Homelessness is borderless – it is a universal dilemma that permeates our modern human existence. Time spent traveling the western coast of the United States made unavoidable the insurmountable financial difficulties and despair that have so many people in its grasp; sub-cities of disheveled tents expanded, swelling through the streets, and held at a distance unnerved tourists and residents alike. Society has neglected these people and they have been left to fend for themselves underneath the rug of social welfare. It was within this context that two months later I moved to South Korea, and was staggered by what at first seemed to me to be a quasi-utopian society almost exempt from the homelessness that had felt so visceral halfway across the world. It left me with the question: how is it that South Korea appears to have such a handle on homelessness? Rationalizing my own experience, official numbers read that the homeless population in the United States is five times the size of that in South Korea – as a percentage of the population, the two countries have 1.5% and 0.3% homelessness respectively. Nonetheless, upon further analysis, South Korea invests significantly less on public welfare spending (taken as a percentage of GDP) than other OECD nations, with the United States devoting considerably more. In fact, South Korea falls fifth last amongst OECD nations, and dedicates only 12% of its GDP to the cause of social welfare. The OECD average is 20%. This lack of welfare spending as well as a steadily skyrocketing Korean housing index – that has seen a 25% increase since 2020 – is set against comparatively stagnant growth in average yearly salary. This information is paradoxical: how can a nation, at the economic behest of gentrification and expansion, invest so little in its social welfare system yet have such a modest homeless population? This article aims to understand this paradox. The South Korean government does run outreach schemes to tackle the problem of homelessness. The most notable of these is run by the local Seoul government, and is called Simin Chatdongi. This roughly translates as “People Visiting Their Neighbors,” and is a program that encourages citizens to alert authorities when they believe someone may be on the verge of homelessness. Citizens who want to participate can sign up for the outreach program online or by telephoning the Dasan Call Centre (+82 120). Nonetheless, Tak Jang-Han, a PhD student from Seoul National University currently undertaking a doctorate thesis on South Korean homelessness, all whilst living in an impoverished area of Seoul, does not believe that such governmental outreach programs are effective in lowering the numbers of homeless. Tak spoke of the officials involved with Simin Chatdongi to SNU Quill, stating, “[they] go to homeless people and talk to them for a while, distribute goods, or link resources, but in my opinion, they don’t help them get out of homelessness.” Tak believes that the Korean government does not have a handle on homelessness, and argues that “the number of homeless people counted by the Korean government is around 10,000, which is much less than the actual number.” He continued to describe the South Korean government’s conception of homelessness as “narrow,” and suggested that, if the government were to extend their definition when recording numbers, the population of homeless in the country could soar to forty times higher than previously estimated. This perspective has merit. The Ministry of Land, Transport, and Infrastructure has confirmed 430,000 unregistered households, many of which fall under the category of jjokbang housing. Jjokbang housing are shantytown communities of unregistered, poorly constructed, poorly maintained housing. With living spaces often smaller than two square meters in size, and with communities of 16-17 people often sharing two pit toilets between them, Tak believes that residents of such communities should also be recorded as homeless by the Korean government. To make clear Tak's perspective, the scale of homelessness in South Korea is not immediately visible because it is hidden within unregistered housing communities such as jjokbang housing, and governmental statistics are inaccurate because the definition used to classify homelessness is excessively narrow. While the South Korean government statistically conceives of homelessness as archetypal street homelessness, the Institute of Global Homelessness offers a more nuanced definition: “Experiencing homelessness means lacking access to minimally adequate housing.” Importantly, the IGH definition also focuses upon the adequacy of one’s living conditions, and thus includes within its conception of homelessness, “persons living in severely inadequate and insecure housing.” The IGH conceives of homelessness in categories and if applied to South Korea, this IGH classification considers residents of jjokbang housing as “3H” homeless – “People living in non-conventional buildings and temporary structures that are unfit for human habitation.” In a similar manner, the United Nations, unlike the South Korean government, acknowledges that, “Rough sleeping is only one manifestation of homelessness, but not necessarily the most frequent one.” Governments of countries that have similar unregistered housing communities do consider large swathes of those living within them as homeless. For instance, Brazil is a country that is infamous for having large favela neighborhoods in its cities. In an official UN report, the Brazilian government defines homelessness as “a group that has in common the extreme poverty, broken or weakened family ties and the lack of regular conventional housing, and that uses public places and degraded areas as living space and livelihood, temporarily or permanently.” Neglected housing that is found within favelas is considered by the government as a “degraded area” and thus their tenants are counted amongst the country’s official homelessness statistics. The South Korean government, in comparison, does not define homelessness with an adequately broad scope. Tak is not alone in his argument that the South Korean government should extend its definition of homelessness. In fact, in 2018 the UN dispatched special rapporteur Leilana Farha to South Korea to investigate adequate housing within the country. Upon her visit, a report provided to her by the Korean NGOs for the Realization of Housing Rights reads, “After the ratification of the UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Korean government received concerns and advice from all the four rounds of deliberation. It was