Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment (환경영향평가)

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

DOI QR Code

Evaluation of Ecosystem Service for Distribution of Korean fir using InVEST Model

InVEST모델을 이용한 생태계서비스의 가치 평가 - 구상나무 분포지를 대상으로 -

  • Choi, Jiyoung (Dept. of Environmental Science and Engineering, Ewha University) ;
  • Lee, Sangdon (Dept. of Environmental Science and Engineering, Ewha University)
  • 최지영 (이화여자대학교 환경공학과) ;
  • 이상돈 (이화여자대학교 환경공학과)
  • Received : 2017.12.22
  • Accepted : 2018.02.19
  • Published : 2018.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The present study was conducted to analyze the quality of the habitats of Abies koreana WILS. by using the InVEST model based on the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) technique and to evaluate the economic value by estimating the carbon fixation. Abies koreana WILS., an original biological species of South Korea, may be an essential element in establishing the national biological sovereignty in the future. The subjects of the present study were the national parks in Mt. Halla, Mt. Jiri, and Mt. Sobaek, which are the habitats of Abies koreana WILS. As suggested by previous studies as a limitation of the InVEST model, the utilization of the data from relevant international publications as the input data, due to the lack of the domestic input data, may decrease the accuracy of the modeling. Therefore, the AHP technique was applied for the input data. The modeling was performed with reference to the years of 1980, 1990, and 2000 for the scenario analysis. The result of the modeling showed that the habitat quality was changed most in the national park in Mt. Halla, as the habitat quality score was decreased from 0.96 in 1980 to 0.97 in 1990 and 0.94 in 2000. In the national part of Mt. Sobeak, the habitat quality was changed most in the sub-alpine zone, as the habitat quality score was decreased from 0.98 in 1980 and 0.98 in 1990 to 0.97 in 2000. The habitat quality was best conserved in the national part in Mt. Jiri, as the habitat quality score was 0.98 in 1980, 0.99 in 1990, and 0.99 in 2000. The estimated economic loss by the change of the habitat quality was 19,280,000 USD for Mt. Halla and 8,030,000 USD for Mt. Sobeak. In the present study, the habitat quality of the Abies koreana WILS, the original species of South Korea, was evaluated and the economic value of the ecological services provided by the habitats was estimated quantitatively. The result showed that the ecosystem service model may be used to qualitatively analyze the quality of a habitat located in a specific region and to estimate the economic value quantitatively. The objective evaluation of ecosystem services demonstrated in the present study may be applied to promote sustainable utilization of natural resources and conservation of the ecosystem by predicting the changes that may be caused by external factors including the development of preservation areas.

