Journal of Ecology and Environment

The Ecological Society of Korea (한국생태학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Pattern and process in MAEUL, a traditional Korean rural landscape

  • Kim, Jae-Eun (Institution for Marine and Island Cultures, Mokpo National University) ;
  • Hong, Sun-Kee (Institution for Marine and Island Cultures, Mokpo National University)
  • Received : 2011.03.30
  • Accepted : 2011.04.11
  • Published : 2011.06.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Land-use changes due to the socio-economic environment influence landscape patterns and processes, which affect habitats and biodiversity. This study considers the effects of such land-use changes, particularly on the traditional rural "Maeul" forested landscape, by analyzing landscape structure and vegetation changes. Three study areas were examined that have seen their populations decrease and age over the last few decades. Five types of plant life-forms (Raunkier life-forms) were distinguished to investigate ecosystem function. Principle component analysis was used to understand vegetation dynamics and community characteristics based on a vegetation similarity index. Ordination analysis transformed species-coverage data was introduced to clarify vegetation dynamics. Landscape indices, such as area metrics, edge metrics, and shape metrics, showed that spatial heterogeneity has increased over time in all areas. Pinus densiflora was the main land-use plant type in all study areas but decreased over time, whereas Quercus spp. increased. Over a decade, P. densiflora communities shifted to deciduous oak and plantation. These findings indicate that the impact of human activities on the Maeul landscape is twofold. While forestry activities caused heavy disturbances, the abandonment of traditional human activities has led to natural succession. Furthermore, it can be concluded that the type and intensity of these human impacts on landscape heterogeneity relate differently to vegetation succession. This reflects the cause and consequence of patch dynamics. We discuss an approach for sustainable landscape planning and management of the Maeul landscape based on traditional management.