pointed out, among others, that there is not sufficient information about the homeless … Thus, the Korean government should discard the narrow concept of “the homeless, etc.”, and it should redefine the concept and extent of homelessness, and thereby, it should identify the scale and current state of homelessness in the nation.” Interestingly, just as Tak does, the report emphasizes that the South Korean definition of homelessness is too “narrow.” The UN has stated that “a number of challenges exist with regards to measuring homelessness, including the risk of excluding marginalized groups that are not ‘visibly’ homeless.” After her visit to South Korea and consequent to the NGO report cited here, Farha officially urged the South Korean government to “shift their approach,” to homelessness so that it “meets current human rights standards.” In response to Farha’s indictment the government responded that it “takes note of her recommendations.” Not only is the government being urged to extend its definition of homelessness but also the mechanism by which South Korean homelessness is ostensibly hidden within inadequate, unregistered housing is also under strain. In recent years, with Seoul expanding radically, jjokbang housing has been destroyed to make way for high rise expansion. Notable examples of this have been near Seoul Station and Yeongdeungpo District. Nonetheless, with the destruction of neighborhoods comes the displacement of their previous residents – UN rapporteur Farha, after her visit to South Korea, said, “I am deeply concerned by the continuation of massive reconstruction projects resulting in the destruction of neighborhoods and displacement of individuals and families.” She continues in this statement to emphasize that the current Korean legal framework for urban redevelopment and reconstruction does not comply with internationally recognised human rights standards and continues to result in forced evictions. With increasing rents in the country and the absence of affordable housing in the form of jjokbang housing, South Korea’s poor are being left with nowhere to turn. Significantly, the average household debt in South Korea has been rapidly increasing in recent years, and now sits higher than any other OECD nation at 163% of net disposable income. At the beginning of the article it was established that, statistically, there is a paradox as concerns homelessness in South Korea – minimal governmental welfare investment, a burgeoning housing index and comparatively stagnant growth in average yearly salary seem in stark contrast to the low numbers of homelessness recorded by the government. The UN has criticized South Korea’s attitude toward public welfare, and the manner in which the government defines homelessness; with an escalating crisis of household debt amidst soaring, expansive development, the country has unquestionably reached a watershed moment as concerns its approach to the issue of homelessness. It begs the question: what will the next few years bring for the underprivileged in South Korean society and how will their government respond?

Have you ever felt vulnerable entering a casual restaurant for a meal? Or felt reluctant to enter a grocery store? What about going to the movies with your friends on the weekends? Such regular encounters have turned out to be somewhat foreign for the elderly since the COVID-19 pandemic. Feelings of hesitation and isolation penetrated the lives of seniors due to social distancing policies that involved digital technologies issued to cope with the virus. The emergence of COVID-19 led the South Korean government to implement several social distancing policies. Those included quarantine, compulsory mask wearing, tracing of the infected, and more. Of those policies, the restrictive entrance system–which allowed only those with proof of vaccination in the form of QR codes or those with PCR negative results within 48-hours to enter MultiUse facilities–especially impacted citizens. Without the QR codes, they were unable to enter malls, restaurants and other day-to-day facilities. Furthermore, online services, such as vaccine reservations, and emergency relief fund registrations for the infected and for small enterprises, prevailed in the country. The internet was again the source for vital information about the virus. The availability to such digital sources determined whether a person was going to be safe or not, aided or not and foremost included or not. In the phase of such radical changes, the elderly quickly became one of the most insecure groups in Korea. According to an annual survey conducted by the Ministry of Science and ICT in 2021, seniors scored the lowest in accessing and utilizing digital devices among the four vulnerable groups of digital accessibility, which include the disabled, the poor, farmers and fishermen, and the elderly. Jun Woo-chun, a professor of Computer Education at Seoul National University of Education, called this phenomenon “the digital divide of older citizens” in his study. This gap leads to the social marginalization of seniors, eventually trapping them in the vicious cycle of isolation. Seniors frequently reported difficulties in using the QR codes to enter day-to-day facilities. A 64-year-old citizen surnamed Jeong, described the indignity he felt at a restaurant. “I went to a restaurant a few days ago and was required to show a QR code. I had no idea what to do and felt like I was causing a disturbance so I just got out of the place.” The government acknowledged the exclusion that older citizens were experiencing and came up with several mechanisms to confront it. For example, the restrictive entrance system allowed alternative forms of QR codes, such as printed certificates and vaccination stickers, with which seniors feel more comfortable. However, most of the seniors didn’t realize the need for the quarantine pass until they encountered younger generations using QR codes. Some of those who even had their vaccination stickers attached to their ID cards weren’t welcomed by the storeowners. Park Seung-min, an activist in the Dongja-dong jjokbang village who assists seniors, noted, “I went to a restaurant in Jung-gu with an elderly group, but couldn’t go in. Although they showed their vaccination stickers, the restaurant owner didn’t acknowledge them as valid quarantine passes.” Such misunderstandings inevitably bring the problem back to its starting point. Stores in Jongno-gu, where seniors account for a large portion of its consumers, confronted hardships despite policies embracing the elderly. Storeowners faced many old consumers who struggled with the