서울대 10개 만들기와 글로컬대학 30: 대학 체제 재편 없는 선택과 집중의 상징정치와 구조적 한계 = Glocal Universities 30 and “Ten Seoul National Universities”:Symbolic Politics and Structural Limits of Selective Concentration Without Systemic Higher Education Reform

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Korean higher education is undergoing a structural transition shaped by the rapid decline in the college-age population, continued youth concentration in the Seoul Metropolitan Area, cascading crises among regional universities, and the financial fragility of private institutions. In this context, the Glocal Universities 30 initiative and the “Ten Seoul National Universities” proposal are presented as strategies for regional innovation and enhanced competitiveness. Yet their policy designs tend to converge on a common model of selective concentration: identifying a limited number of institutions for concentrated support and linking that support to quantitatively driven performance management. This study integrates the World-Class University (WCU) discourse, theories of functional differentiation in higher education systems, and the concept of symbolic politics to interpret the two initiatives as variations within the same policy trajectory. It examines how they operate under, and potentially reproduce, the hierarchical structure of Korea’s university system (Seoul National University–regional flagship national universities–regional private universities) and assesses the likely consequences. The analysis suggests that these initiatives may reinforce the concentration of symbolic capital and resources at the upper tier absent a sufficiently integrated system-level design for functional reallocation and transition . In turn, they risk weakening the diversity and sustainability of regional higher education ecosystems and shifting the burdens of restructuring onto middle- and lower-tier institutions. The prominent numerical targets (“30” and “10”) also function as powerful instruments of political communication, creating conditions in which core questions of systemic reform are pushed behind slogan competition. The study argues that selective concentration can align with its stated policy objectives only when it is coupled with substantive system reform.