본 연구는 구상나무(Abies koreana) 분포지를 대상으로 AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)기법을 적용한 InVEST모델을 사용하여 서식처 질 분석과 탄소고정량 추정을 통한 경제적 가치 평가를 하였다. 구상나무는 국내 고유종으로 장차 국가의 생물 주권 확립에 따라 핵심요소로 작용하고 있음에 따라 구상나무의 보존을 위해 연구대상지를 구상나무의 분포지인 한라산, 지리산, 소백산국립공원으로 선정하였다. InVEST모델 선행연구에서 시사한 한계점인 국내 입력자료가 없어 해외문헌의 값을 차용하여 정확성이 떨어지는 부분을 보완하기 위해 AHP기법을 적용하여 입력자료로 하였으며, 시나리오 분석을 위해 1980, 1990, 2000년을 기준으로 모델링을 하였다. 결과는 한라산국립공원이 가장 큰 서식처 질의 변화양상을 보였으며, 1980년은 $0.96{\pm}0.14$, 1990년은 $0.97{\pm}0.14$, 2000년은 $0.94{\pm}0.17$로 감소하는 것으로 도출되었다. 소백산국립공원의 구상나무의 분포지인 아고산지대의 변화가 가장 큰 곳으로, 서식처 질은 0.98, 0.98, 0.97로 감소하였다. 연구대상지 중 지리산국립공원의 서식처 질은 0.98, 0.99, 0.99로 가장 잘 보존된 곳으로 도출되었다. 그리고 경제적 가치환산 결과, 한라산은 1,928만 달러 손실, 소백산은 803만 달러 손실로 추정되었다. 결과적으로 국내 고유종인 구상나무가 제공하는 생태계서비스의 서식처 질과 경제적 가치추정을 통해 정량적인 값을 도출하였다. 생태계서비스 모델로 특정지역의 서식처 질 분석을 통한 정성적인 변화와 경제적 가치 환산을 통한 정량적인 값의 제시가 가능함을 확인할 수 있었다. 생태계서비스의 가치를 평가를 통해 보존지역의 개발과 같은 외부요인으로부터의 변화예측을 통한 객관적인 평가로 지속가능한 자연자원의 이용과 생태계 보전을 증진하는 방향으로 유도할 수 있는 방안으로 적용이 가능하다고 사료된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Bhagabati NK, Ricketts T, Sulistyawan TBS, Conte M, Ennaanay D, Hadian O, Wolny S. 2014. Ecosystem services reinforce Sumatran tiger conservation in land use plans. Biological Conservation. 169: 147-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2013.11.010
  2. Choi HA, Lee WK, Jeon SW, Kim JS, Kwak HB, Kim MI, Kim JT. 2014. Quantifying Climate Change Regulating Service of Forest Ecosystem - Focus on Quantifying Carbon Storage and Sequestration. Journal of Climate Change Research. 5(1): 21-36. [Korean Literature]
  3. Costanza R, Arge R, De Groot R, Farber S, Grasso M, Hannon B, Raskin RG. 1998. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Ecological economics. 25(1): 3-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(98)00020-2
  4. Dalkey NC. 1969. The Delphi method: an experimental study of group opinion. Rand, Stanta Monica, CA.
  5. De Groot RS, Wilson MA, Boumans RM. 2002. A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions goods and services. Ecological economics. 41(3): 393-408. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00089-7
  6. European Commission, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, United Nations, World Bank. 2013. System of Environmental-Economic Accounting 2012 Experimental Ecosystem Accounting. 1-204.
  7. Ewing DM. 1991. Future competencies needed in the preparation of secretaries in the state of illionis using the Delphi echnique. Illinois Digital Environment for access to learning and scholarship.
  8. Fischer J, Lindenmayer DB, Manning AD. 2006, Biodiversity, ecosystem function, and resilience: ten guiding principles for commodity production landscapes. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 4(2): 80-86. https://doi.org/10.1890/1540-9295(2006)004[0080:BEFART]2.0.CO;2
  9. Geijzendorffer IR, Roche PK. 2013. Can biodiversity monitoring schemes provide indicators for ecosystem services?. Ecological Indicators. 33: 148-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.03.010
  10. Heo YJ, Park DY, Kang SO. 2015. Establishing the Concept of Competency-oriented Society and Extracting its Components Using a Delphi Method. The Journal of Vocational Education Research. 34(6): 53-71. [Korean Literature]
  11. Kang BH, Seo WS, 2016. A Study on the Importance of Location Selection Factors of Integrated Resorts Using AHP. Korea academic society of tourism and leisure. 28(3): 149-166. [Korean Literature]
  12. Kim GT, Choo GC. 2000. Comparison of Growth Condition of Abies koreana Wilson by Districts', Korean Journal of Environment and Ecolog. 14(1): 80-87. [Korean Literature]
  13. Kim NS, Han DU, Cha JY, Park YS, Cho HJ, Kwon HJ, Cho YC, Oh SH, Lee CS. 2015. A Detection of Novel Habitats of Abies Koreana by Using Species Distribution Models(SDMs) and Its Application for Plant Conservation. J. Korean Environmental Restoration Technology. 18(6): 135-149. [Korean Literature]
  14. Kim NS, Lee HC. 2013. A Study on Changes and Distributions of Korean Fir in Sub-Alpine Zone. J. Korean Environmental Restoration Technology. 16(5): 45-57. [Korean Literature]
  15. Kim TG, Oh JG. 2016. Analysis of the Location Environment of the Sub-alpine Coniferous Forest in National Parks Using GIS - Focusing on Abies koreana -. J. Korean Society of Limnology. 49(3): 236-243.[Korean Literature]
  16. Kim TY, Kim CK, Maeng JH, Jang SJ, 2015. A Study on Strategic Envrionmental Assessment Guideline for Site Selection of Offshore Wind Farm Project. Korea Environment Institute. [Korean Literature]
  17. Kim TY, Song CH, Lee WK, Kim MI, Lim CH, Jeon SW, Kim JS, 2015. Habitat Quality Valuation Using InVEST Model in Jeju Island. J. Korea Society of Environmental Restoration Technology. 18(5): 1-11. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.13087/KOSERT.2015.18.5.1
  18. Kong WS. 2015. Selection of Vulnerable Indicator Plants by Global Warming. korea meteorological society. 41(2-1): 263-273. [Korean Literature]
