Low-Altitude Economy and Port-City Aviation Strategies
This report compares five cities that sit at different points in the global low-altitude economy (LAE), for example, Shenzhen as a scale-driven LAE industrial pioneer, Shanghai as a port-metropolis and regional network builder, Seoul as a metropolitan UAM and airport-district model, Busan as an emerging port-aerospace cluster, and Dubai as a commercialization-and-branding leader. The aim is not to rank them on a single axis, but to understand the different strategic models they represent.
The evidence suggests that these cities are competing in the same broad domain but through distinct pathways. Seoul is integrating UAM into an airport-area innovation district around Gimpo, with planned UAM takeoff and landing facilities by 2030 and broader economic-development goals. Shenzhen is aggressively scaling infrastructure and route density, with official targets exceeding 1,200 takeoff and landing facilities and 1,000 commercial routes by end-2026. Shanghai is building a full LAE industrial chain and linking it to the Yangtze River Delta through an inter-provincial low-altitude network and sea-shore-city logistics logic. Dubai is pursuing early commercial deployment, targeting air taxi operations by the end of 2026. Busan is combining a KRW 200 billion Korean Air investment, a global drone-and-aerospace event platform, a large transshipment port base, and a future 24-hour multimodal airport at Gadeokdo.
From a global perspective, Shenzhen leads on ecosystem scale and rollout intensity. Shanghai leads on linking LAE to a wider regional and port-metropolitan system. Dubai leads on visibility and near-term commercial signaling. Seoul leads on metropolitan policy integration. Busan’s strongest comparative niche is the convergence of port logistics, coastal operations, aerospace manufacturing, UAV production, MRO, and airport-seaport integration. That niche is strategically meaningful because it is more transferable to many global port cities than a pure downtown air-taxi model.
The key policy implication is that the global LAE field is fragmenting into multiple viable city models. Cities are not simply choosing whether to “enter” the low-altitude economy; they are choosing which model of entry fits their geography, institutions, and industrial assets. For Busan, the strategic question is not whether it can replicate Shenzhen or Dubai. It is whether it can become one of the world’s strongest examples of a port-linked low-altitude and aerospace city.
Purpose and scope
These cities were selected because each represents a distinct and internationally relevant LAE development pattern. Seoul provides the strongest domestic Korean comparator through the Gimpo Airport innovation strategy. Shenzhen represents the fastest-moving industrial-policy model. Shanghai represents the most relevant port-metropolis and regional-network comparator. Dubai represents the strongest commercialization and global-branding model. Busan serves as the focal emerging case because it combines aerospace investment, maritime logistics, and a future multimodal airport platform.
City profiles
Busan: emerging port-aerospace-low-altitude cluster
Busan’s profile is anchored by three current assets. First, the city signed a KRW 200 billion investment MOU with Korean Air in March 2026 to expand aerospace manufacturing at the Busan Tech Center, including next-generation UAVs, civil aircraft parts, and military aircraft modification/upgrading. Second, Busan hosted DSK 2026, which brought together 318 companies from 23 countries and broadened its scope from drones to aerospace, defense, AI, and future mobility. Third, Busan’s broader logistics base remains formidable: the port handled 24.402 million TEUs in 2024, including 13.497 million TEUs of transshipment, which accounted for 55.3% of total volume.
Busan’s forward-looking asset is Gadeokdo New Airport, which official materials describe as a 24-hour passenger- and logistics-oriented airport within a “quattro-port” structure linking air, sea, rail, and road, with future passenger access also referencing UAM. That makes Busan one of the few cities in this comparison with a clearly articulated air-sea-land integration narrative already present in public planning.
Seoul: metropolitan UAM and airport-district integration
Seoul’s Gimpo Airport Innovation District is one of the clearest official urban UAM plans in South Korea. The Seoul Metropolitan Government states that by 2030 the area will include UAM takeoff and landing sites and complex transfer facilities, alongside high-tech and aviation-industry development. The city projects 30,000 new jobs and KRW 4 trillion in economic effects from the broader district. Seoul, therefore, represents a model in which the low-altitude economy is embedded in urban redevelopment, airport-area transformation, and multimodal transport planning.
Shenzhen: industrial-scale LAE acceleration
Shenzhen’s official materials outline one of the world’s most aggressive LAE infrastructure programs. The city’s plans reference more than 1,200 takeoff and landing facilities, more than 1,000 commercial routes, operation pilot zones, testing fields, and industrial parks by end-2026. Official reports also note that Shenzhen has already opened 310 low-altitude logistics routes and built a large infrastructure network to support commercial operations. Shenzhen, therefore, represents a scale-and-speed model driven by industrial policy, infrastructure intensity, and ecosystem mobilization.
Shanghai: port-metropolis and regional systems strategy
Shanghai’s 2024–2027 action plan targets a complete LAE industrial chain covering R&D, design, assembly and manufacturing, airworthiness testing, and commercial application, with the sector’s core industrial scale expected to exceed 50 billion yuan by 2027. The plan also explicitly links Shanghai to the wider Yangtze River Delta, seeking to create the first batch of inter-provincial low-altitude navigable cities and a broader logistics and industrial system. Shanghai therefore stands out as the clearest example of a city using LAE as part of a port-metropolitan and regional integration strategy, rather than only as an urban-mobility project.
