Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture (한국조경학회지)

The Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture (한국조경학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Understanding the Difference in Residents' Perception of the Vulnerability of Local Ecological Assets - Focused on Paju, Gyeonggi-do -

지역 생태자산의 훼손 취약성에 대한 거주민의 인식 차이 - 경기도 파주지역을 대상으로 -

  • Son, Yong-Hoon (Graduate School of Environment Studies, Seoul National University) ;
  • Lee, Ju-Kyung (Interdisciplinary Program in Landscape Architecture, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kim, Do-Eun (Interdisciplinary Program in Landscape Architecture, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kwon, Hyuksoo (Bureau of Ecological Research, National Institute of Ecology)
  • Received : 2020.12.16
  • Accepted : 2020.12.31
  • Published : 2021.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study targets the city of Paju, Gyeonggi-do, where many challenges are facing ecological assets management due to the increase in recent development. Using the survey data provided by the National Institute of Ecology in Korea, the study analysed the differences in the local residents' perception of local ecological assets. The Q methodology, which is useful for revealing differences in opinions, was applied to classify the narrative groups, which had different points of view in evaluating each asset. Next, the study compared the differences in perceptions of the vulnerability of ecological assets. As a result of the analysis, the city of Paju was divided into two main narrative groups: a 'Nature Conservation Group' and a 'Heritage Conservation Group'. The Nature Conservation Group wanted to prioritize ecologically valuable assets, such as wetlands, brackish zones, and forests. The Heritage Conservation Group preferred preserving ecological assets having a cultural contexts, such as royal tombs, graves, and the surrounding landscape. Evaluating the ecological assets, the two groups identified 23 ecological sites under threat from development among the 25 ecological sites considered. The Nature Conservation Group noted the importance of sites such as the Sannam Wetlands, Gongneungcheon, Gongneungcheon Brackish Zone, and Simhak Mountain. These were considered to be the most vulnerable ecological assets in the city. The study found differences in the perceived values for each ecological asset by residents. The results can serve as useful data for decision-making on ecological asset management in the city of Paju.