quarantine pass, and eventually couldn’t help but to allow those without the pass into their shops, thereby violating the law. Their sympathy for the elderly was not the only reason they couldn’t abide by the law. They themselves did not know how to install the QR code machine or they were desperate for profit, unavoidably permitting customers without valid certificates. These incidents imply that the quarantine pass system has shortcomings in various aspects. Misunderstanding between different generations, economic fallbacks caused by the pandemic and digital illiteracy among aged shop owners all contribute to the problem. A simple “paperback” version of QR code is not working. Korea was not the only country facing problems with QR codes. Since the test-trace-isolate (TTI) strategy for Covid-19 containment was ubiquitous around the world, tracing exposure by the use of QR codes was also found worldwide. Among many countries that had implemented QR codes for tracing, including the US, France, Malaysia, New Zealand and more, China had one of the most strict and complicated surveillance systems. Unlike other countries, China used two types of QR codes for tracing: the Venue code and the Travel code. The former was used for entering a wide range of facilities such as malls, airports, restaurants and even public restrooms. It would display one’s identity, health information and their latest PCR test results. The latter, also called the itinerary code, was required for Chinese citizens to enter each province during their domestic travels. Each province of China had different versions of those codes which coiled up the complexity. Such new interrogations have shown to be effective for the “Zero-Covid” objective, but served as a burden for the seniors who did not own digital devices or struggled with using them. Public and private sectors in China recognized their predicaments and attempted QR code simplification and digital education. Instead of obligating several codes, the country is planning to link the travel card with the citizen’s ID card and health status, allowing citizens to just tag their travel card when entering any venue. Meanwhile, University students opened free digital usage classes for local seniors. However, Zheng Lei, a professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University and director of its Lab for Digital and Mobile Governance, addressed his concerns about these classes to Chinese online publication Sixth Tones. “The elderly should be able to choose not to learn about cell phones, instead of being threatened with exclusion if they don’t learn,” Zheng told the Chinese online magazine. His worries shed a new light on how we should deal with the digital divide among older citizens. Digital education and printed quarantine passes are not go-to simple solutions for this generational gap. The term “digital divide” assumes that those who lack digital literacy must follow those who are familiar with automation to close the gap. However, closing the divide requires understanding and participation from both sides. For the elderly, digital education may not be available because of physical impairments or absence of a desire to learn. On the other hand, youngsters may not acknowledge what kind of hardships seniors are facing and may not realize analog alternatives such as the paper back certificates. A survey conducted by Korea’s Ministry of Science and ICT, analyzing the seniors’ experience on digital services adds weight to the aforementioned problem. Compared to the overall citizens, seniors reported lack of participation in using online services. Only 48.3% of the elderly participated in registering services (vaccine administration and government subsidies application) while 73.6% of the entire population used them. The most frequently answered reasons for not using such services were that they couldn’t understand the need for them, and that they didn’t know how to approach the technology. This result suggests that the insufficiency in automated experiences among seniors stem not only from digital illiteracy but also from the lack of want and need. Therefore, assuming that the elderly should have an opportunity to learn digital skills just because they face difficulties may be a one-sided idea. Since some seniors may not want to, need to, or simply cannot pursue the trend, digital literacy classes should be open for all who struggle with automation, but voluntary participation should be guaranteed. Meanwhile, people who meet these seniors should respect and understand the hardships seniors face in the era of radical digital changes. Even though the elderly are qualified with a paper quarantine pass, if those who give them admission do not “know” of its validity, what use is the analog option? This implies that it should not be just the elders who receive learning. Rather, youngsters should be aware of what the older generation are choosing as an alternative. Such improvements are hopefully appearing in Korea. For instance, in 2022, the Seoul Digital Foundation decided to expand its use of the “Elderly-friendly Digital Accessibility Standard,” a nationwide criteria for a more convenient usage of applications. It requires apps to have bigger fonts, to place the search boxes in the center of the screen, and to add frequently used functions in the main screen’s bottom edge. This would make it easier for the elderly to use apps that show vaccine availability or banking apps that help them receive emergency relief funds. “The New Normal is Digital” is a contemporary and undeniable statement. But is it still valid for some of us who would like, want, or have no choice but to head back to the old Normal? When the youngsters of the 21st century become the “senior” generation, systems that seem undeniably natural to the future generations may look bizarre to them. The same goes for the current older citizens. Digital was not the trend for them, so the difficulties they face when using such services are inevitable. Younger generations should not impose the use of automation on seniors just because the current change heads towards the digital. Neither generation is to blame in this divide. Different backgrounds formed divergent competences and acceptability to digital services. And furthermore, even in the same generation, variations appear on the attitude towards automation. The mutual understanding of different generations is essential for an inclusive society. This phenomenon, unveiled by the QR codes of the COVID-19 pandemic, teaches our generation to contemplate on which approach would be valid for every member of society.

