Lee Chae-won Ordinances

A term collectively referring to autonomous regulations on youth, housing, and care support proposed as the lead sponsor by Seoul Metropolitan Council member Lee Chae-won; a case in which individual m

Lee Chae-won Ordinances

Overview

The Lee Chae-won Ordinances (Korean: 이채원 조례; Hanja: 李彩媛條例) is a term collectively referring to a series of autonomous regulations (ordinances) proposed as the lead sponsor by Councilmember Lee Chae-won, who served in the Seoul Metropolitan Council. Although the official name differs for each ordinance, they share a common policy direction of establishing a basis for support in the fields of youth, housing, and care, and the collective name derived from the proposer's name has been widely used in the local community and media. It is regarded as a representative case in which an individual council member's legislative activity was recognized as a policy brand in the era of local autonomy.

Main Content

Background

Since the local autonomy system was fully implemented, the number of ordinances proposed by metropolitan and basic councils has steadily increased, but many ordinances have been criticized for being ineffective because they remain declarative phrases or lack execution funding. The Lee Chae-won Ordinances started from this awareness of the problem, and are characterized by specifying concrete support targets in the provisions and including mandatory clauses requiring the establishment and reporting of annual implementation plans.

Key Provisions

First, they clearly define the targets and scope of support. They separately define groups with high policy demand, such as youth, newlyweds, and single-person households, and directly specify income standards and residency requirements in the ordinance, reducing the discretion of administrative agencies. Second, they establish a basis for dedicated organizations and budget securing. Along with designating a responsible department, they made it mandatory to establish annual support plans and report implementation results to the council. Third, they prescribe a public-private cooperation system. They formed a consultative body involving public institutions, private companies, and nonprofit organizations, and allowed agreements to be concluded when necessary. Fourth, they prepared information disclosure and feedback procedures, requiring project performance to be regularly announced.

Scope and Application

The main targets are youth living in or active in Seoul, housing-vulnerable groups, and households experiencing care gaps. The ordinances apply to the Seoul Metropolitan Government and its affiliated institutions, as well as invested and funded institutions, and spread to autonomous districts by providing reference standards when they enact or amend their own ordinances. However, their effect is recognized only to the extent that they do not conflict with higher-level laws such as the Housing Act, Framework Act on Youth, and Framework Act on Social Security.

Progress

After being proposed, they went through review by the standing committee, budget estimation, and consultation with relevant departments, and were resolved at the plenary session, then took effect after a certain grace period following promulgation. Subsequently, enforcement rules and detailed guidelines were prepared, moving to the actual execution stage, and amendments continued to gradually expand the support targets based on the results of pilot projects.

Controversy and Evaluation

Proponents positively evaluate the ordinances for moving beyond declarative welfare and having executable procedures. On the other hand, opponents pointed out that the funding plans are not specific and could ultimately lead to a burden on local finances, and that coordination mechanisms with similar or overlapping projects are insufficient. Concerns were also raised that provisions favoring specific groups could cause equity controversies.

Recent Trends

In 2024–2025, as local fiscal pressure and demographic changes intersect, demands for verifying the effectiveness of ordinances proposed by individual council members as a whole are growing. Accordingly, discussions on amending the Lee Chae-won Ordinances are also underway to reduce declarative expressions in the provisions and strengthen the setting of performance indicators and budget linkage by project. In addition, as the linkage between central and local governments in youth policy is emphasized, the need to integrate and reorganize similar ordinances is also being raised. The trend of strengthening public hearings and legislative notice procedures in the process of enacting and amending ordinances to expand resident participation is also clear. Another recent change is the spread of methods that unify application and reception procedures online in line with digital transformation and select support targets by analyzing demand based on data.