This study examines the feasibility of an AI–Human Hybrid integrated deliberation system to address structural limitations in landscape and public design reviews conducted by local governments. These limitations include duplicated procedures, unclea...
This study examines the feasibility of an AI–Human Hybrid integrated deliberation system to address structural limitations in landscape and public design reviews conducted by local governments. These limitations include duplicated procedures, unclear standards, inconsistent judgments, and limited citizen perspectives. Guided by the Landscape Act and the Public Design Promotion Act, the study analyzes current deliberation practices. The methodology integrates literature and legal analysis, institutional comparison, and expert FGIs. The findings reveal persistent inefficiencies and judgment variability, while expert FGIs highlight both the value of AI—quantitative analysis, case-based evidence, predictive support—and its limitations in cultural judgment, accountability, and potential bias. Experts agreed that AI should serve as a supportive tool with an involvement level of 20–30%. The study concludes that an AI–Human Hybrid model can enhance objectivity, efficiency, and transparency in integrated deliberations and underscores the need for region-specific AI-assisted models.