You might not have your phone in your hand, but you probably know where it is. Because if you did not know where it is, you might have difficulty concentrating on this article! According to Anders Hansen, the author of Insta-Brain, we touch our cell phones 2600 times per day on average, and check our phones every ten minutes when we are awake. And how much of that time do we spend on Instagram? Some readers may be frightened to learn how addicted they are. Do you not find yourself habitually scrolling down to update new stories and regularly jumping onto Instagram from time to time? So why do we habitually check Instagram? According to the author, the main problem is dopamine, a type of neurotransmitter that tells you what you should focus on (if you look at food when you are hungry, dopamine rates increase to tell you, “Focus on the food!”). Dopamine is released by “expectations” that something might happen. When a little Instagram notification pops up on the screen, dopamine is released as you think: Perhaps I got one more like on my feed! I must check, and you are pushed by a strong desire to check your phone. It is interesting that Chamath Palihapitiya, former vice-president of Facebook, commented that “Feedback loop that provokes dopamine release is having a negative impact on society,” and that he felt guilty when he thought of what social media is doing to people. Justin Rosenstein, who made the “like” feature on Facebook, shared that this function was too enticing, and that he decided to control his Facebook use since he found it as addictive as heroin. This article will analyze the contents of the book Insta-Brain to explain Instagram's effect on our concentration in relation to dopamine release. Then it will go further to discuss Instagram’s effect on our mind and mental state based on my experience as an Instagram user. Firstly, according to Hansen, the excessive use of Instagram diminishes concentration as our mind works vigorously to multitask. Multitasking refers to “the performance of more than one task at the same time.” The author argues that we can concentrate on only one task at a time. We often believe we are multitasking, but the fact is, we are moving quickly between multiple chores. We can switch from one job to another in about ten minutes, but the problem is that our attention is still lingering in the previous task as it takes a few more minutes for our brains to focus 100% on the present work. (This applies to everyone, unless you are a “super-multitasker” who can actually multitask, which is unlikely because they make up only 1% of humankind!) Now let’s apply this argument to our use of Instagram. Take for instance the words of Chung Na-yeon, an ordinary 22-year-old studying at Seoul National University. In response to a question asked regarding her usage of Instagram, Chung replied, “I do some studying and then look at Instagram for a moment, and then move back to studying, and then check Instagram for a moment. But does it really matter? I only check it for a few minutes or sometimes even a few seconds.” Her logic may seem reasonable; however, we know that according to Hansen, her brain might be lingering on Instagram for longer than she realizes. This means that even if she thinks checking it for a few minutes or seconds does not really matter, she actually spends much more time on Instagram than she expects. This misconception is in fact a serious problem considering what research discovered about multitasking people -- they have a lower capacity to concentrate and to filter unimportant information since their attention is distracted by too many things here and there. The bigger problem is that many modern people struggle to concentrate on anything, even when they are not using their phone, as their lack of concentration and their vulnerability to distractions have become their attitude of life. For example, many modern people find it difficult to focus on reading books. According to research done by Korea University professor Lee Soon-young, among 1200 men and women aged 10 or older surveyed nationwide, 23.0% of the surveyees do not read at all, and 15.4% of the surveyees read once a year. Moreover, according to the research done by the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism in 2021, about 43% of the surveyees had reading experience but the average amount of reading was only 2.3 books per year. This indicates that people tend to read a few pages and do not know what to do, feeling a strong impulse to check their phone just once, to check Instagram just once. This phenomenon also occurs due to their brains becoming used to the information processing activated when they are on social media, which indicates a change in the neural network and leads to decreased literacy. Hansen is not the only one who claims that the use of digital devices changes our brain. Maryanne Wolf says in her book Reader Come Home: The Reading Brain in a Digital World that she was surprised when she found out that she could no longer read her favorite book due to the impact of digital device usage on her brain. She could not stand hard words, complex sentences, and slow development as she lost her patience with reading. In other words, people who are so used to getting instant rewards by constantly checking Instagram cannot bear longer waits when taking part in other tasks. Interestingly, we might not be fully focused even when we are on Instagram! How many seconds does it take to see one story? Some Instagram users, including 22 year-old university student Che Da-Eun studying at Seoul National University, realized that they tend to scroll too quickly through stories. That is, they read all the stories, but they do not pay attention to the content or think deeply of it, often not even remembering what they have seen. The habitual use of Instagram without real focus is probably one of the reasons why users regard being on Instagram a waste of time. Another large category of the impact Instagram has on its users is its mental effect. The main motivation behind using Instagram is to promote an appealing image of ourselves to others. What happens in our brain when we talk about ourselves? According to research explained in Insta-Brain, when test subjects talked about their own thoughts, more parts of their brain were activated compared to when they talked about the thoughts of others. One of the activated parts is the nucleus accumbens, which is usually activated when we experience enjoyable moments such as eating delicious food or socializing with others. This showcases how people love to talk about themselves. So, what a chance Instagram provides! Now, people can constantly appeal to others and talk about themselves to hundreds and thousands of their followers. Let’s dive a little deeper. What does it mean when we say that people want to “appeal” to