Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment (환경영향평가)

Korean Society of Environmental Impact Assessment (한국환경영향평가학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Trend and estimation of the ecological footprint from the consumption of bovine meat in Korea

우리나라 쇠고기 소비에 의한 생태발자국 추이와 예측

  • Yeo, Min Ju (Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Kim, Yong Pyo (Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, Ewha Womans University)
  • 여민주 (이화여자대학교 환경공학과) ;
  • 김용표 (이화여자대학교 환경공학과)
  • Received : 2016.05.24
  • Accepted : 2016.08.22
  • Published : 2016.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Influences on the environment from the consumption of livestock have increased drastically during the last 50 years in Korea. Reduction of bovine meat consumption is one of the alternatives as sustainable food supply. The consumption of bovine meat and the ecological footprint (the sum of the cropland, grazing land, and carbon footprint) from the consumption of bovine meat have increased over 13 and 12 times over the last 50 years. Especially, the consumption of imported bovine meat and the ecological footprint from the consumption of imported bovine meat have increased significantly about 346 and 369 times over the last 40 years. If the consumption of bovine meat decreased by half in Korea in 2023, the ecological footprint from the consumption of bovine meat would be reduced by 40~65% depending on the scenarios. The supportable population number for the consumptions of environmental resources (food (crops, livestock, and fish), energy, forest, and built-up land) and the crops were 0.57~1.56 million and 3.42~6.83 million, respectively, depending on the scenarios and the nationality of the supported people.

