81, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26912705. That’s a topic for another day. Rather, this is a study of how articles on tourism in the primary Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) economic journals—Kyo’ngje Yo’ngu and Hakpo (the Journal of Kim Il Sung University (Economics))—reflected and possibly played a role in the regime’s thinking about economic policy between 2012 and 2020.2 Note: This series uses a modified version of the McCune-Reischauer romanization system for North Korean text. Diacritics are replaced with apostrophes. Some well-known proper nouns will follow internationally recognized spellings or North Korean transliterations instead. A recent government daily editorial endorsing the cabinet’s leading role in the economy called for: “continuously researching, perfecting and applying optimized economic management methods” by “carrying out discussions broadly and in-depth between academia and functionaries on the ground.”3 Note: “<사설> 내각의 결정과 행정명령은 당의 결정이고 국가의 법이다,” Minju Joson, June 30, 2022. This suggests that the ideas being put forward in North Korea’s economic journals carry policy significance and are intended to have a practical impact.
Broadly speaking, these articles on tourism can be separated into two categories: the first, and by far the smaller, was concerned with tourism as an ideological issue; the second was purely practical explorations of how to make tourism successful and, most of all, profitable. Naturally, some articles were a little of both, with authors starting with a nod to ideological orthodoxy and then halfway through casting that off to concentrate on pragmatic approaches.
Background
Between 2012 and 2020, the two aforementioned journals published nearly 60 articles dedicated to tourism. The topics ranged from general discussions about the nature of “socialist tourism” to areas such as hotel service work, tourism advertising, the impact of tourism on the economy and international trends in tourism. This focus went well beyond the South Korean-financed Mt. Kumgang tourist area in Kangwon Province.4 Note: Mt. Kumgang was an inter-Korean joint tourism venture that closed in 2008 due to an incident of a North Korean guard shooting a South Korean tourist. This was one of the first large-scale tourism projects in North Korea. Despite being closed since 2008, articles dedicated to the resort appeared in Kyo’ngje Yo’ngu as late as 2017, and hopes to reopen the resort resurfaced during inter-Korean talks as recently as 2018. However, Kim Jong Un in October 2019 threw cold water on this inter-Korean project by calling for removing South Korean facilities and developing the district without the South.
Despite the oft-repeated description of North Korea as being isolated and closed to outsiders, tourism was not a new concept to the DPRK when Kim Jong Un assumed power after his father, Kim Jong Il, died in December 2011. The elder Kim had devoted much attention to tourism, especially near the end of his rule, when North Korea signed several agreements with the People’s Republic of China (PRC), easing visa requirements for Chinese tourists, whose numbers had increased to tens of thousands per year.5 Note: “Agreement and Agreed Documents Signed between DPRK and Chinese Governments,” KCNA, October 4, 2009; “DPRK Draws Many Tourists,” KCNA, April 21, 2011; and “Harbin-Mt. Kumgang Tourist Group Tours Mt. Kumgang,” KCNA, November 7, 2011. Kim Jong Il himself made on-site inspections to tourist hotels and sites around the country to check on new construction and upgrades to existing facilities.6 Note: “Kim Jong Il Gives Field Guidance to Mt. Myohyang Recreation Ground,” KCNA, October 25, 2009; and “Kim Jong Il Inspects Renovated Hyangsan Hotel,” KCNA, January 30, 2010. Money was spent on infrastructure improvements, including rail lines to get tourists to various sites, especially in the northeast.7 Note: “Rason City Development Plan,” KCNA, April 6, 2011; and “Rason Directs Efforts to Tourist Development,” KCNA, August 30, 2011.
What changed under Kim Jong Un was how tourism became part and parcel of the extensive push for new economic policies. The DPRK introduced its tourism initiative in the midst of researching and testing various economic reform ideas that spanned from incentivized farming and greater autonomy to enterprises to revitalized commercial banks. All of which suggested that tourism was part of Kim’s new economic policies. His first public endorsement of tourism and economic development districts came at the March 2013 party plenum, simultaneously with his broad guidelines on the “economic management methods of our style,” which was code for the aforementioned economic reform initiatives.8 Note: “경애하는 김정은동지께서 조선로동당 중앙위원회 2013년 3월전원회의에서 하신 보고,” Rodong Sinmun, April 2, 2013. In the months that followed, North Korea started to actively promote tourism, holding knowledge-sharing conferences and promulgating relevant laws.9 Note: “DPRK Law on Economic Development Zones Enacted,” KCNA, June 5, 2013; “Tourism-related Explanation Session Held in DPRK,” KCNA, August 24, 2013; and “DPRK to Develop Tourism as One of Major Industries,” KCNA, August 28, 2013. Eventually, tourism became seen as an “economic activity” in its own right.10 Note: Cho’n Yo’ng-myo’ng, “Tourism Economy as Economic Relations of Tourism Activities,” Kim Il Sung Chonghaptaehakhakpo (Ch’o’rhak, Kyo’ngje) 1, (2017). As such, it required consideration in the context of a full range of economic issues rather than simply as an ornament or ideological-propaganda tool to influence the thinking of foreigners. For that reason, discussions about tourism in the country’s economic journals should be seen as bearing increased policy significance.
Read the full analysis on 38 North.
Notes
Recent & Related