others? We desire attention from others. We want to show who we are, what kind of person we are, what we are like, what we spend most of our time doing, what we care most about. Some people always post gatherings with friends, others find themselves posting their pets, and some people always post special experiences such as traveling to exotic places.Through their feeds and stories, we can guess what kind of person he or she is, or at least what kind of person he or she wants to represent. Of course, these desires are not necessarily bad. They are instinctive. However, the problem often occurs when we try to satisfy our desires through Instagram. We can show pieces of ourselves through Instagram, but we should ask ourselves if it is a “real” representation of ourselves. We tend to post only the happiest and best moments of our life.. In fact, Instagram can be used as a mere means to show off so that we can be admired by others. Even if we have some desire to express ourselves to others and have meaningful communication, it seems that this kind of communication is rarely achieved on Instagram, when we only show our masked selves. Compare it to personal relationships with others in which we know about their entire life -- not only the “best” parts but also the worst parts -- their strengths and also their weaknesses. In this kind of relationship, we are accepted the way we are. The reason why we feel unsatisfied by the self-expression and attention we get on Instagram is perhaps because both are distorted. Secondly, being active on Instagram does not necessarily mean we are living as more “social” people. In other words, Instagram is not the same as socializing. We desire satisfaction from socializing with others, and this is one of the reasons why people start Instagram and why they cannot erase it. However, the result of this online socializing is quite different from that of socializing with people face to face. We can easily see passionate Instagram users saying they are lonely. Even though the present situation is improving, the COVID-19 restrictions over the past few years have forced many to meet people online instead of in person. The prolonged online meetings made many gloomy and not fully satisfied, as online interactions could not replace the lively offline gatherings. However, apart from the pandemic, maybe we were already too dependent on relationships within Instagram. Kang Min-Seong, a 22 year-old student at Seoul National University, said he hardly checks Instagram for almost a day when enjoying time with his friends. On the contrary, when he is not meeting someone for a long time and feeling lonely, he tends to spend way too much time on Instagram, just looking at the social lives of others, and not satisfying his own desire to socialize. Thus, finding one’s way into Instagram too often can indicate that one is lonely. However, at the same time, scrolling through Instagram paradoxically makes us even lonelier, making us feel “loneliness among the crowd.” All those social lives we see on Instagram remind us of the connections we wish we had. Finally, the impact of Instagram on our mind is a sense of inferiority and jealousy, which often makes people depressed. This is probably the negative impact of Instagram that most of the people are aware of. Everyone might have experienced that they were pretty satisfied with their own lives, but as they entered Instagram, they suddenly felt less satisfied with their lives. There always seems to be someone having a more exciting and fabulous life than us, traveling around exotic places, having unusual experiences like paragliding (Interestingly, according to a survey in Insta-Brain, most of the Facebook users answered that they were more jealous about the “experiences” of others over things like fancy cars.), living a more passionate life than we are, doing all kinds of contests, interns, and club activities, posting pictures that might get a series of compliments, being “inssa”(a Korean word referring to a sociable person with many friends) … Suddenly, we feel as if we are getting left behind. Instagram makes us constantly compare ourselves with others, making us feel inferior, jealous, and depressed. But why should we compete with others when we all know that the posts are collections of the “best” highlights of everyone’s lives? We need to take time to really think about how Instagram is influencing us since it has become our habit. Even though negative impacts of Instagram do exist, erasing Instagram might not be the most realistic choice. In fact, Instagram, if used in a new way, can be a positive channel of expressing ourselves or our thoughts. The point is, we should really ponder about “how” to use Instagram. Here are some personal solutions regarding how to use Instagram in a positive way. First, look at your feed and stories -- what do you mostly post? Try to find the pattern. Are those posts really about “you”? For example, if you always post delicious food in fancy restaurants or gatherings with friends, you might think that those posts are showing only “surface” information about you. If you tend to post about special events or trips, you might think that those are precious moments in your life but are too fragmentary. If you are trying too hard to post the contents people mostly respond to, such as well-taken pictures that fit Instagram vibe, and are reluctant to post what you really want to post -- you might feel that your Instagram account is overly controlled by social expectations. Then, how about trying something else? For example, my sister has been running an account that is by far the most groundbreaking and fresh I have ever seen. The biggest difference is that she posts her thoughts and emotions of life such as parts of a webtoon that she was impressed by, the quotes of books ranging from Jane Eyre and Daddy Long Legs to books of Jeong Yak-yong and poems with her literary comments, lyrics of songs, anecdotes of how she observes plants and randomly goes on bus trips around town, and hilarious experiences of getting bitten by a red ant. She also shares her insights from her classes, beautiful scenery, and impressive cartoons her friend makes. From these posts, people can really know what kind of person she is and truly empathize with the feed, as they do not just brag but actually show some pieces of her life that anyone could sympathize with. Her posts encourage and touch them, and make them smile and laugh. Instagram certainly can have some negative effects on one’s concentration and mental health. However, despite these concerns, there is some comfort in knowing that Instagram can be used as a channel of expressing ourselves or our thoughts and as a way to communicate based on the “real” expression of oneself. Instagram does not have to be used in a typical way, like it has always been.

