한국환경생태학회지 (Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology)

  • 제19권3호
  • /
  • Pages.287-298
  • /
  • 2005
  • /
  • 1229-3857(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-131X(eISSN)
한국환경생태학회 (Korean Society of Environment and Ecology)
권호 표지

지속가능한 자연생태계 보전을 위 한 평가지표 체계구축

Construction of System on Assessment Indicators for Conservation of Sustainable Natural Ecosystem

  • You Ju-Han (Chungcheongbuk-do Research Ceonter for Wild Plants) ;
  • Jung Sung-Gwan (Dept. of Landscape Architecture, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Oh Jeong-Hak (Div. of Forest Ecology, Korea Forest Research Institute)
  • 발행 : 2005.09.01
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구는 지속가능한 자연생태계를 객관적이고 합리적으로 평가할 수 있는 지표군을 구축함으로써 국토 및 자연환경 보전의 기초자료 제공과 더불어 환경정책 수립이나 입안을 위한 방향제시를 위해 수행되었다. 생물적 요인, 무생물적 요인, 질적 요인, 기능적 요인 등 4개의 평가항목을 선정하였으며, 평가지표는 밀도, 총 질소량, 헤메로비등급, 재화생산등56개로 추출하였다. 평가항목과 평가지표가 신뢰계수 0.6 이상으로 확인되어 설문지 설계에는 큰 문제가 없는 것으로 나타났다. 평가지표의 상관분석 결과, 생물적 요인의 경우 군도와 우점도, 무생물적 요인의 경우 토성과 방위, 질적 요인의 경우 귀화율과자연파괴도, 기능적 요인의 경우산사태 방지와토양침식 방지가 높은상관성을 보였다. 다차원 척도법에 의해 차원결정을 수행한 결과, 스트레스값은 $0.042\sim0.133$, 적합도 지수는 0.9 이상으로 나타나 통계적 문제는 발생하지 않았다. X축의 경우 생물적 요인은 구조, 무생물적 요인은 관점, 질적 요인은 구성, 기능적 요인은 대상이고 Y축은 형태, 범위, 구조, 활동으로 형성되었다.