본 연구는 최근 개발압력이 증가하여 생태자산 관리에 대한 많은 과제가 있는 경기도 파주시를 대상으로, 국립생태원에서 실시한 지역 주민 인식평가 조사 데이터를 활용하여, 지역 생태자산에 대한 거주민의 인식을 분석하였다. 연구에서는 가치관의 차이를 밝히는데 유용한 Q방법론을 적용하여 생태자산에 대한 주민들의 평가 성향을 구분하였으며, 성향에 따른 그룹별로 생태자산 훼손 취약성에 대한 인식 차이를 비교 분석하였다. 분석 결과, 파주시 주민 중에는 생태적으로 중요한 기능을 하는 습지나 기수역, 산림 등 자연자산을 우선 보전하고자 하는 '자연보전 그룹'과 왕릉 및 묘역 등 문화유산과 연계된 생태자산을 우선 보전하고자 하는 '유산보전 그룹' 등 크게 두 성향이 구분되었다. 두 설명그룹은 각 생태자산의 보전 인식, 활용 인식에 대해서는 차이가 있었지만, 훼손도 평가에서는 비슷한 성향으로 답했으며, 특히 25개의 생태자산 중 2개 자산을 제외하고 모두 개발압력을 받고 있다고 인식했다. 또한, 전반적으로 '자연보전 그룹'이 '유산보전 그룹'보다 생태자산의 훼손에 대해 적극적으로 인식하고 있었다. 생태자산 중에서는 산남습지, 특히 공릉천, 공릉천 기수지역, 심학산의 관리에 대해서 '자연보전 그룹'이 훼손 가능성에 대해서 문제로 인식하고 있었다. 본 연구는 각 생태자산에 대한 거주민들의 가치관의 차이를 보다 객관적으로 평가했으며, 연구의 결과는 파주시 생태자산 관리에 관한 의사결정에 유용한 자료로 활용할 수 있으리라 기대된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Ahn, S.(2013) Definition and classification of ecosystem services for decision making. Journal of Environmental Policy 12(2): 3-16. https://doi.org/10.17330/JOEP.12.2.201306.3
  2. Brown, S. R.(1993) A primer on Q methodology. Operant Subjectivity 16(3/4): 91-138.
  3. Buchel, S. and N. Frantzeskaki(2015) Citizens' voice: A case study about perceived ecosystem services by urban park users in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Ecosyst. Serv 12: 169-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.11.014
  4. Chan, K. M., T. Satterfield and J. Goldstein(2012) Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values. Ecological Economics 74: 8-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.11.011
  5. Forrester, J., B. Cook, L. Bracken, S. Cinderby and A. Donaldson(2015) Combining participatory mapping with Q-methodology to map stakeholder perceptions of complex environmental problems. Applied Geography 56: 199-208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2014.11.019
  6. Grimsrud, K., M. Graesse and H. Lindhjem(2020) Using the generalised Q method in ecological economics: A better way to capture representative values and perspectives in ecosystem service management. Ecological Economics 170: 106588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106588
  7. Hein, L., K. Bagstad, B. Edens, C. Obst, R. de Jong and J. P. Lesschen (2016) Defining ecosystem assets for natural capital accounting. PloS One 11(11): e0164460. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0164460
  8. Jeon, S, J. Kim and H. Jung(2013) A study on the forest classification for ecosystem services valuation. J. Korean Env. Res. Tech 16(3): 31-39.
  9. Kerr, G. N. and S. R. Swaffield(2012) Identifying cultural service values of a small river in the agricultural landscape of Canterbury, New Zealand, using combined methods. Society & Natural Resources 25(12): 1330-1339. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2012.676723
  10. Kim, B., J. Lee, I. Kim, S. Kim and H. Kwon(2019a) Rapid assessment of ecosystem services apply to local stakeholders. Journal of the Korean Society of Environmental Restoration Technology 22(1): 1-11.
  11. Kim, B., J. Lee and H. Kwon(2017) Recent ecological asset research trends using keyword network analysis. Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment 26(5): 303-314. https://doi.org/10.14249/eia.2017.26.5.303
  12. Kim, I., S. Kim, J. Lee and H. Kwon(2019b) Categorization of cities in Gyeonggi-do using ecosystem service bundles. Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment 28(3): 201-214. https://doi.org/10.14249/EIA.2019.28.3.201
  13. Kim, J. and K. Lee(2009) Monitoring on vegetation structure for ecological restoration of small stream in Paju. Journal of Environmental Science International 18(1): 99-111. https://doi.org/10.5322/JES.2009.18.1.099
  14. Kim, M., J. Choi and J. Park(2018) A Study of ecosystem services trade-off based on user perception in Tancheon. Journal of the Korean Society of Environmental Restoration Technology 21(1): 31-40.
  15. Larondelle, N. and D. Haase(2013) Urban ecosystem services assessment along a rural-urban gradient: A cross-analysis of European cities. Ecological Indicators 29: 179-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.12.022
  16. Lee, H. (2017) Basic direction of the preservation and utilization of DeokjinSanseong fortress. Baekje Culture Research Institute 56: 255-270.
  17. Lee, J. (2019) Conflict mapping toward ecotourism facility foundation using spatial Q methodology. Tourism Management 72: 69-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2018.11.012
  18. Lee, C. and D. Kim(2020) A study on the characteristics of spatial and landscape composition in Jangneung, Paju. Journal of the Korean Institute of Traditional Landscape Architecture 38(1): 1-9. https://doi.org/10.14700/KITLA.2020.38.1.001
  19. Martin-Lopez, B., Iniesta-I. Arandia, M. Garcia-Llorente, I. Palomo, I. Casado-Arzuaga, D. G. Del Amo and J. A. Gonzalez(2012) Uncovering ecosystem service bundles through social preferences. PLoS One 7(6): e38970. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038970
  20. Nhem, S. and Y. Lee(2019) Using Q methodology to investigate the views of local experts on the sustainability of community-based forestry in Oddar Meanchey province, Cambodia. Forest Policy and Economics 106: 101961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2019.101961
  21. NIER(2006) 2006 National Survey of Natural Landscape : Paju. MOE.
  22. Park, E. (2009) Funding for nature conservation of the DMZ area: Focusing on the ecosystem conservation fund. Gyeonggi Reserch Institute 5: 111-112.
  23. Rhew, H. and S. Kim(2004) Spatial pattern of environmental loadings on border region of Gyeonggi province. Journal of the Economic Geographical Society of Korea 7(2): 157-170.
  24. Song, C., W. Lee, H. Choi, S. Jeon, J. Kim, J. Kim and J. Kim(2015) Application of InVEST water yield model for assessing forest water provisioning ecosystem service. Journal of the Korean Association of Geographic Information Studies 18(1): 120-134. https://doi.org/10.11108/kagis.2015.18.1.120
  25. Song, I. and C. Yoon(2019) Establishment and Utilization of Ecosystem Service Assessment in Seoul. The Seoul Institute of Research on Policy Issues.