Introduction
Recent mobility between Korea and Thailand has rapidly expanded beyond short-term, tourism-oriented visits into a multi-layered pattern encompassing study, employment, long-term residence, and settlement. The resumption of cross-border movement following COVID-19 has further accelerated this transformation, suggesting that bilateral exchanges are entering a stage of structured and sustained connectivity rather than one-off interactions.
These changes cannot be fully explained by conventional theories of international migration, which emphasize economic and institutional factors such as wage differentials, labor market demand, and visa regimes. Instead, recent mobility patterns reflect a more complex phenomenon in which non-economic factors—such as cultural appeal, national image, and social perceptions—play an increasingly significant role.
Recent migration scholarship has moved beyond explaining mobility solely as a product of economic rationality. Instead, there is growing theoretical interest in understanding migration as a complex socio-cultural phenomenon driven by aspirations, imagination, cultural appeal, and socially constructed perceptions and values. Notably, Carling and Schewel propose a distinction between the “capability” to move and the “aspiration” to migrate. From this perspective, while structural constraints and institutional conditions define the feasibility of movement, the point of departure for migration can be found in the stage where expectations, symbolic images, and the social imaginary regarding a specific country are formed.
This paper draws on recent theoretical approaches that distinguish between “migration capability” and “migration aspiration,” focusing on the role of soft power as a key variable shaping aspirations in the pre-mobility stage. Focusing on Korea–Thailand relations, this paper examines how cultural content and national image shape individual migration pathways.
Changing Patterns of Korea–Thailand Mobility
The mobility of Koreans to Thailand has rapidly expanded beyond traditional retirement migration into lifestyle-oriented forms such as digital nomadism, remote work, and short-term residential stays, including “one-month living” arrangements. Cities such as Bangkok and Chiang Mai have consistently ranked among globally preferred destinations, leading Thailand to be perceived not merely as a tourist destination but as a viable place for everyday living. A key factor behind this shift lies in the institutional flexibility of the Thai government. Visa policies that facilitate long-term residence, combined with cultural openness, increase the feasibility and stability of longer stays for Koreans and help translate cultural attraction into actual mobility.
Conversely, Thai migration to Korea is also becoming more multi-layered and life-course oriented through diverse pathways, including international students, skilled workers, and marriage migrants. In particular, the positive image of Korea shaped by the Korean Wave (Hallyu) plays a crucial role in strengthening mobility pathways that extend from study to employment and ultimately to long-term settlement.
As a result, human mobility between the two countries is being restructured into a continuous trajectory from tourism to study, employment, and settlement, while also taking on a circular pattern that combines repeated visits with long-term stays. This transformation signifies not merely an increase in the volume of movement but a fundamental shift in mobility itself.
Soft power, unlike military or economic power, refers to the ability to shape the preferences of others through culture, values, and image. In the context of migration, it functions as a symbolic and cognitive resource through which individuals come to imagine a country as “a place to live.” In the case of Korea, the Korean Wave has evolved progressively—from its initial spread centered on television dramas, to global expansion through K-pop and digital platforms, and further into a broader lifestyle domain encompassing film, gaming, and food. With global successes such as BTS, the film Parasite, and the series Squid Game, Korea has emerged as a global cultural hub. Through this process, Korea has been reimagined not simply as a site of cultural consumption but as a place for education, career development, and self-realization.
Meanwhile, Thailand has actively leveraged soft power through state-led strategies. The so-called “5F strategy,” which centers on food, film, fashion, Muay Thai, and festivals, represents a notable case of integrating cultural resources with industrial and national branding strategies. Thai dramas and BL (Boys’ Love) content often emphasize inclusivity and emotional intimacy, contributing to an image of Thailand as an affectively attractive and socially open society. Ultimately, although Korea and Thailand have developed their soft power through different pathways, both function as key cultural resources that shape migration aspirations.
Soft Power and Migration Aspirations
The soft power of Korea and Thailand does not operate through a one-directional flow but is reinforced within a mutually circulating structure. For instance, the spread of the Korean Wave leads to an increase in Thai migration to Korea, which in turn contributes to the expansion of multicultural experiences within Korean society and the reproduction of cultural content. Conversely, growing interest in Thai culture encourages more Koreans to visit and reside in Thailand, and the sharing of these experiences further strengthens Thailand’s positive image.
Within this cyclical structure, soft power does not directly generate mobility; rather, it creates the conditions under which mobility becomes a feasible and legitimate choice. As a result, Korea is reimagined by many Thai individuals as a space of opportunity, self-development, and upward mobility, while Thailand is perceived by many Koreans as an alternative space in which work–life balance and a more relaxed lifestyle may be pursued.
However, such migration aspirations translate into actual movement only when they are combined with favorable institutional conditions. Visa policies, labor market structures, and the stability of legal residence function as “institutional filters” that shape both the scale and direction of mobility. Recent cases of visa rejection highlight the tension between cultural affinity and institutional realities, suggesting that soft power does not always operate in a uniformly positive manner.
Thai media outlets and online communities have repeatedly reported cases of C-3 and D-4 visa rejections despite applicants having prepared the required documentation. This rapid spread of negative experiences underscores the gap between Hallyu-driven soft power and rigid institutional barriers. Ultimately, when soft power’s mobility aspirations clash with strict controls, cultural affinity may give way to institutional distrust.
Ultimately, human mobility between Korea and Thailand should be understood as an interactive process driven by a combination of cultural appeal and emotional imagination—a phenomenon that cannot be explained solely by traditional economic variables such as wage differentials or labor demand. Soft power serves not only as a background condition that fosters aspirations in the pre-migration stage but also as a cyclical resource that is reproduced through post-migration experiences. In this regard, the bilateral relationship transcends simple cultural diffusion or demographic movement; rather, it can be interpreted as a cyclical structure of mutual influence within a “crossed soft power ecosystem.”
Conclusion
Human mobility between Korea and Thailand can no longer be explained solely by economic factors. Instead, it operates within a dual structure in which cultural attractiveness and national image shape migration aspirations, while institutional conditions—such as visa policies, labor market structures, and residence stability—filter and determine actual movement.
Several key implications emerge from this analysis. First, migration is not merely an economic decision, but a complex process shaped by cultural imagination and emotional motivations. Individuals choose destinations not only based on income or opportunities, but also on how they perceive and feel about a place as somewhere they would like to live. Second, mobility is not a one-time, linear event; rather, it follows a cyclical pattern in which aspirations lead to movement, and lived experiences are subsequently reproduced and shared, reinforcing further mobility. Third, while soft power plays a significant role in facilitating movement, the sustainability of such mobility ultimately depends on institutional trust and the broader policy environment.
Accordingly, future policy approaches should go beyond the mere promotion of cultural influence and adopt a more integrated framework. This includes enhancing the predictability of visa systems, ensuring the stability of residence, and strengthening social integration policies for migrants. Only when these elements are effectively combined can cultural attraction be translated into sustainable patterns of human mobility.
Ultimately, if soft power opens the door to mobility, institutions determine whether those who pass through that door can stay. The development of sustainable and meaningful human exchange between Korea and Thailand depends on the effective integration of these two dimensions.
Joonpyo Lee
Full-time Researcher
Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies (HUFS)