Despite a Rise in Foreign Tourists, Korea’s Tourism Brand is Weakening — What’s the Solution?
Yanolja Research Releases 2024 Korea Tourism Brand Equity Evaluation — Online Buzz and Quality Indices Decline Despite 48.4% Growth in Tourist Numbers

According to Yanolja Research’s new report “Korea Tourism Brand Equity Model and Evaluation”, the number of foreign tourists visiting Korea in 2024 rose by 48.4% year-on-year — a remarkable quantitative achievement. However, the value of Korea’s tourism brand equity actually declined. The report introduces a proprietary evaluation model to assess Korea’s tourism brand and proposes strategic directions for enhancing its brand value.

Model Development: Evaluating Korean Tourism with a Global Branding Framework

Yanolja Research developed its model by combining Dr. David Aaker’s globally recognized brand equity model with destination-specific attributes. The model consists of five core dimensions — brand awareness, brand image, brand associations, perceived quality, and brand loyalty — and was designed to maximize practical applicability by systematically analyzing both pre-trip expectations and post-trip experiences.

The data was sourced from Brandwatch, a UK-based AI-driven social media analytics platform, which collected user-generated content (UGC) such as posts, blogs, and reviews. Using online buzz volume and sentiment as key indicators, the study compared data from five target markets — Japan, China, the U.S., Taiwan, and Southeast Asia — between 2023 and 2024. By accounting for linguistic nuances across countries, this study marks the first attempt to evaluate Korea’s tourism brand equity from the perspective of foreign travelers.

Evaluation Results: A Mixed Bag of Progress and Setbacks

While Korea’s overall tourism brand equity weakened in 2024, there were areas of positive momentum. Brand awareness declined in Japan, China, the U.S., and Taiwan — with Southeast Asia being the exception. Despite the increase in tourists, total social media buzz around Korean tourism fell 2.5 percentage points from 2023, with the sharpest drops seen in China (-21.1pp) and Japan (-8.4pp). Although Seoul maintained strong brand recognition, awareness of surrounding metro areas and regional cities declined. In contrast, Taiwan showed rising awareness for Seoul (+2.0pp), Busan (+2.9pp), and Jeju (+0.7pp), and Southeast Asia showed increasing interest in Busan (+6.8pp) and Jeju (+5.1pp), hinting at the potential for regional diversification.

Brand image declined in Japan (-0.2pp), Taiwan (-2.2pp), and Southeast Asia (-7.7pp), while the U.S. and China saw relatively stable or improving perceptions. Negative sentiment was attributed to over-tourism in Seoul, proliferation of low-cost package tours, and poor readiness to accommodate visitors. On the other hand, favorable evaluations from the U.S. and Taiwan demonstrated Korea’s latent tourism potential.

Brand associations diversified, led by K-content, K-food, and shopping. BTS and K-pop remained strong attractors in all markets, while keywords like bibimbap, cafes, food delivery, and Jeju’s natural beauty emerged as key draws.

Perceived quality declined across most sectors — including K-content, K-beauty, leisure/entertainment, historical/cultural heritage, shopping, and nature — with the exception of K-food. In particular, quality scores for history and traditional culture dropped significantly in the U.S. (-19.6pp), Southeast Asia (-16.0pp), and Japan (-10.1pp). K-content ratings also fell in Taiwan (-6.4pp). However, infrastructure-related areas such as cost of living (+0.9pp), accommodations (+3.3pp), and transportation (+9.9pp) were positively evaluated, confirming Korea’s competitiveness in these areas. Areas needing improvement include public safety and hygiene (-43.6pp) and language/translation support (-24.4pp), particularly in Southeast Asia.

Brand loyalty remained relatively high, staying in the 90-point range, but dipped slightly to 87 points in 2024 (-2.4pp from 2023). Loyalty rose in Southeast Asia and the U.S., but dropped significantly in Japan due to low-cost tourism offerings and over-tourism issues.

Four Strategic Directions to Strengthen Korea’s Tourism Brand Equity

Based on these findings, Yanolja Research proposed four strategic directions for improving Korea’s tourism brand equity:

Develop market-specific tourism strategies that reflect unique demand patterns by country.

Promote high-value-added experiences such as wellness, medical tourism, and premium accommodations to increase per-capita spending.

Foster hub cities beyond Seoul, such as Busan and Jeju, to reduce capital-region overconcentration.

Expand themed tourism using K-content and programs targeting global fandom communities.

Yanolja Research Director SooCheong Jang commented, “The increase in tourist numbers in 2024 is a meaningful achievement, but the overall decline in brand equity warns us to pay closer attention to quality and experience. K-content is Korea’s most powerful tourism asset, but to move beyond fleeting trends, systematic brand management and the delivery of high-quality experiences are essential.”

Importantly, this study goes beyond general brand reputation analysis and offers segmented insights by market, identifying what is working — and where — for Korea’s tourism brand. Notable findings include rising awareness of regional cities in Taiwan and Southeast Asia, favorable image scores in the U.S. and Taiwan, and strong infrastructure evaluations (accommodation and transport). These highlight that Korea has potential not just in volume, but also in quality.

Strategically amplifying these strengths and addressing weak points will be critical to rebuilding Korea’s tourism brand equity.

Professor Kyu-Wan Choi of Kyung Hee University’s School of Hotel and Tourism Management noted, “This study’s significance lies in establishing a system that goes beyond simply counting visitors and instead regularly evaluates the core value of Korea’s tourism brand equity. It offers key indicators that can inform future government policies and tourism marketing strategies.”