 At the urban age it is my first time and I thank all the sponsors and organizations. I will be talking about Seoul, the way that it had developed in a very short span of time and the transition from the early developmental models that made Seoul what it is. And so I set the title as Between Plan and Project, but this is from the point primarily of governance. But since our, I think, section is titled Planning Fundamentals, I would just say that planning is a culture. And as a culture it is created through history, it changes even as we speak at this very moment. And so Korea is a society that is very used to planning culture and that we need to understand the very complex historical and cultural conditions in which the way that planning and governance intervenes. And so we have a map of Seoul, the yellow line indicates the administrative boundaries. About 10 million people reside within the boundaries. The larger metropolitan area is about 25 million. Roughly half of the population of South Korea resides in the Seoul metropolitan government, in the Seoul metropolitan area. Planning was for a long time part of the culture because Seoul when it was first established in 1394 as the capital of the Joseon Dynasty was planned, was a planned city. It was based on confusion, ritual principles, and on principles of Geomancy. And so it was a beautifully organized city. It is the seat of governments. It was a political city planned to govern the dynasty. And so you have wonderful, beautiful, palatial complexes. But within this confusion system, the primary system of governance was a bureaucracy. And it was based on confusion, meritocracy. And so for taking the long historical view, the system of working through documents, through writing, through administrative systems has been with us for centuries. This culture, you could say, was transformed into a rather authoritarian culture during the Japanese colonial period that extended from the 1910 to 1945, but it had a bit of a wider historical period. And so it transformed into a rather militaristic culture. And that culture extended after independence is 1945. And then it continued on to a long period of dictatorships that extended until the 1990s. So if we want to understand the history of Seoul in terms of planning and governance, you can see that there's a great period of expansion in population. And it's now, the population has now plateaued to around 10 million. And you see in the urban age booklet that Seoul as a city of, as a megalopolis that's larger than 10 million, it is now a city that is in real crisis because the population is shrinking, is growing old, and that is part of the overall nature of Korea, of South Korea. But you can see that particularly after 1961, when the military government of Park Jung-hee comes to power, that South Korea and Seoul as a kind of machine for governance for a capitalist country has a series of plans. So a series of five-year plans and that national level planning extends into the city. And so until 1994 when local governance is reinstated, the mayor of Seoul is really appointed by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and it is in de facto appointed by the President. And so the governance and planning of Seoul is really a kind of system of national governance. And so within this bureaucratic system and culture, a very rigid system of regulation is instated and you have zoning plans that conform. And so you have even now with our very progressive mayor, we have a system of bureaucracy. But when you look back at the decades of planning, what actually drove the development of Seoul was really the projects. The big projects and bureaucracies really are a system of maintenance and so they are very rigid vertical structures. But when you want to implement a large plan, for example the subdivisions of large areas that supported the big development, really these are large scale projects. And when you want to implement a plan, you crisscross these bureaucratic systems through political will. And so when you look at all these plans, they are in fact de facto after the fact ideas that were after the big projects. And so the subdivisions that allowed the great expansion of the city towards the south, the highways that were built, urban infrastructure projects, and then the renovation into more sustainable things were all big projects that crossed the hierarchical bureaucratic system. And so now we are in a period of transition towards smaller projects, but they are still projects that are created and pushed through political will. And so we are in a state of transition, globally the relation between North Korea will change the status of Seoul and the kind of crisis of stagnancy within the society may have a different kind of vision for the future with this opening up of the North Korean relations. And then though the projects have become smaller, they do work still within this kind of planning culture that extends to the present and the foreseeable future. Thank you. Thank you so much for a very clear and very fascinating presentation and highlighting that tension where even when there is a big plan and the capacity to implement the plan that there is this kind of pushback, micro tension and time erodes and we come back as we did in Paris context.