In the Koreas for the past 60 years, three border typologies existed per the 1953 Korean Armistice Agreement. What is not discussed is the discrepancy between what was defined and what exists in reality. The border that was defined by the Armistice have been constantly adjusted by the topographical, natural, ecological forces of the sites. This produces and contains many in-between spaces between the language and reality. Due to the open texture of language, text and map agreements of border zones inherently contain ambiguous territories that exist between paper and reality. For spatial opportunities, it is important to explore the gaps and opportunities that exist between the abstract and legal notations of the border sites with the realities on the ground. The dynamic nature of natural and artificial environments defy static legal definitions of territory and properties. This is where we can find possibilities of interpretation and intervention for resilient spatial scenarios.
