Journal of Korean Society of Rural Planning (농촌계획)

Korean Society of Rural Planning (한국농촌계획학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Identifying Supply-demand Relationships on Ecosystem Services Using Socio-ecological Approach in Gyeong-gi Province

사회-생태계 이론을 활용한 경기도 지역 생태계서비스 공급-수요관계 분석

  • Park, Yoon-Sun (Interdisciplinary Program in Landscape Architecture, Graduate School, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kim, Choong-Ki (Korea Environment Institute) ;
  • Lee, Jae-Hyuck (Korea Environment Institute) ;
  • Song, Young-Keun (Department of Landscape Architecture, Graduate School of Environmental Studies, Seoul National University) ;
  • Hong, Hyun-Jeong (Korea Environment Institute)
  • 박윤선 (서울대학교 대학원 협동과정조경학) ;
  • 김충기 (한국환경연구원) ;
  • 이재혁 (한국환경연구원) ;
  • 송영근 (서울대학교 환경대학원 환경조경학과) ;
  • 홍현정 (한국환경연구원)
  • Received : 2021.05.21
  • Accepted : 2021.08.11
  • Published : 2021.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Ecosystem services play a role in promoting sustainable development by contributing to human welfare. For sustainable development, a balance between supply and demand for ecosystem services must be made. In this regard, in this study, factor analysis was performed using the results of measuring ecosystem services for the supply of ecosystem services and national statistical data representing socio-economic factors for demand for ecosystem services The results of analysis for Gyeong-gi Province are as follows. The service supply based on the result of ecosystem services was divided into the mixed service provisioning as factor1, the food provisioning as factor2, and the P retention service provisioning area as factor3. As for the demand for services based on socio-economic factors, factor1 is divided into urbanized areas, factor2 is forest development area, and factor3 is agricultural activity development area. Local governments that maintain balance were evaluated as Pocheon, Yangpyeong, Icheon, Pyeongtaek, Goyang, Suwon, Gwangmyeong, and Osan, and imbalanced local governments appeared in Gimpo, Uiwang, Anseong, and Yeoju. A management plan to maintain the balance between supply and demand of ecosystem services was suggested. The analysis method and results of this study are expected to be applicable to various local governments through regional expansion.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

본 논문은 환경부 「생태계서비스 평가 및 지도구축시범사업III(2020-060)」 및 한국환경연구원에서 해양수산과학기술진흥원의 국가연구개발사업으로 수행된 「지능형 해양쓰레기 수거지원기술개발(2021- 019(R))」의 지원으로 수행되었습니다.