Nowadays, everyone has at least one banking app on their phone. There are a large number of banking apps including Toss, Kakao Bank, and Kbank. In addition, most traditional banks including Shinhan Bank, NH Nonghyup Bank and KB Kookmin Bank, have launched their own banking apps in order to stay competitive against Internet banks. These banking apps increasingly gain more users. But what is the number one banking app in Korea? The answer is Toss. Let's find out how Toss reached the top of the list. Toss is a remittance service app developed by Korean startup Viva Republica. The banking app made it possible to wire money quickly and easily without a public certificate or security medium. Toss can be used by anyone over the age of 14 who owns a smartphone in his or her name. The Toss app was launched in 2015 and became the largest Fintech app in Korea. Fintech is a portmanteau of the words “financial” and “technology,” and refers to the phenomenon in which financial service providers integrate new technologies to compete with traditional methods in delivering financial products and services. It includes payment apps such as Toss, PayPal, and Kakao Bank, investment apps such as Robinhood, and crypto apps such as Coinbase. To answer the question of why Toss is deemed the number one banking app in Korea, we must first examine its Monthly Active Users. Among the various criteria by which apps can be ranked, the most widely used is MAU. MAU is an indicator of how many people regularly use mobile banking apps. It is the most widely used criterion because the higher this indicator, the more likely apps are to have loyal customers. MAU is a more credible standard compared to regular download rates as the latter includes the number of inactive users who downloaded the app with mere curiosity, while the former represents the actual number of users who regularly use the app. According to big data analysis platform Mobile Index on July 18, 2022, the MAU of Toss reached 14.27 million as of June 2022, maintaining the top position in the financial platform sector. This is an increase of 560,000 from 13.71 million in May 2022. Kakao Bank ranked second with 13.15 million MAU. In terms of MAU, Toss is also more popular than apps created by major commercial banks including Shinhan and KB Kookmin. Commercial banks started providing mobile financial services before Kakao Bank and Toss, but their MAU fell far behind. This is because Toss was the first in the financial industry to launch an integrated banking app, luring those who want to do banking chores with their mobile phones to become Toss users. Meanwhile, the main reason why Toss was able to become the number one mobile banking app in terms of MAU is because of its super app strategy. A super app is a single application that can perform multiple tasks, and it is nothing new. Super apps have existed in various fields. For example, South Korean second-hand marketplace-to-lifestyle solution provider Danggeun Market offers a hyperlocal super app. It provides all the services that users need in their local area with one app. Although the app started as a platform for users to trade used goods, it now provides various local commercial services such as cleaning, real estate, education, and job instruction. Therefore, it is faster and simpler than search engines when browsing information or services related to the user’s area of residence. The largest super app in Korea, however, is offered by Naver. Users can search, pay, and shop all at once through Naver’s comprehensive app. As much as Super apps are convenient for users as they do not need to install multiple apps, users may become skewed towards one dominant super app since the need for more than one app becomes obsolete. Therefore, it becomes disadvantageous for companies entering the market late. That is why commercial banks lost their mobile banking customers to Toss. Toss started as a simple remittance app, but has now expanded its scope to the banking and securities sectors by launching Toss Securities and Toss Bank. Of course, there are banking and securities services in other commercial banks. But there is not yet a banking app that can handle all banking operations at once like Toss. Also, the user interface of banking apps provided by commercial banks are not as convenient as that of Toss. For instance, Kakao, which is considered to be Toss’ rival, launched apps for Kakao Bank, Kakao Pay, and Kakao Pay Securities separately. So users need to install more than three apps to use banking, payment, and securities services. However, Toss implemented its remittance, securities, insurance, and banking services into one