Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment & Safety (해양환경안전학회지)

The Korean Society of Marine Environment and safety (해양환경안전학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Assessment of the Environmental Value of the Geum-river Estuary

금강하구의 환경가치 평가

  • Kwon, Young-Ju (Graduate School of Energy & Environment, Seoul National University of Science & Technology) ;
  • Yoo, Seung-Hoon (Graduate School of Energy & Environment, Seoul National University of Science & Technology) ;
  • Park, Se-Hun (Environment and Economics Assessment Section, Korea Institute of Ocean Science & Technology)
  • 권영주 (서울과학기술대학교 에너지환경대학원) ;
  • 유승훈 (서울과학기술대학교 에너지환경대학원) ;
  • 박세헌 (한국해양과학기술원 해양환경.산업연구실)
  • Received : 2013.06.20
  • Accepted : 2013.10.25
  • Published : 2013.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The current study attempted to assess the environmental value of Geum-river estuary for rational management decision-making. To investigate the comprehensive properties of the Geum-river estuary, we applied the contingent valuation method based on multi-attribute utility theory. We surveyed a randomly selected sample of 400 and 600 households of the Geum-river estuary-neighboring area (Jeollabuk-do, Chungcheongnam-do), and other nation-wide large districts (except Jeollabuk-do, Chungcheongnam-do, and Jeju-do), respectively, and carried out person-to-person interviews with subjects on their willingness-to-pay for the estuary conservation and management program. Respondents, overall, accepted the contingent market system and were willing to contribute a significant amount, that is 1,497 won for the residents from the Geum-river estuary-neighboring area and 4,343 won for the residents from other nation-wide large districts on average, per household per year. These results implied that there were large difference between the two groups. The aggregate values of the Geum-river estuary for the estuary-neighboring area and other nation-wide large districts amount to 2.13 and 70.15 billion won, respectively, per year. This quantitative value deduced from the current study, could be a useful baseline fact for any decision-making process particularly in the establishment of management policies for the Geum-river estuary.

본 연구는 금강 하구 관리에 대한 합리적 결론을 도출하기 위하여 하구의 환경가치를 추정하였다. 추정 방법은 하구의 세부적인 속성을 평가하기 위하여 다속성 효용이론에 근거한 조건부 가치측정법을 적용하였다. 또한 하구 인근지역(전북, 충남) 400가구와 전국 13개 광역지자체(전북, 충남, 제주도 제외)지역 600가구를 무작위로 추출하여 일대일 개별면접을 통해 금강 하구 관리방안에 대해 얼마나 지불할 의사가 있는지를 조사하였다. 응답자들은 전반적으로 조건부 시장을 잘 받아들였으며, 가구당 연 평균 지불의사액은 금강하구 인근지역의 경우 1,497원, 전국 13개 광역지자체 지역의 경우 4,343원으로 분석되어 지역에 따라 큰 차이가 났다. 이 값을 해당 지역의 모집단으로 확장한 결과, 각각 연간 21.3억 원 및 701.5억 원이었다. 이러한 정량적인 값은 금강 하구관리 정책에 대한 합리적인 의사결정에 유용한 자료로 활용될 수 있을 것이다.