This study was carried out to offer the raw data on conservation of land and natural environment by constructing groups of indicators to objectively and rationally assess the sustainable natural ecosystem and present the direction for establishing and planning the environmental policy. There were selected that four assessment items were biotic, abiotic, qualitative, and functional factor. And there were extracted fifty-six indicators including density, total nitrogen, hemeroby degree, and goods production. As assessment items and indicators were over 0.6, the design of questionnaire showed no great problem. In the results of correlation analysis of assessment indicators, sociality and dominance was highly correlative in biotic factor, soil property and aspect in abiotic factor, naturalized and urbanized index in qualitative factor, and protection of landslide and soil erosion were too correlative. In the results of deciding the dimension by multidimensional scaling, as stress values were from 0.042 to 0.133, index of fit over 0.9, there no statistical problems. In case of X axis, biotic factor was structure, viewpoint in abiotic factor, composition in qualitative factor, and object in functional factor, and Y axis was shaped Into form, range, structure, and activity.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. 김상윤, 윤여창(1999) 지속가능한 산지개발을 위한 토지이용계획 변수설정에 관한 연구. 산림경제연구 7(1): 63-72
  2. 나정화, 류연수, 사공정희(2001) 평가지표에 의한 도시 비오톱의 가치평가. 한국조경학회지 29(1): 100-112
  3. 유주한, 정성관(2002) 자연자원 보전지역의 평가모형 -내셔널 트러스트 후보지 선정을 중심으로-. 한국조경학회지 30(2): 39-49
  4. 유주한, 정성관(2005) 충청북도 미동산수목원의 자생초본군락 구조 및 관리방안. 한국조경학회지 33(2): 48-59
  5. 윤여창, 김상윤, 권태호, 이창석(1999) 지속가능한 산지개발을 위한 환경기준 설정에 관한 연구. 한국환경영향평가학회지 8(2): 53-63
  6. 이동근, 윤소원(1998) 지속가능한 도시개발을 위한 환경지표에 관한 연구 -인간과 자연과의 공생지표를 중심으로-. 한국환경영향평가학회지 7(1): 93-107
  7. 이동근, 윤소원, 김은영, 전성우, 최재용(2005) 보전가치평가를 위한 경관생태학적 지표의 활용 및 적용. 한국조경학회지 32(6): 14-22
  8. 임양재, 전의식(1980) 한반도의 귀화식물분포. 한국식물분류학회지 22:69-83
  9. Bazzaz, F.A.(1975) Plant species diversity in old-field successional ecosystem in southern Illinois. Ecology 56: 485-488 https://doi.org/10.2307/1934981
  10. Bebi, P., F. Kienast and W. Schonenberger(2001) Assessing structures in mountain forests as a basis for investigation the forest's dynamics and protective function. Forest Ecology and Management 145: 3-14 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(00)00570-3
  11. Blume, H.P. and Sukopp, H.(1976) Okologische bedeutung anthropogener bodenveranderung. Schriftenreihe fur Vegetationskunde 10: 75-89
  12. Cole, R.P. and S.V. Cordray(1991) What should forests sustain? eight answers. Journal of Forestry 89: 31-36
  13. Cowling, R.M. and M.J. Samways(1995) Predicting global patterns of endemic plant species richness. Biodiversity Letters 2: 127-131
  14. Folke, C., C.S. Holling and C. Perings(1996) Biological diversity, ecosystem, and the human scale. Ecological Applications 6(4): 1018-1024 https://doi.org/10.2307/2269584
  15. Freeman, C.(1999) Development of a simple methods for site survey and assessment in urban areas. Landscape and Urban Planning 44: 1-11 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(98)00114-5
  16. Frissel, S.S.(1977) Judging recreation impacts on wildness campsite. Journal of Forestry 76: 481-483
  17. Gluck, P.(2000) Policy means for ensuring the full value of forests to society. Land Use Policy 17: 177-185 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0264-8377(00)00018-1
  18. Grigal, D.F.(2000) Effects of extensive forest management on soil productivity. Forest Ecology and Management 138: 167-185 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(00)00395-9
  19. Kapfer, J.A. and S.B. Franklin(2000) Evaluation of an ecological land type classification system Natchez Trace state forest, western Tennessee, USA. Landscape and Urban Planning 49: 179-190 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(00)00070-0
  20. Kessler, M.(2001) Patterns of diversity and range size of selected plant groups along an elevational transect in the Bolivian Andes. Biodiversity and Conservation 10: 1897-1921 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013130902993
  21. Locke, M.A., K.N. Reddy, and R.M. Zablotowicz(2002) Weed management in conservation crop production systems. Weed Biology and Management 2: 123-132 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1445-6664.2002.00061.x
  22. Louw, J.H. and M.S. Scholes(2002) Forest site classification and evaluation: a South African perspective. Forest Ecology and Management 171: 153-168 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(02)00469-3
  23. Malanson, G.P. and B.E. Cramer(1999) Landscape heterogeneity, connectivity, and critical landscapes for conservation. Diversity and Distribution 5: 27-39 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1472-4642.1999.00035.x
  24. Malone, C.R.(2000) Ecosystem management policies in state government of the USA. Landscape and Urban Planning 48: 57-64 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(00)00043-8
  25. Martin, H. and J. Cornelis(2000) Towards a monitoring method and a number of multifaceted and hierarchical biodiversity indicators for urban and suburban parks. Landscape and Urban Planning 49: 149-162 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(00)00061-X
  26. Mendoza, G.A. and R. Prabhu(2003) Qualitative multi-criteria approaches to assessing indicators of sustainable forest resource management. Forest Ecology and Management 174: 329-343 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(02)00044-0
  27. Noss, R.F.(1990) Indicators for monitoring biodiversity: a hierarchical approach. Conservation Biology 4(4): 355-364 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.1990.tb00309.x
  28. Nowak, D.J.(1993) Atmospheric carbon reduction by urban trees. Journal of Environmental Management 37: 207-217 https://doi.org/10.1006/jema.1993.1017
  29. Odum, E.P.(1969) The strategy of ecosystem development. Science 164: 262-270 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.164.3877.262
  30. Sidle, R.C.(1992) A theoretical model of the effects of timber harvesting on slope stability. Water Resources Research 28(7): 1898-1910
  31. Skole, D. and C. Tucker(1993) Tropical deforestation and habitat fragmentation in the Amazon: satellite data from 1978 to 1988. Science 260: 1905-1910 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.260.5116.1905
  32. Sukopp, H.(2004) Human-caused impact on preserved vegetation. Landscape and Urban Planning 68: 347-355 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(03)00152-X
  33. Tansley, A. G .(1935) The use and abuse of vegetational concepts and terms. Ecology 16: 284-307 https://doi.org/10.2307/1930070
  34. Thompson, S., K. McElwee and J.T. Lee(2001) Using landscape characteristics for targeting habitat conservation and restoration: a case study of ancient semi-natural woodland in the Chiltern Hills area of outstanding natural beauty, UK. Landscape Research 26(3): 203-223 https://doi.org/10.1080/01426390125623