application. Users only need to install the Toss app to use banking, payment, and securities services. Of course Toss Bank, Toss Securities, and Toss Payments are separated within the Toss app. However, it is only natural for Toss to have a higher MAU than other banking apps as it has integrated all of its services into one app. In the case of other banks, its MAU is distributed among various apps, whereas Toss’ MAU is integrated into one app. Also, Toss has a longer average monthly app usage time per person, with 2.07 hours, compared to other banking apps such as Kakao Bank, which only recorded 0.4 hours. There are lots of people who are reluctant to install many apps on their phones, and Toss is the best option for them as users only need one app to use all of its financial services. As Toss became the most widely used mobile banking app in Korea, it was able to attract significant investments and become the first fintech unicorn company–a private startup with a corporate value of more than $1 billion–in 2018. The corporate value of Toss has increased about 10 times since 2018. Toss attracted about 530 billion won of new funds through Series G investment between July and August of 2022, and achieved a corporate value of 9.1 trillion won. In particular, the recent investments received by Toss are more meaningful because they result from the sharp decline in value of the fintech industry as investor sentiment around the world freezes. According to CBInsights, an evaluation agency specializing in unicorn companies, Toss ranked 27th in corporate value among fintech unicorn companies in the world, and 1st in Asia. According to data provided by Nice Rating Information, Korea’s new credit loans logged approximately 9 trillion won in July, and the amount of loans made through Toss was at about 1.8 trillion won. This means that 1 in 5 people who get credit loans in Korea uses Toss. Toss Securities recorded its own 2.3 million MAU, and its overseas stock trading service, launched in December 2021, is growing rapidly. Finally, to answer the question “does Toss’ super app strategy really work,” it most certainly does. Many users moved to Toss from traditional commercial banks such as Shinhan, Kookmin, and Woori Bank. Also, traditional commercial banks are imitating Toss’ super app strategy. They are updating their apps’ user interface and user experience by including many features in one app. For example, Shinhan Bank launched the banking app Shinhan SOL. Shinhan Bank users can manage deposits, withdrawals, funds, loans, and insurance in one app. Shinhan Bank had 14 apps before the launch of Shinhan SOL. Of course its MAU is lower than Toss, but it was launched three years later than Toss. Based on its bigger user base, Toss is trying out many new services. Recently, Toss launched the Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL) service. BNPL is a service that allows users to pay the difference between the prepaid recharge balance and the payment amount later. As The Financial Services Commission granted special cases for innovative finance, Naver Pay started servicing BNPL services in April 2021 and Toss jumped onboard in March 2022. Toss recorded 752,000 cumulative subscribers at the end of August, five months after the launch of BNPL services, surpassing Naver Pay, which had 551,000 cumulative subscribers. According to Toss, “users can use BNPL service at over 70 affiliated stores, including Yanolja, Musinsa, Today House, Yogiyo, and WeMakePrice.” In addition, Toss stated that “through close consultation with the merchants, users can select the BNPL service of Toss on the main screen of the merchants or the order form screen, so there are relatively many user points of contact.” However, there are some limitations in the Toss app. As Toss focuses only on user convenience, there are many cases where it does not use professional financial terms, but rather tries to explain them in easy terms. This can cause confusion for users. Also, some people found that using the app was more inconvenient than they thought because it was too focused on convenience. For example, Toss doesn't show all the available features in the app; it just summarizes them. It shows the features that users likely need, sometimes making it difficult to use if the user requires other features. Some people are more comfortable with the available options being listed all the time, just like the existing traditional banking apps, even if they have to click a little more. Despite these limitations, Toss is the most suitable app for users who are reluctant to install many apps and for those who have difficulty handling multiple applications.

