The 2025 APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation) summit held in Gyeongju left us with a legacy that went beyond that of a mere international event. This was because it provided an opportunity for heads of state from various countries to meet face-to-face and engage in dialogue amid extremely heightened uncertainty in the fields of diplomacy and trade, including the U.S.-China conflict.
Although South Korea, as the host country, did not directly mediate the conflicts, it provided an opportunity for nations with sharply conflicting interests to meet and engage in dialogue naturally. In this sense, it demonstrated its potential as a “bridge builder” connecting dialogue and cooperation among nations in the international community.
This is precisely why we must view the value and impact of the MICE (Meetings, Incentives, Conferences, and Exhibitions) industry from a broader perspective. Until now, the success of international conferences, exhibitions, and conventions has been measured primarily in economic terms—such as the number of participants, the number of overnight stays, and total spending.
However, the functions and effects of MICE extend far beyond simply attracting tourists. This is because it is an “industry of relationships” that connects nations, cities, and businesses, and serves as a platform for the central government, local governments, and the private sector to engage in diplomacy and exchange at various levels.
International events bring together not only heads of state and ministers from various countries but also a diverse range of stakeholders from industry, academia, the media, and international organizations. This is why the dialogue and trust formed outside the conference halls can lead to inter-corporate exchanges, investment, trade, and technological cooperation. In essence, the political and diplomatic benefits of MICE extend into economic benefits.
This is why, when evaluating the success of international events, we must consider not only the number of participants and their spending but also the long-term legacy—such as the establishment of global networks, cooperation between cities and companies, and the attraction of follow-up events. To achieve this, the following three changes are necessary.
First, the role of regional convention bureaus (CVBs) must be expanded. They should be viewed not merely as entities that attract international conferences and support participants, but as organizations that carry out “city diplomacy” by connecting local industries, universities, and companies with international associations, academic societies, and other organizations. This is because attracting international conferences can serve as a starting point for connecting local industries and talent to global networks.
Second, from an administrative perspective, we must move away from the practice of viewing MICE solely as part of the tourism sector. Only then can relevant policy departments identify international conferences in diverse fields such as semiconductors, the environment, and biotechnology. Just as Andong City in North Gyeongsang Province recently recruited 45 civil servants with foreign language proficiency to support local diplomacy, civil servants must be empowered to directly identify and attract international conferences in their respective fields.
Third, we must strengthen the national-level strategic system for attracting international events. We need to proactively identify influential events not only in the G20 (Group of 20) and APEC but also in future industries such as AI (artificial intelligence), semiconductors, and biotechnology, and establish institutional frameworks and support systems that enable the government, local governments, convention bureaus, universities, and companies to jointly attract these events.
Ultimately, what is needed to implement these changes on the ground is people. Since the success of international events extends beyond mere event management to include building international networks, negotiation, agenda-setting, and follow-up cooperation, MICE education at universities must also evolve. Education, which has traditionally focused on event planning and operations, must be expanded to include attracting and negotiating international events, city diplomacy, and legacy creation.
Hosting a single international conference is not merely a matter of filling a conference room. It is about opening new channels of communication with the world and laying the foundation for collaborative relationships among nations, cities, and businesses. Now, the criteria for evaluating MICE outcomes must also change. We must ask not only “How much revenue was generated?” but also “With whom were relationships forged, and what did those relationships leave behind?”