Dubai: commercialization and global signaling
Dubai’s low-altitude strategy is built around early commercial launch, international visibility, and premium global branding. Reuters reported in January 2026 that Dubai’s Roads and Transport Authority expected commercial air taxi operations by the end of 2026, following earlier agreements and infrastructure work involving Joby and Skyports. Dubai, therefore, represents the strongest benchmark in public-facing commercialization and global signaling, even if its industrial manufacturing base is not as deep as Shenzhen’s or Shanghai’s.
SWOT analysis
Strengths
The global LAE field is now supported by credible public plans, infrastructure targets, and policy instruments across multiple cities. Seoul has integrated UAM into airport-area redevelopment. Shenzhen has operationalized large-scale facilities and routes. Shanghai has linked LAE with the port and regional strategy. Dubai has an advanced visible commercial deployment. Busan has a strong combination of aerospace investment, event-platform capacity, and a globally significant transshipment port.
Weaknesses
No city has yet solved every challenge. Urban airspace governance, commercialization beyond pilots, public acceptance, industrial certification, and integration across agencies remain difficult. Even where plans are ambitious, execution risks are significant. Busan’s public record shows a strong anchor and logistics platform, but so far, less evidence of Shenzhen-level supplier density, Shanghai-level chain completeness, or Dubai-level launch visibility.
Opportunities
The LAE is opening multiple strategic lanes: dense-city passenger mobility, regional logistics, industrial drones, port and coastal services, airport-access services, and multimodal freight coordination. This allows cities to specialize rather than converge on one model. For globally connected port cities in particular, there is growing room for a port-aerospace-low-altitude model that links maritime logistics, UAV services, maintenance, inspection, and airport connectivity. Busan and Shanghai are especially well-positioned in this lane.
Threats
Competition is intensifying, and the field is vulnerable to regulatory bottlenecks, fragmented standards, dual-use concerns, and hype cycles. Cities that remain overly dependent on exhibition narratives or pilots may lose momentum to cities that lock in infrastructure, standards, supplier ecosystems, and visible operating services. The global race is therefore shifting from announcement competition to institutional and industrial execution.
Strategic findings
Seoul represents the metropolitan mobility and airport-district model. Shenzhen represents the model of industrial acceleration and scale. Shanghai represents the port-metropolis and regional network model. Dubai represents the commercial launch and global signaling model. Busan is emerging as a port-linked model for aerospace and low-altitude operations.
Port-city development is becoming a decisive differentiator
A city’s role in the LAE is increasingly shaped not only by population density or aviation ambition, but by whether it can connect LAE to ports, cargo, industrial logistics, coastal operations, and airport systems. This is where Busan and Shanghai stand out. Busan already has the port scale and official sea-air integration narrative. Shanghai has a stronger full-chain and regional system plan. These port-city logics are likely to become more important as LAE matures beyond headline passenger services.
Global visibility still matters
Dubai’s experience shows that a clear commercialization milestone can quickly reshape a city’s international image. DSK gives Busan visibility, but Dubai demonstrates the branding power of moving from conferences and pilots to a recognizable operating service. Shenzhen also benefits from this dynamic through route density and infrastructure scale. Global positioning in the LAE will therefore depend not only on capabilities but on demonstrable deployment stories.
Policy recommendations
For global cities generally
Cities should stop treating the low-altitude economy as a single template. Instead, they should define their LAE strategy through their strongest structural advantage, such as metropolitan transfer systems, manufacturing ecosystems, regional logistics, port-city services, tourism, or premium early commercialization. The evidence from these five cases suggests that strategic clarity matters more than generic enthusiasm.
Cities should also integrate LAE planning into airport, seaport, rail, and road systems early. The more LAE is tied to existing economic geography, the more likely it is to move beyond pilots. Gadeokdo’s quattro-port framing and Seoul’s Gimpo transfer logic are both examples of this principle, despite very different urban contexts.
For Busan specifically
Busan should formalize its global niche as a port-aerospace-low-altitude city rather than a generic future-mobility city. Its strongest assets lie in maritime logistics, coastal operations, UAV and aerospace manufacturing, MRO, and airport-seaport integration. The city should use the Korean Air investment as a platform for cluster building, not just as a large anchor deal.
Busan should also turn DSK into a strategic platform for ecosystem construction: supplier attraction, standards collaboration, maritime-use-case pilots, and international city-to-city industrial partnerships. The event’s scale already gives it legitimacy; the next step is to convert that legitimacy into durable capability and deals.
Busan needs one globally legible deployment story. That could be a smart-port drone service, a combined port-airport low-altitude logistics pilot, or a visible coastal emergency-response network. One recognizable application would strengthen Busan’s global signaling far more than additional generic promotion.
Conclusion
From a global perspective, the low-altitude economy is no longer one story. It is becoming a family of urban and regional strategies. Seoul, Shenzhen, Shanghai, Dubai, and Busan each exhibit distinct configurations of infrastructure, institutions, industrial depth, and economic purpose. Busan’s global relevance lies in the possibility that it can become a leading example of a port-linked aerospace and low-altitude city, not by copying the others, but by executing its own more distinctive model.