Keywords

References

  1. Baker WL. 1995. Long-term response of disturbance landscapes to human intervention and global change. Landsc Ecol, 10: 143-159. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00133028
  2. Beon MS, Bartsch N. 2003. Early seedling growth of pine (Pinus densiflora) and oaks (Quercus serrata, Q. mongolica, Q. variabilis) in response to light intensity and soil moisture. Plant Ecol 167: 97-105. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023989813567
  3. Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C. 2000. Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as adaptive management. Ecol Appl 10: 1251-1262. https://doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[1251:ROTEKA]2.0.CO;2
  4. Bogaert J, Hong SK. 2004. Landscape ecology: monitoring landscape dynamics using spatial pattern metrics. In: Ecological Issues in a Changing World: Status, Response and Strategy (Hong SK, Lee JA, Ihm BS, Farina A, Son Y, Kim ES, Choe JC, eds). Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 109-131.
  5. Braun-Blanquet J. 1964. Pflanzensoziologie, Grundzuge der Vegetationskunde. 3 Aufl. Springer-Verlag, Wien.
  6. Burel F, Baudry J. 1995. Species biodiversity in changing agricultural landscapes: a case study in the Pays d'Auge, France. Agric Ecosyst Environ 55: 193-200. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-8809(95)00614-X
  7. Choung HL, Hong SK. 2006. Distribution patterns, floristic differentiation and succession of Pinus densiflora forest in South Korea: a perspective at nation-wide scale. Phytocoenologia 36: 213-229. https://doi.org/10.1127/0340-269X/2006/0036-0213
  8. Croissant C. 2004. Landscape patterns and parcel boundaries: an analysis of composition and configuration of land use and land cover in south-central Indiana. Agric Ecosyst Environ 101: 219-232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2003.09.006
  9. Forman RTT. 1995. Land Mosaics: The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  10. Fukamachi K, Oku H, Nakashizuka T. 2001. The change of a Satoyama landscape and its causality in Kamiseya, Kyoto Prefecture, Japan between 1907 and 1995. Landsc Ecol 16: 703-717.
  11. Golley FB, Bellot J. 1999. Planning as a way of achieving sustainable development. In: Rural Planning from an Environmental Systems Perspective (Golley FB, Bellot J, eds). Springer, New York, NY, pp 3-17.
  12. Hietala-Koivu R. 1999. Agricultural landscape change: a case study in Ylane, southwest Finland. Landsc Urban Plan 46: 103-108. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(99)00051-1
  13. Hong SK. 1998. Changes landscape patterns and vegetation process in the Far-Eastern cultural landscapes: human activity on pine-dominated secondary vegetations in Korea and Japan. Phytocoenologia 28: 45-66. https://doi.org/10.1127/phyto/28/1998/45
  14. Hong SK. 2001. Factors affecting landscape changes in central Korea: cultural disturbance on the forested landscape systems. In: Landscape Ecology Applied in Land Evaluation, Development and Conservation: Some Worldwide Selected Examples (van der Zee D, Zonneveld IS, eds). ITC Publisher, Enschede, pp 131-147.
  15. Hong SK. 2007. Linking man and nature landscape systems: landscaping blue-green network. In: Landscape Ecological Applications in Man-Influenced Areas: Linking Man and Nature Systems (Hong SK, Nakagoshi N, Fu B, Morimoto Y, eds). Springer, Tokyo, pp 505-524.
  16. Hong SK, Nakagoshi N, Kamada M. 1995. Human impacts on pine-dominated vegetation in rural landscapes in Korea and western Japan. Vegetatio 116: 161-172. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00045306
  17. Jeanneret Ph, Schupbach B, Luka H. 2003. Quantifying the impact of landscape and habitat features on biodiversity in cultivated landscapes. Agric Ecosyst Environ 98: 311-320. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(03)00091-4
  18. Jongman RHG, ter Braak CJF, van Tongeren OFR. 1995. Data Analysis in Community and Landscape Ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  19. Kamada M, Nakagoshi N. 1993. Pine forest structure in a human-dominated landscape system in Korea. Ecol Res 8: 35-46. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02348605
  20. Kamada M, Nakagoshi N. 1996. Landscape structure and the disturbance regime at three rural regions in Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan. Landsc Ecol 11: 15-25. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02087110
  21. Kim JE, Hong SK, Nakagoshi N. 2002. Landscape ecology on vegetation types and land use systems of agro-forested regions in Korea. Hikobia 13: 693-703.
  22. Kim JE, Hong SK, Nakagoshi N. 2006. Changes in patch mosaics and vegetation structure of rural forested landscapes under shifting human impacts in South Korea. Landsc Ecol Eng 2: 177-195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11355-006-0001-0
  23. Kim JE, Hong SK, Nakagoshi N. 2007. International trends of rural landscape researches for land management and policies. In: Landscape Ecological Applications in Man-Influenced Areas: Linking Man and Nature System (Hong SK, Nakagoshi N, Fu B, Morimoto Y, eds). Springer, Tokyo, pp 489-504.
  24. Lee D. 2004. Ecological Knowledge Embedded in Traditional Korean Landscape. Seoul National University Press, Seoul. (in Korean)
  25. Lee YN. 1996. Flora of Korea. Kyo-Hak Publishing Co., Seoul. (in Korean)
  26. Lim HB, Cho JK. 2004. A comparative study on rural development of Korea and EU. J Korean Soc Rural Plan 10: 25-34. (in Korean with English abstract)
  27. McGarigal K, Marks BJ.1995. FRAGSTATS: Spatial Pattern Analysis Program for Quantifying Landscape Structure. General Technical Report, PNW-GTR-351. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR.
  28. Morisita M. 1959. Measuring of interspecific association and similarity between communities. Mem Fac Sci Kyushu Univ Ser E (Biol), 3: 65-80.
  29. Moser D, Zechmeister HG, Plutzar C, Sauberer N, Wrbka T, Grabherr G. 2002. Landscape patch shape complexity as an effective measure for plant species richness in rural landscapes. Landsc Ecol, 17: 657-669. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021513729205
  30. Nakagoshi N, Hong SK. 2001. Vegetation and landscape ecology of East Asian 'Satoyama'. Glob Environ Res, 5: 171-181.
  31. Nakagoshi N, Kamada M, Hong S-K. 1992. Map of actual vegetation of Miwa-cho, Hiroshima Prefecture. Bull Biol Soc Hiroshima Univ, 58: 3-6 (include map).
  32. Oreszczyn S. 2000. A systems approach to the research of people's relationships with English hedgerows. Landsc Urban Plan 50: 107-117. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(00)00083-9
  33. Pinto-Correia T. 2000. Future development in Portuguese rural areas: how to manage agriculture support for landscape conservation? Landsc Urban Plan 50: 95-106. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(00)00082-7
  34. Reenberg A, Baudry J. 1999. Land-use and landscape changes: the challenge of comparative analysis of rural areas in Europe. In: Land-Use Changes and Their Environmental Impact in Rural Areas in Europe (Kronert R, Baudry IRB, Reenberg A, eds). UNESCO and Parthenon Publishing, Paris, pp 23-41.
  35. Saїd S. 2001. Floristic and life form diversity in post-pasture successions on a Mediterranean island (Corsica). Plant Ecol 162: 67-76.
  36. Shin JH. 2002. Ecosystem geography of Korea. In: Ecology of Korea (Lee D, Jin V, Choe JC, Son Y, Yoo S, Lee HY, Hong SK, Ihm BS, eds). Bumwoo Publishing Co., Seoul, pp 19-46.
  37. Solon J. 1995. Anthropogenic disturbance and vegetation diversity in agricultural landscapes. Landsc Urban Plan 31: 171-180. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-2046(94)01043-8
  38. Takeuchi K. 2010. Rebuilding the relationship between people and nature: the Satoyama Initiative. Ecol Res 25: 891-897. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11284-010-0745-8
  39. Turner MG, Gardner RH, O'Neill RV. 2001. Landscape Ecology in Theory and Practice. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY.
  40. Turner MG, Wear DN, Flamm RO. 1996. Land ownership and land-cover change in the southern Appalachian highlands and the Olympic peninsula. Ecol Appl 6: 1150-1172. https://doi.org/10.2307/2269599
  41. van Lier HN. 1998. The role of land use planning in sustainable rural systems. Landsc Urban Plan 41: 83-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(97)00061-3
  42. Walker BH, Langridge JL. 2002. Measuring functional diversity in plant communities with mixed life forms: a problem of hard and soft attributes. Ecosystems 5: 529-538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-002-0154-0
  43. Washitani I. 2003. Satoyama landscapes and conservation ecology. In: Satoyama: The Traditional Rural Landscape of Japan (Takeuchi K, Brown RD, Washitani I, Tsunekawa A, Yokohari M, eds). Springer-Verlag, Tokyo, pp 16-23
  44. Woodhouse SP, Good JEG, Lovett AA, Fuller RJ, Dolman PM. 2005. Effects of land-use and agricultural management on birds of marginal farmland: a case study in the Llyn peninsula, Wales. Agric Ecosyst Environ 107: 331-340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2004.12.006

Cited by

  1. Examining Relationships Between Socioeconomic Factors and Landscape Metrics in the Southern Basin of the Caspian Sea vol.21, pp.5, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10666-016-9503-9