JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Evaluation Method Development for Ecological Restorations by Damaged Types
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Evaluation Method Development for Ecological Restorations by Damaged Types
Choi, Jaeyong; Lee, Sanghyuk; Lee, Sol Ae; Ji, Seung Yong; Lee, Peter Sang-Hoon;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
It was required to evaluate ecological restorations in a comprehensive way in order to systematically manage conservation areas such as DMZ and national parks in South Korea. In this research we developed a new approach to evaluating ecological restorations with more various indexes than vegetation covering-related indexes. By analyzing damaged areas in the vicinity of DMZ, major damaged types were identified as six classes: landform modification, surface loss, soil pollution, soil physio-chemical modification, vegetation decline and vegetation damaged. From literature review, 39 indexes were selected and were grouped into four divisions: soil property, vegetation growth & structure, habitat property and landscape structure & functions. By conducting a survey with the selected indexes targeting relevant experts, data on relative importance among the divisions and indexes by damaged type were collected. As a result, it was found that the orders and values of weighted values of the divisions were different by damaged type: for example, soil property (0.402), vegetation growth & structure (0.209), habitat property (0.225), landscape structure & function (0.163) for "landform modification"; but soil property (0.171), vegetation growth & structure (0.401), habitat property (0.270), landscape structure & function (0.158) for "vegetation decline". Similarly, evaluation indexes showed different orders and values of relative importance, easiness in field measurement and representativeness for the division by damaged type, and the values were used for calculating importance factor for each index. In the evaluation table, score1 and score2 were made by the importance factors of indexes multiplied by distribution values which present grades and by the weighted values of divisions. In conclusion, while dealing with the damaged type was considered significant for evaluating and managing restorations, further tests on this table with a range of cases were needed to improve its quality.
 Keywords
Evaluation index;Ecological restoration;Landscape analysis;Sustainable monitoring;Restoration management;
 Language
Korean
 Cited by
 References
1.
Bradshaw A. D. & J. Chadwick. 1980. The restoration of land. Oxford: Blackwell.

2.
Bradshaw A. D. 1984. Ecological principles and land reclamation practice. Landscape Planning, 11: 35-48. crossref(new window)

3.
KFS. 2015. Statistical Yearbook of Forestry Vol. 45. Korea Forest Service, Daejeon, Korea.

4.
Ki K and Kim J. 2012. Monitoring of plant community structure change for four years (2007-2010) after riparian ecological restoration, Nakdonggang(river). Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology, 26(5): 707-718. (in Korean)

5.
Kim GG and Cho DK. 2004. The principles of natural environment & ecological restoration. Seoul: Academybook. pp. 63. (in Korean)

6.
Kim IH.Ahn DM.Lee JY.Kim CK and Kim SJ. 2009. Development and application of a community involvement program for ecological restoration of Baekdudaegan - pilot project of alpine vegetable garden in Anbandaegi, Gangneung. Proceeding of symposium of the Korean Society for Environmental Education, p. 39-45. (in Korean)

7.
Kim N.Song H.Park G.Jeon G.Lee S and Lee B. 2007. An analytical study on the revegetation methods for highway slopes. Journal of the Korea Society of Environmental Restoration Technology, 10(2): 1-15. (in Korean)

8.
Lee CH. 2000. Group decision making. Sejong Books. Seoul, Korea. (in Korean)

9.
Lee PS.Lee S.Lee SA and Choi J. 2015. Development of Evaluation Indices for Ecological Restoration of Degraded Environments near DMZ in the Republic of Korea. Journal of the Korea Society of Environmental Restoration Technology, 18(1): 1-17. (in Korean)

10.
MLTMA. 2009. Engineering guide to the greening system for road-slope. Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs (MLTMA). Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. Sejong, Korea. (in Korean)

11.
Moon SK.Koo BH and Nam SJ. 2000. View and Subjects on the Settling the Area of Ecological Restoration in Korea. Journal of the Korea Society of Environmental Restoration Technology, 4(1): 67-79. (in Korean)

12.
Ro BH. 2010. How to evaluate the success of ecological restoration? - Focussing on goal setting and habitat evaluation, Environment Forum, 14(10): 1-8. (in Korean)

13.
Schamberger M. & W. B. Krohn. 1982. Status of the habitat evaluation procedures. US Fish & Wildlife Servicem, US Fish & WIldlife Publications, University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

14.
SER. 2004. Science and Policy Working Group, Society for Ecological Restoration(SER). Restoration & Management Notes, 16: 46-50.

15.
You B.Jeon G.Shim J and Jang H. 2009. Application on environment-friendly vegetation countermeasures in expressway. Korean Geo-Environmental Conference 2009, p. 58-69. (in Korean)