Take a look at what you are wearing right now. Have you ever thought about the impact those clothes have on the environment? Many of you may be wary of plastic delivery containers which pollute the environment, but most are probably unaware of the environmental impacts of purchasing low quality, inexpensive apparel, which R. Preuit called “fast fashion.” Major environmental issues associated with such clothing include toxic production processes, microplastics from laundry, and waste generation. Small plastic particles are released from synthetic fibers such as polyester, nylons, and acrylics during the washing process. In addition, after Specialty store retailers of Private label Apparel (SPA) brands such as Zara and H&M began to emerge, consumers’ purchase cycles were shortened and a host of unsold goods turned into apparel waste. Government officials and politicians have begun introducing regulations following rising concerns about the negative consequences produced by the fast fashion industry. The European Union announced that the disclosure of Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) reports, outlining a company’s non-financial standard, would become mandatory from 2024. They also suggested that fast fashion brands should use recyclable materials over a certain percentage in production and stop scrapping unsold goods. Meanwhile, environmentally conscious consumers are rapidly growing, making eco-friendliness an essential business strategy for corporations to survive in the international market. But is there a company that really carries out eco-friendly management when huge cost, time, and efforts are required for change? Is there any clothing company in Korea that does business with sustainable items? Let’s take a look. RE;CODE is the upcycling fashion affiliate of South Korean textile giant Kolon FnC that came into the spotlight when BTS wore its clothes to the United Nations General Assembly. Their uniqueness lies in upcycling, a recycling method that focuses on transforming discarded goods into new and high-value products. RE;CODE dismantles and recombines inventory to produce its RE;CODE Collections and sells the RE;NANO Line, which recycles the remnants and subsidiary materials of the remaining clothes. It also operates Box Atelier, which repairs clothes and customizes reforms. Although RE;CODE is a relatively new brand, having been launched only 10 years ago, its sales grew by 40 percent for three years in a row, according to the company. Its brand value is also becoming gradually recognized, having been invited to famous overseas fashion shows as well as collaborating with Kia’s EV6. What are other domestic companies doing? Even though they were not founded under the slogan of minimizing harmful environmental impact, companies in the textile industry are currently working on changes, largely because of regulations and growing criticism against fast fashion. Companies have mostly chosen to use biodegradable and recyclable materials to create hangers and wrappers. They have also released product lineups made from recycled plastic bottles. For example, Samsung C&T’s fashion brand Beanpole recycled waste plastic bottles to release denim pants and skirts in its 2021 F/W collection. Meanwhile, SPAO, run by E-Land, also said it plans to produce its entire denim line with eco-friendly materials by 2023. As such, more brands and companies seem to be participating in eco-friendly efforts. However, when you take a closer look at these cases, you might find some blind spots in their activities: they are too “superficial.” By changing packaging materials and providing some lines of upcycled products, improvements have been made only in areas that are seemingly the most plausible and easy to implement. But more fundamental issues such as apparel waste or the problematic clothing production itself have been avoided. Even if SPAO introduces eco-friendly materials to make denim, the rest of the clothes they manufacture would still cause extreme environmental pollution and all their remaining inventories would be discarded. The problem is that companies nevertheless call themselves “eco-friendly.” This phenomenon is called “Green-washing.” Green-washing refers to hiding or distorting other larger parts that destroy the environment while a company or government releases projects or products that contribute to environmental conservation. Most fashion companies in Korea engage in eco-friendly or sustainable activities to jump on the most recent trend or to improve their brand image. This is not wrong, but the reputation gained without making true efforts undermines consumer confidence and might only come as a burden to companies in the long run. In light of this issue, how exactly should firms change? In order to bolster sustainability, sweeping changes that require tremendous amounts of time and effort need to be made on each company’s overall operating system. Thus, here are three practical ways that can gradually but ultimately lead companies to the goal. First, in order to improve the circulation structure across all stages of manufacturing, selling, distributing and collecting, companies can work on “inventory management.” Prediction and sensitive production systems based on time series, styles, and trends can be applied to prevent overproduction and to eliminate inventories. Choosing a flexible production strategy by setting initial production at an appropriate level and producing more according to market reactions would also be a good alternative to original production strategies. Second, companies can provide a setting for consumers to wear clothes for a long time. Usually, companies want customers to buy new products rather than to patch them up. They believe they will benefit more if customers go through clothes more quickly. However, repairing the products can also benefit the company. That is, the real profits for brands are in fostering a more positive relationship with customers. By providing repair services, a company can earn brand loyalty, consumer engagement, and frequent touchpoints. And that is exactly what Patagonia is doing, running a service that mends not only its products but also that of other companies while still maintaining a growth rate of over 22 percent over the past three years. Finally, in addition to repairs, there is another way to help consumers escape the “fast-buying, fast-dumping” cycle: creating or forming partnerships with a platform that facilitates clothing rental service or used-clothing transactions. Kolon FnC launched the online second-hand clothing shop OLO Relay Market. There, consumers sell their used products to a company, and the company inspects and restores them, reselling them at a discounted price in the OLO Relay Market. Points are given to consumers who sell used goods so that they can purchase new or used products at the OLO Relay Market. Closet Share is another example of a business that helps consumers share their own closets, lend their own clothes, and receive rent. They are operating a shared closet to reduce clothing waste and restore the value of clothes that are not worn anymore. Fast fashion companies are responsible for polluting the earth with their significant impact on people’s wasteful buying behavior. Now it’s time for them to reverse the trend and in turn exercise their power to play a positive role in protecting the planet. Whether it's through inventory management, repair, or activation of second-hand transactions, companies can approach these goals in a variety of ways, and only then can they get rid of the stigma of "green-washing" and reach consumers in a sincere manner.