최근 육류 소비에 의한 환경 영향이 증가하였고, 쇠고기 소비를 줄이는 것은 지속가능한 식량 공급을 위한 대안의 하나이다. 우리나라에서는 지난 50여 년간 쇠고기 소비는 1961년 대비 2009년 약 13배 증가하였고, 쇠고기 소비에 의한 생태발자국(경작지발자국, 초지발자국, 탄소발자국의 합)도 동기간 약 12배 증가하였다. 특히 수입 쇠고기 소비 증가가 1970년 대비 2009년 약 346배, 수입 쇠고기 소비로 인한 생태발자국은 369배로 현저히 증가하였다. 2023년 한국인이 쇠고기 소비를 절반으로 줄이는 경우 쇠고기 소비에 의한 생태발자국은 기준전망치(BAU, Business As Usual) 대비 40~65% 감소하였다. 또한 시나리오별 저감된 생태발자국으로 지탱가능한 인구수를 추정하면, 한국인과 세계평균 소비 수준에 따라 약 57~156만 명의 식량(농작물, 육류, 어류), 화석 에너지, 산림 및 건조환경 부문의 소비를 지탱할 수 있고, 342~683만 명의 농작물 소비를 지탱할 수 있을 것으로 기대된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Borucke M, Moore D, Cranston G, Gracey K, Iha K, Larson L, Lazarous E, Morales JC, Wackernagel M, Galli A. 2013. Accounting for demand and supply of the biosphere's regenerative capacity: the National Footprint Accounts' underlying methodology and framework. Ecological Indicators. 24: 518-533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.08.005
  2. Brown LR. trans. Edith Ji KH, Lee IW, Han SS, Kim SM. 1998. Who will feed China?. Ddanim.
  3. Choi JI, Chung JY, Hong GS. 2011. A study on the environmental capacity assessment in Seoul Metropolitan Area using ecological footprint. Seoul Studies. 12(4): 23-40. [Korean Literature]
  4. Cleveland CJ, Morris CG. 2009. Dictionary of energy, 1st Ed. Amsterdam.
  5. Davis SJ, Caldeira K. 2010. Consumption-based accounting of CO2 emissions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 107(12): 5687-5692. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0906974107
  6. DEFRA (Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs). 2006. Environmental impacts of food production and consumption. London.
  7. EWG (Environmental Working Group). 2011. Meat eaters guide: Methodology. Washington, DC.
  8. Ewing B, Moore D, Goldfinger S, Oursler A, Reed A, Wackernagel M. 2010. The Ecological Footprint Atlas 2010. Oakland: Global Footprint Network.
  9. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2006. Livestock's long shadow: environmental issues and options. Italy.
  10. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2014a. Production of livestock primary. [cited 2014 November 04]. Available from: http://faostat3.fao.org/download/Q/*/E.
  11. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2014b. Trade of crops and livestock products. [cited 2014 November 04]. Available from: http://faostat3.fao.org/download/Q/*/E.
  12. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2015. Food Balance Sheets: Standard Download. [cited 2015 December 13]. Available from: http://faostat3.fao.org/download/FB/FBS/E.
  13. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) and WFP (World Food Programme). 2013. FAO/WFP crop and food security assessment mission to the democratic people's republic of Korea. Rome.
  14. Galli A, Weinzettel J, Cranston G, Ercin E. 2013. A footprint family extended MRIO model to support Europe's transition to a one planet economy. Science of the Total Environment. 461-462: 813-818. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.11.071
  15. GFN (Global Footprint Network). 2014. National Footprint Accounts 2012 Edition: Korea, Republic of. Oakland.
  16. GFN (Global Footprint Network). 2015a. Glossary, Oakland.
  17. GFN (Global Footprint Network). 2015b. National Footprint Accounts, 2015 Edition. Oakland.
  18. Joyce A, Dixon S, Comfort J, Hallett J. 2012. Reducing the environmental impact of dietary choice: Perspectives from a behavioural and social change approach. Journal of Environmental and Public Health. 2012(9786720): 1-7.
  19. Jung SG, Lee WS. 2009. An assessment of environmental carrying capacity and ecosystem service value in the Daegu Metropolitan Area. Journal of the Korean Association of Geographic Information Studies. 12(4): 18-33. [Korean Literature]
  20. KAST (Korean Academy of Science and Technology). 2009. Food security problems and countermeasures in Korea. Gyeonggi. [Korean Literature]
  21. KMIFAFF (Korea Ministry for Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries). 2010. A study on conceptualization of food self-sufficiency rate and reestablishing its target in Korea. Seoul. [Korean Literature]
  22. KMOHW (Korea Ministry of Health and Welfare). 2013. Korea Health Statistics 2012: Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANESV-3). Korea. [Korean Literature]
  23. KOSTAT (Statistics Korea). 2016. Trend of production and consumption of crops and livestock. [cited 2016 May 10]. Available from: http://www.index.go.kr/potal/main/EachDtlPageDetail.do?idx_cd=2747. [Korean Literature]
  24. KREI (Korea Rural Economics Institute). 1999. Future agriculture 1999. Seoul. [Korean Literature]
  25. KREI (Korea Rural Economics Institute). 2013. Food balance sheet 2012. Seoul. [Korean Literature]
  26. KREI (Korea Rural Economics Institute). 2014. Future agriculture 2014 (I). Seoul. [Korean Literature]
  27. Lazarus E, Zokai G, Borucke M, Panda D, Iha K, Morales JC, Wackernagel M, Galli A, Gupta N. 2014. Working guidebook to the National Footprint Accounts, 2014 edition. Oakland: Global Footprint Network.
  28. Liu M, Zhang D, Min Q, Xie G, Su N. 2014. The calculation of productivity factor for ecological footprints in China: A methodological note. Ecological Indicators. 38: 124-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.11.003
  29. Monfreda C, Wackernagel M, Deumling D. 2004. Establishing national natural capital accounts based on detailed ecological footprint and biological capacity accounts. Land Use Policy. 21: 231-246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2003.10.009
  30. Pimentel D, Pimentel M. 2003. Sustainability of meat-based and plant-based diets and the environment. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 78: 660S-663S. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/78.3.660S
  31. Sanders KT, Webber ME. 2014. A comparative analysis of the greenhouse gas emissions intensity of wheat and beef in the United States. Environmental Research Letters. 9(044011): 1-9.
  32. Tilman D, Clark M. 2014. Global diets link environmental sustainability and human health. Nature. 515: 518-522. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13959
  33. TRUCOST. 2013. Natural capital at risk: The top 100 externalities of business.
  34. Wackernagel M, Rees W. 1996. Our ecological footprint, New Society Publishers, Canada.
  35. Wiedmann T, Minx J. 2008. A definition of 'Carbon Footprint'. In: Pertsova CC (Ed.), Ecological Economics Research Trends: Chapter1. Nova Science Publishers, New York.
  36. Williams AG, Audsley E, Sandars DL. 2006. Determining the environmental burdens and resource use in the production of agricultural and horticultural commodities. Main Report. Defra Research Project IS0205. Bedford: Cranfield University and Defra.
  37. WRI (World Resources Institute). 2013. Creating a sustainable food future: A menu of solutions to sustainably feed more than 9 billion people by 2050. Washington, DC.
  38. Yeo MJ, Kim YP. 2014. Trend and prediction of the ecological footprint in Korea. J Environ Impact Assess. 23: 364-378. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.14249/eia.2014.23.5.364
  39. Yeo MJ. 2015. Trends and predictions of the influence of energy and livestock consumption on the environment in South Korea: Predictions of the ecological footprint and carbon dioxide emissions resulting from implementation of energy policies and changes in bovine meat consumption behaviour. Ph.D. dissertation, Ewha Womans University, Seoul. [Korean Literature]
  40. Yeo MJ, Kim YP. 2015. Prediction of the Carbon Dioxide Emission Change Resulting from the Changes in Bovine Meat Consumption Behavior in Korea. J Korean Society for Atmospheric Environment. 31(4): 356-367. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.5572/KOSAE.2015.31.4.356

Cited by

  1. 식물성 단백질을 이용한 육류 유사식품에 대한 고찰 vol.52, pp.2, 2020, https://doi.org/10.9721/kjfst.2020.52.2.167
  2. Chemical Composition Affecting Physical Properties of Textured Vegetable Proteins vol.24, pp.4, 2016, https://doi.org/10.13050/foodengprog.2020.24.4.299