Keywords

References

  1. Arrow, K., R. Solow, P. R. Portney, E. E. Leamer, R. Radner and H. Schuman(1993), Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation, Federal Register, Vol. 58, No. 10, pp. 4601-4614.
  2. Gregory, R., S. Lichtenstein and P. Slovic(1993), Valuing Environmental Resources: A Constructive Approach, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Vol. 7, pp. 177-197. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01065813
  3. Hanemann, W. M.(1984), Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 66, No. 3, pp. 332-341. https://doi.org/10.2307/1240800
  4. Hanemann, W. M., J. Loomis and B. Kaninnen(1991), Statistical Efficiency of Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 73, No. 4, pp. 1255-1263. https://doi.org/10.2307/1242453
  5. Johnson, E. J., R. M. Meyer and S. Ghose(1989), When Choice Models Fail: Compensatory Representations in Negatively Correlated Environments, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 26, pp. 255-270. https://doi.org/10.2307/3172899
  6. KDI(2008), Korea Development Institute, A Study on General Guidelines for Pre-feasibility Study (5th Edition), pp. 303-312.
  7. KEI(2004), Korea Environment Institute, Development of Sustainable Estuary Management Strategy in Korea, pp. 187-189.
  8. Krinsky, I. and A. L. Robb(1986), On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities, Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 68, 1986, pp.715-719. https://doi.org/10.2307/1924536
  9. Kriström, B.(1997), Spike Models in Contingent Valuation, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 79, No. 3, pp. 1013-1023. https://doi.org/10.2307/1244440
  10. Kwak, S. J., S. H. Yoo and J. I. Chang(2006), Valuing the Han-river Estuary; using Conjoint Analysis, The Korean Economic Review, Vol. 54, No. 4, pp. 141-161.
  11. McDaniels, T. L. and C. Roessler(1998), Multiattribute Elicitation of Wilderness Preservation Benefits: a Constructive Approach, Ecological Economics, Vol. 27, pp. 299-312. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(98)00005-6
  12. MLTM(2009), Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs, A Study of the Estuary Management System(II): Youngsan River Estuary, pp. 499-502.
  13. MLTM(2010), Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs, A Study of the Estuary Management System(III): Seomjin River Estuary, pp. 133-135.
  14. Payne, J. W., J. R. Bettman and E. J. Johnson(1992), Behavioral Decision Research: A Constructive Processing Perspective, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 43, pp. 87-132. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.43.020192.000511
  15. Phelps, R. H. and J. Shanteau(1978), Livestock Judges: How Much Information Can An Expert Use?, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Vol. 21, pp. 209-219. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(78)90050-8
  16. Russell, C., V. Dale, J. Lee, M. H. Jenesen, M. Kane and R. Gregory(2001), Experimenting with Multi-attribute Utility Survey Methods in a Multi-dimensional Valuation Problem, Ecological Economics, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 87-108. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(00)00207-X
  17. Slovic, P. and S. Lichtenstein(1971), Comparison of Bayesian and Regression Approaches to the Study of Information Processing in Judgement, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Vol. 6, pp. 649-744. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(71)90033-X
  18. Yoo, S. H.(2007a), Using the Contingent Valuation Method Based on Multi-attribute Utility Theory to Measure the Environmental Value of the Nakdong-river Estuary, Ocean and Polar Research, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp.69-80. https://doi.org/10.4217/OPR.2007.29.1.069
  19. Yoo, S. H.(2007b), Measurement of the Environmental Value of the Seomjin-river Estuary, Journal of Environmental Policy, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 1-25.
  20. Yoo, S. H. and J. S. Lee(2011), Assessment of Economic Value of Youngsan River Estuary, Journal of Korea Water Resources Association, Vol. 44, No. 8, pp. 629-637. https://doi.org/10.3741/JKWRA.2011.44.8.629
  21. Yoo, S. H. and K. S. Chae(2001), Measuring the Economic Benefits of the Ozone Pollution Control Policy in Seoul: Results of a Contingent Valuation Survey, Urban Studies, Vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 49-60. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980020014802
  22. Yoo, S. H. and S. J. Kwak(2002), Using a Spike Model to deal with Zero Response Data from Double Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Surveys, Applied Economics Letters, Vol. 9, No. 14, pp. 929-932. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504850210139378
  23. Yoo, S. H., S. J. Kwak and T. Y. Kim(1999), Valuing Air Quality of Seoul: Contingent Valuation Method Based on Multi-attribute Utility, Environmental Economic Review, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp.243-270.
  24. Yoo, S. H., S. J. Kwak and T. Y. Kim(2001a), Modeling Willingness to Pay Responses from Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Surveys with Zero Observations, Applied Economics, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp. 523-529. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840122117
  25. Yoo, S. H., T. Y. Kim and J. K. Lee(2001b), Modeling Zero Response Data from Willingness to Pay Surveys: A Semi-parametric Estimation, Economics Letters, Vol. 71, No. 2, pp. 191-196. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-1765(01)00363-9

Cited by

  1. Emergy Evaluation of the Korean Economy and Environment: Implications for the Valuation of Marine Ecosystem Services vol.18, pp.2, 2015, https://doi.org/10.7846/JKOSMEE.2015.18.2.102
  2. Emergy Valuation of Tidal Flat Ecosystems in Korea: I. Characteristics of Environmental Emergy Inputs vol.21, pp.4, 2016, https://doi.org/10.7850/jkso.2016.21.4.134
  3. The Conservation Value of Coral Communities in Moonseom Ecosystem Protected Area vol.24, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.7837/kosomes.2018.24.1.101
  4. 키워드 네트워크 분석을 활용한 생태자산 연구 경향 분석 vol.26, pp.5, 2013, https://doi.org/10.14249/eia.2017.26.5.303
  5. 항만재개발사업의 경제적 가치추정에 관한 연구 - 어메니티의 관점에서 - vol.37, pp.2, 2021, https://doi.org/10.38121/kpea.2021.06.37.2.33
  6. Emergy-Based Value of Ecosystem Services Provided by the Korean seas vol.24, pp.3, 2021, https://doi.org/10.7846/jkosmee.2021.24.3.119