Journal of agriculture & life science (농업생명과학연구)

Institute of Agriculture & Life Science, Gyeongsang National University (경상대학교 농업생명과학연구원)
권호 표지

The Economic Evaluation of the Forest Biodiversity in South Korea

산림생물다양성의 경제적 가치 평가

  • Received : 2012.04.30
  • Accepted : 2012.08.28
  • Published : 2012.08.30
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In this study, biodiversity was classified as 4 sectors (genes, species, ecosystems, and cultures) and overall 14 indicators were subdivided by the classification criterion of 4 sectors. Among those 14 indicators, monetary evaluation was conducted for 11 indicators that can be quantified in economic perspectives. Results show that negative economy effects (forest degradation, forest fire, forest damage caused by diseases and insects, deforestation, and cost under the assumption with the adoption of the Nagoya Protocol to be compensated for traditional knowledge) by reducing forest biodiversity were evaluated as 254.5 billion won annually. Also, Bioindustry, indigenous species, forest production, protection area, and income associated with mountain village were considered as positive economy effects and their annual economic value was 6.72 trillion won. Net annual benefit by maintaining forest biodiversity was about 6.5 trillion won.

본 연구에서는 유전자, 종, 생태계, 문화로 구분한 4종류의 분류 기준에 따라 14 종류의 평가 지표를 선정하였고 이중 가치 평가가 가능한 11개 인자를 대상으로 화폐적 평가를 수행하였다. 산림생물다양성을 저해하는 부의 경제효과 인자인 산림훼손, 산불, 병충해, 산림전용과 국가의 전통지식 권리를 보상해주어야 하는 나고야의정서가 발효된다는 가정에서 비용을 산출한 결과, 2,545억 원으로 평가되었다. 산림생물 다양성에 의한 양의 경제효과에는 바이오산업, 자생종, 임산물 생산, 보호구역, 산촌 소득적인 측면에서 이루어졌으며 그 가치는 연간 6조 7,200억 원으로 평가되었다. 산림생물다양성으로 인한 경제적 순편익은 연간 6조 4,655억 원으로 나타났다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : 산림청

References

  1. Business and Bidiversity Offsets Programme. 2010. Biodiversity offsets and the mitigation hierarchy: a review of current application in the banking sector. Pricewaterhousecoopers.
  2. Convention on Biological Diversity. 2010. Global Biodiversity Outlook 3. pp. 94.
  3. Costanza, R., d'Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O'Neill, R. V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R. G., P. Sutton, and M. V. D. Belt. 1997. The Value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387:253-260. https://doi.org/10.1038/387253a0
  4. Garcia, S., Harou, P., C. Montagne, and A. Stenger. 2009. Models for sample selection bias in contingent valuation: Application to forest biodiversity. J. Forest Econ. 15: 59-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfe.2008.03.008
  5. Han, S. R. and G. Choi. 1998. New approach to value outdoor recreational benefits of forest: An application of CVM-X(Experimental Contingent Valuation). J. Forest Recre. 2: 39-51.
  6. Horne, P. 2006. Forest owners' acceptance of incentive based policy instruments in forest biodiversity conservation-A choice experiment based approach. Silva Fennica, 40: 169-178.
  7. Korea Forest Research Institute. 2006. Mountain village promotion plan direction establishment for promoting regional development.
  8. Korea BIO. 2010. 2009 Domestic bio-industry statistics.
  9. Korea Forest Service. 2011a. Biodiversity and forest.
  10. Korea Forest Service. 2011b. Statistical Yearbook of Forestry.
  11. Korea University. 2010. The analysis of impacts on industry and research on countermeasures by access and benefit sharing of genetic resources. Korea Research Institute of Bioscience and Biotechnology.
  12. Korea Valuation Association. 2008. Advance research on the royalty model in the biotechnology sector. Biotech Policy Research Center.
  13. Kumar, P. 2010. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity. pp. 410. Earthscan.
  14. Lee, H. C. 2002. Valuing the nightheron resource: The dichotomous choice contingent valuation method approach. J. Tourism Sci. 25: 127-142.
  15. Matero. J. and O. Saastamoinen. 2007. In search of marginal environmental valuations-ecosystem services in Finnish forest accounting. Ecol. Econ. 61: 101-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.02.006
  16. UNESCO. 2010. Biodiversity is life. Biodiversity is our life.
  17. Willis, K. G., G. Garrod, R. Scarpa, N. Powe, A. Lovett, I. J. Bateman, N. Hanley, and D. C. Macmillan. 2003. The social and environmental benefits of forests in Great Britain (Phase 2), Report to the Forestry Commission, Centre for Research in Environmental Appraisal and Management, University of Newcastle, United Kingdom.
  18. Yeo, J. H. and S. W. Bang. 2007. Analysis of professionals' willingness to pay about the KumKang Pine tree stock in Ul-Jin. Jour. Korean Insti. Forest Recre. 11: 11-23.
  19. Yeo, J. H. and W. H. Jang. 2007. Estimation of the biodiversity conservation value about the Heory stock in Sun-Cheon. Jour. Korean For. Soc. 96: 483-493.
  20. Youn, Y. C. and H. C. Jang. 1994. Evaluation on conservation value for Gwangneung woodpecker. Environ. Res. Econ. Rev. 3: 87-105.
  21. Yu, I. D. 2000. Studies on the diversity of Korean mushroom and development of bioactive compounds. Korea Research Institute of Bioscience and Biotechnology.
  22. Yu, J. C. and J. E. Kim. 2008. Using one and one-half bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation methods to estimate non-market value of otters in Cheongju, Cheongwon area. Environ. Res. Econ. Rev. 17: 349-379.
  23. Yun, G. W. and M. Y. Kim. 2010. Korea Medicinal Plants. Shinkwang Publising Company.