References

  1. Baro, F., Palomo, I., Zulian, G., Vizcaino, P., Haase, D. and Gomez-Baggethun, E. 2016. Mapping ecosystem service capacity, flow and demand for landscape and urban planning: A case study in the Barcelona metropolitan region. Land use policy 57: 405-417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.06.006
  2. Bennett, E. M., Cramer, W., Begossi, A., Cundill, G., Diaz, S., Egoh, B. N. and Lebel, L. 2015. Linking biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human well-being: three challenges for designing research for sustainability. Current opinion in environmental sustainability 14: 76-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.03.007
  3. Berkes, F., Folke, C. and Colding, J. 1998. Linking Social and Ecological Systems, Management Practices and Social Mechanisms for Building Resilience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  4. Burkhard, B., Kroll, F., Nedkov, S., and Muller, F. 2012. Mapping ecosystem service supply, demand and budgets. Ecological indicators 21: 17-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.06.019
  5. Castro, A. J., Vaughn, C. C., Julian, J. P., and Garcia-Llorente, M. 2016. Social demand for ecosystem services and implications for watershed management. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association 52(1), 209-221. https://doi.org/10.1111/1752-1688.12379
  6. Choong-Ki Kim et al. 2020. Ecosystem Services Evaluation and Pilot Mapping ProjectIII. Ministry of Environment. Sejong-si, Korea(in Korean).
  7. Colding, J., Lundberg, J. and Folke, C. 2006. Incorporating green-area user groups in urban ecosystem management. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment 35(5): 237-244. https://doi.org/10.1579/05-A-098R.1
  8. Ellis, E. C., and Ramankutty, N. 2008. Putting people in the map: anthropogenic biomes of the world. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 6(8): 439-447. https://doi.org/10.1890/070062
  9. Garcia-Llorente, M., Iniesta-Arandia, I., Willaarts, B. A., Harrison, P. A., Berry, P., del Mar Bayo, M. and Martin-Lopez, B. 2015. Biophysical and sociocultural factors underlying spatial trade-offs of ecosystem services in semiarid watersheds. Ecology and Society 20(3).
  10. Gret-Regamey, A., Brunner, S. H., and Kienast, F. 2012. Mountain ecosystem services: who cares?. Mountain Research and Development 32(S1).
  11. Gyeonggi Province Statistics. 2020. (2020. 12. 1.) Retrieved from https://stat.gg.go.kr.
  12. Hamann, M., Biggs, R., and Reyers, B. 2015. Mapping social-ecological systems: Identifying 'green-loop'and 'red-loop'dynamics based on characteristic bundles of ecosystem service use. Global Environmental Change 34: 218-226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.07.008
  13. Hamann, M., Biggs, R., and Reyers, B. 2016. An exploration of human well-being bundles as identifiers of ecosystem service use patterns. PLoS One 11(10): e0163476. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0163476
  14. Kim, I., Kim, S., Lee, J. and Kwon, H. 2019. Categorization of Cities in Gyeonggi-do Using Ecosystem Service Bundles. Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment 28(3): 201-214(in Korean). https://doi.org/10.14249/EIA.2019.28.3.201
  15. Kim S, Lee D, Moon S, Byeon S, Kim J, Kim H, Kim J. 2020. A Study on the Evaluation and Improvements of New Town Policies in the Seoul Metropolitan Area. KRIHS, Sejong-si, Korea(in Korean).
  16. Kaiser, H. F. 1958. The Varimax criterion for analytic rotation in factor analysis. Psychometrika 23: 187-200. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289233
  17. Lahtinen, K., Guan, Y., Li, N., and Toppinen, A. 2016. Biodiversity and ecosystem services in supply chain management in the global forest industry. Ecosystem Services 21, 130-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.07.006
  18. Millenium Ecosystem Assessment 2005. Millenium ecosystem assessment synthesis report, Washington DC: Island press.
  19. Meacham, M., Queiroz, C., Norstrom, A. V., and Peterson, G. D. 2016. Social-ecological drivers of multiple ecosystem services: what variables explain patterns of ecosystem services across the Norrstrom drainage basin?. Ecology and Society 21(1).
  20. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport(MOLIT) 2019. 「The landscape policy plan(2020-2024)」.
  21. Ostrom, E. 2009. A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science 325(5939): 419-422. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1172133
  22. Quintas-Soriano, C., Garcia-Llorente, M., Norstrom, A., Meacham, M., Peter son, G., and Castr o, A. J. 2019. Integrating supply and demand in ecosystem service bundles characterization across Mediterranean transformed landscapes. Landscape Ecology 34(7): 1619-1633. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-019-00826-7
  23. Scholes, R. J., Reyers, B., Biggs, R., Spierenburg, M. J., and Duriappah, A. 2013. Multi-scale and cross-scale assessments of social-ecological systems and their ecosystem services. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 5(1): 16-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2013.01.004
  24. Sharp, R. et al. 2020. InVEST User's Guide. The Natural Capital Project, Stanford University, University of Minnesota, The Nature Conservancy, and World Wildlife Fund.
  25. Spake, R., Lasseur, R., Crouzat, E., Bullock, J. M., Lavorel, S., Parks, K. E. and Mouchet, M. 2017. Unpacking ecosystem service bundles: Towards predictive mapping of syner gies and tr ade-offs between ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change 47: 37-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.08.004
  26. Wei, H., Fan, W., Wang, X., Lu, N., Dong, X., Zhao, Y. and Zhao, Y. 2017. Integrating supply and social demand in ecosystem services assessment: A review. Ecosystem Services 25: 15-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.03.017
  27. Wolff, S., Schulp, C. J. E., and Verburg, P. H. 2015. Mapping ecosystem services demand: A review of current research and future perspectives. Ecological Indicators 55, 159-171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.03.016