| Title |
A Comparative Analysis of Home Modification Support Systems Under Long-Term Care Insurance in Korea and Japan |
| DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5659/JAIK.2026.42.5.59 |
| Keywords |
Home Modification; Long-Term Care Insurance System; Comparative Study; Residential Environment Improvement |
| Abstract |
This study examines how institutional design shapes residential environmental interventions through a comparative analysis of home
modification support systems within the long-term care insurance frameworks of Japan and Korea. With aging in place as a central policy
objective in aging societies, the analysis focuses on differences in policy goals, support structures, and implementation processes between the
two countries. A qualitative comparative methodology was used, based on policy documents, operational manuals, and publicly available
guidelines related to long-term care insurance home modification programs. The comparison considers eligibility criteria, support amounts,
scopes of modification, and implementation procedures, with particular attention to planning and decision-making processes. Findings indicate
that Japan's home modification system, introduced as a statutory benefit in 2000, follows a goal-oriented approach prioritizing functional
improvements in daily activities through flexible spatial interventions. Professional involvement at the planning stage, including care managers
and housing specialists, enables tailored responses to diverse housing conditions. In contrast, Korea's home modification support, launched as a
pilot program in 2023, uses a standardized, item-based framework with limited subsidies, restricting design adaptability and comprehensive
spatial improvement. Korea also lacks a formal mechanism for expert-led assessment and planning before construction. The study concludes
that effective home modification policies require a shift from item-based provision to goal-oriented spatial planning supported by professional
assessment. It contributes to housing and architectural research by clarifying the institutional conditions that shape the quality and scope of
residential environmental interventions. |