Residents of Gangneung, South Korea, faced criticism for reselling donated bottled water after the city endured its worst drought in over a century. Many citizens used online marketplaces to sell the water they had received during the crisis. The incident has sparked debate over ethics and community responsibility, highlighting tensions during times of scarcity.
Gangneung distributed bottled water to residents twice as the drought intensified. Apartment residents received 18 two-liter bottles each, while other households got 12. Facilities such as kindergartens, welfare centers, and small businesses received additional supplies. Some citizens, however, listed the water on platforms like Karrot, claiming it was not donated to them personally, raising concerns about the resale of emergency supplies.
The city declared a state of disaster as the drought pushed the Obong Reservoir to a record low of 11.5 percent. Citizens and businesses relied heavily on bottled water, as tap water remained limited to only a few hours each day. When heavy rains replenished the reservoir, authorities lifted the disaster declaration, but the availability of bottled water on resale platforms quickly became controversial.
Some residents expressed disappointment and criticized those selling the donated water. “I would have given it to people who truly need it,” said university student Park Won-jun. Others, however, chose to distribute the bottles for free. One post read: “I received 30 bottles of water as a donation. Anyone who needs them, please feel free to take them.”
Local officials emphasized that Gangneung continues to provide bottled water to small businesses in need. They also urged citizens to consider ethical implications before selling donated goods. The controversy has prompted broader discussion on community solidarity, responsibility, and proper handling of emergency aid during crises.
Observers noted that the bottled water resale issue underscores the importance of public awareness and social responsibility. Furthermore, it highlights how quickly resources intended for emergency relief can move into private markets. Authorities continue to monitor the situation, encouraging residents to prioritize community needs and fair distribution of essential goods.
