[Lee Hyun-woo’s Contrarian View] To Prevent the Agricultural and Forestry Satellite From Becoming Just an Expensive Camera Floating in the Sky...

July 7, 2026, 4:10 p.m. (Korea Standard Time). South Korea’s first agricultural and forestry satellite (Next-Generation Mid-sized Satellite No. 4) pierced the skies over California, USA, and rose into orbit. This marked the opening of the era of ‘space agriculture policy’ and ‘science-based agriculture policy,’ in which farmland across the Korean Peninsula is precisely observed at 5-meter resolution every three days and crop yields are predicted through artificial intelligence (AI)-based models.

At a time when difficulties in rural areas are growing due to aging, labor shortages, and abnormal climate conditions, the ‘independently developed agriculture- and forestry-specialized satellite’ jointly created by the Korea AeroSpace Administration, the Rural Development Administration, and the Korea Forest Service is undoubtedly a triumph of science and technology and a giant leap toward future smart agriculture.

On the same day, at around the same time, amid the forest of buildings in Gwanghwamun, Seoul, about 1,500 farmers and citizens were farming on asphalt on the scorching roads. Under a blazing heat wave with the daytime high soaring to 32°C, they were crying out for their right to survive. They had once again taken to the streets as prices for most agricultural products, including onions, green onions, and cabbage, had collapsed.

According to price information from the Korea Agro-Fisheries & Food Trade Corporation (aT), the price of napa cabbage was 3,849 won (per head, top grade, average for the second quarter), down 9.94% from last year’s price (4,274 won), while cabbage, whose average price in the second quarter of last year was 4,769 won, recorded 2,963 won, a plunge of 37.9%. Onion prices fell from 2,487 won (per 1 kg, top grade) to 1,885 won, and zucchini fell from 1,407 won (per item, top grade) to 1,139 won. These were declines of 24.2% and 19%, respectively, from the same period last year. Cucumber prices (top grade, 10 prickly cucumbers) also plunged 27.3% during the same period (12,410 won → 9,020 won).

On top of this, rising production costs such as tax-free fuel and fertilizer prices have made farm household finances even more precarious. According to tax-free fuel price information from Opinet, diesel prices, which were 1,136.11 won per liter in January this year, soared to 1,510.28 won (average price in June). Fertilizer and potting soil prices, which are closely tied to agricultural production, are also unstable, with urea prices surging from $400 per ton (January) to as high as $800. This is why farmers have taken up asphalt farming and field-plowing protests.
Peasants’ Path, which organized the farmers’ rally that day, explained the reason for taking to the streets, saying, “The collapse in agricultural product prices that began early this year is appearing in almost all items,” and “While the prices of farming materials are skyrocketing, agricultural product prices are crashing; in this reality, farmers’ sighs are deepening and their anger is boiling over.”

It is regrettable that while one side proclaimed the opening of the era of science-based agricultural policy, the reality on the other side still forces people to farm on asphalt. Where does such an extreme gap come from? It is because the ‘eyes’ of advanced technology have opened toward space, but the policy ‘hands’ that should support farmers’ lives remain stuck in the past. No matter how precisely AI predicts crop conditions by circling the Korean Peninsula every three days, if it cannot resolve the structural contradiction in which bumper harvests lead to price collapses and fields being plowed under, while poor harvests leave farmers squeezed out by imports, then the satellite is nothing more than ‘an expensive camera floating in the sky.’

That is why there are many tasks that must be supplemented going forward. First, even if the agricultural and forestry satellite predicts crop conditions, it could become useless unless sufficient institutional safety nets are prepared to guarantee against production declines caused by climate change and price crashes caused by overproduction.

In addition, the data collected by the agricultural and forestry satellite must be linked in real time with a system capable of supply-demand adjustment and preemptive production control. If overproduction is predicted, it should be connected in advance to data-based, precise farm management stabilization policies such as compensation for disposal at production sites and support for switching to alternative crops.

The government must secure professional personnel to carry out data analysis and deploy them sufficiently at places such as the Rural Development Administration’s Agricultural Satellite Center. It is also urgent to build a user-friendly platform so that farmers can easily check satellite data on their smartphones and use it in practice. The threshold must be lowered so that advanced technology does not become the exclusive preserve of only some corporate farms or researchers.

The true completion of space- and science-based agricultural policy is achieved not when technology becomes more advanced, but only when that technology becomes a ‘safety net’ that protects farmers’ right to survive. The government must use the vast amount of data sent by the satellite as a precise blueprint for supply-demand adjustment and price stabilization systems. Even if the satellite’s gaze is fixed on space 800 km above, I hope agricultural policy’s gaze will at least be aligned with the eye level of farmers standing on asphalt under the 32-degree heat wave.