  19. Koo KA, Kim JU, Kong WS., Jung HC, Kim GH. 2016. Projecting the Potential Distribution of Abies koreana in Korea Under the Climate Change Based on RCP Scenarios. J. Korean Enc. Res. Tech. 19(6): 19-30. [Korean Literature]
  20. Korea Forest Research Institute. 2014. Biodiversity Convention (CBD) Recent Negotiations Trend and Countermeasures. Korea Forest Research Institute. Seoul, Korea. [Korean Literature]
  21. Lee DK, Lee MK, Jung TY. 2014. Biodiversity, discuss economic. bomoondang, Seoul.
  22. Lee HW, Kim CK, Hong HJ, Roh YH, Kang SI, Kim JH, Shin SC, Lee SJ. 2015. Development of Decision Supporting Framework to Enhance Natural Capital Sustainability: Focusing on Ecosystem Service Analysis. Korea Environment Institute. 2015(0): 3479-3651. [Korean Literature]
  23. Lee JS. 2001. Delphi Method. Kyoyookbook, Seoul.
  24. Luis Felipe de Almeida Duarte, Caroline Araujo de Souza, Caio Rodrigues Nobre, Camilo Dias Seabra Pereira, Marcelo Antonio Amaro Pinheiro. 2016. Multi-level biological responses in Ucides cordatus as indicators of conservation status in mangrove areas from the western atlantic. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety. 133: 176-187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2016.07.018
  25. Luther JE, Fournier RA, Hall RJ, Ung CH, Guindon L, Piercey DE, Lambert MC, Beaudoin AR. 2002. Astratege for mapping Canada's forest biomass with Landsat TM imagery. 1312-1315.
  26. MA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment). 2005. Ecosysytems and Biodiversity: ecological and economic foundations. UNEP.
  27. Min SJ, Lee GG, Kim JS. 2013. A Study on ABS Cases for Securing Sovereignty Rights on the Native Biological Resources. J. Environmental policy. 21(4): 45-66. [Korean Literature]
  28. National Institute of Biological Resources. 2011. Nagoya Protocol Guidebook. National Institute of Biological Resources. Incheon, Korea. [Korean Literature]
  29. National Institute of Biological Resources. 2016. Support and Consulting for Biological Industry in Response to Nagoya Protocol. National Institute of Biological Resources. Incheon, Korea. [Korean Literature]
  30. Park HC, LEE JH, Lee JH, Um GJ. 2015. Environmental features of the distribution areas and climate sensitivity assesment of Korean Fir and Khinghan Fir. Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment. (24):3 260-277. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.14249/eia.2015.24.3.260
  31. Regulatory Reform Committee. 2015. 2015 Test Project Manual for the Total Cost of Administrative Regulations. Sejong, Korea. [Korean Literature]
  32. Roh YH. 2016. Introduction to the Estimation of Carbon Storage and Space Distribution. Science and Technology Policy Institute. 26(5): 46-51. [Korean Literature]
  33. Seo SB. 2017. Analysis of habitat quality in the Nam-Han River Upstream Watershed using InVEST model. Master's thesis, Ewha Woman, Seoul. Korea. [Korean Literature]
  34. Sharp R, Tallis HT, Ricketts T, Guerry AD, Wppd SA, Chaplin-Kramer R, Nelson E, Wolny S, P;wero N, Vigerstol K, Pennington D, Mendoza G, Aukema J, Foster J, Forrest J, Cameron D, Arkema K, Lonsdorf E, Kennedy C, Verutes G, Kim CK, Guannel G, Papenfus M, Tofr J, Marsik M, Bernhardt J, Griffin R, Glowinski K, Chaumount N, Perelaman A, Lacayo M, Mandle L, Hamel P, Vogl AL, Rogers L, Bierbower W. 2015. InVEST User's Guide. Stanford University, University of Minnesota, The Nature Conservancy, World Wildlife Fund.
  35. Song CH, Lee WK, Choi HA, Jeon SW, Kim JU, Kim JS, Kim JT, 2015. Application of InVEST Water Yield Model for Assessing Forest Water Provisioning Ecosystem Service. The Korean Association of Geographic Information Studies. 18(1): 120-134. [Korean Literature]
  36. Song KM, Kim CS, Joh JG, Kang CH, Kim MH. 2010. Vegetation Structure and Distributional Characteristics of Abies koreana Forests in Mt. Halla. Journal of Environmental Science International. 19(4): 415-425. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.5322/JES.2010.19.4.415
  37. Song SH, Kwon SH, Hong SK, Park JB, 2008. Application of the Delphi Technique in Modifying AHP Method. Korean Institute of Industrial Engineers. 11: 964-971. [Korean Literature]
  38. TEEB. 2010. The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: ecological and economic foundations. Edited by Pushpam Kumar, Earthsca, London.
  39. Terrado M, Sabater S, Chaplin-Kramer B, Mandle L, Ziv G. Acuna V. 2016. Model development for the assessment of terrestrial and aquatic habitat quality in conservation planning. Science of the total environment. 540: 63-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.064
  40. Vigerstol KL, Aukema JE. 2011. A comparison of tools for modeling freshwater ecosystem services. Journal of environmental management. 92(10): 2403-2409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.06.040