Korean Journal of Ecology and Environment (생태와환경)

The Korean Society of Limnology (한국수생태학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Research Trend of Estuarine Ecosystem Monitoring and Assessment

국내 하구 수생태계 현황 및 건강성 조사의 성과와 하구 생태계의 국외 연구동향

  • Won, Doo-Hee (Doohee Institute of Ecological Research, Korea Ecosystem Service Inc.) ;
  • Lim, Sung-Ho (Doohee Institute of Ecological Research, Korea Ecosystem Service Inc.) ;
  • Park, Jihyung (Water Environmental Engineering Research Division, National Institute of Environmental Research) ;
  • Moon, Jeong-Suk (Water Environmental Engineering Research Division, National Institute of Environmental Research) ;
  • Do, Yuno (Department of Biological Sciences, Kongju National University)
  • 원두희 ((주)생태조사단 부설 두희생태연구소) ;
  • 임성호 ((주)생태조사단 부설 두희생태연구소) ;
  • 박지형 (국립환경과학원 물환경공학연구과) ;
  • 문정숙 (국립환경과학원 물환경공학연구과) ;
  • 도윤호 (공주대학교 생명과학과)
  • Received : 2022.03.14
  • Accepted : 2022.03.18
  • Published : 2022.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

An estuary is an area where a freshwater river or stream meets the ocean. Even before the importance of the value of estuaries was recognized, the estuary was lost because of large-scale conversion by draining, filling, damming, and dredging. In South Korea, 643 estuaries are located, and the total area is 3,248,300 ha, accounting for 32.5% of the total area of South Korea. Over 35% of Korean estuaries are closed estuaries which are only temporally connected with the sea, either permanently or periodically. Since 2008, in order to preserve the estuary ecosystem and solve major issues in the estuary by accumulating knowledge about the estuarine ecosystem, the Ministry of Environment of Republic of Korea has been conducting the "Estuarine Ecosystem Monitoring and Assessment Project". At 668 sites of 325 estuaries, epilithic diatom, benthic macroinvertebrate, fish, and vegetation are investigated, and the habitat condition of each site is evaluated using the newly developed biotic index. More than 100 researchers annually record 2,097 species of estuaries according to the standardized survey guidelines over the past 14 years and provide strictly managed data necessary for establishing estuaries conservation policies. As a result of bibliometric analysis of 1,195 research articles related to the monitoring and assessment of the estuarine ecosystem, research on pollutants such as heavy metals and sediment control have recently been conducted. "Estuarine Ecosystem Monitoring and Assessment Project" is an ecological monitoring type of long-term mandated monitoring that is usually focused on identifying trends. Although it is difficult to identify the mechanism influencing a change in an ecosystem through long-term mandated monitoring, providing empirical data for supporting evidence-based policy, decision-making, and the management of ecosystems. In order to increase the efficiency of the project, research to investigate the relationship between sediments and pollutants and organisms can be conducted at specific estuaries or sites to compensate for the shortcomings of mandatory monitoring.

하구는 이질적인 매질인 하천과 바다가 다양한 환경을 조성하고 각 환경에 적응한 생물이 서식하는 공간이다. 하지만 하구의 생태적 가치를 인식하기 이전에 하구둑 건설이나 매립 등으로 대규모 개발사업으로 인해 하구의 면적이 소실되고 하구의 생태환경도 훼손되었다. 한국에는 총 643개 하구가 위치해 있지만 35% 이상이 하구 순환이 원활하지 않은 닫힌하구이다. 2008년 이후 환경부는 "하구수생태계 건강성 조사 및 평가" 사업을 통해 하구 생태계에 관한 지식을 축적하고 하구와 관련된 주요 문제를 해결하기 위해 노력하고 있다. 지난 14년간의 사업을 통해 총 2,097종의 하구 생물을 기록하였고 새롭게 개발된 생물지수를 이용해 각 조사지점의 서식환경을 평가하고 있다. "하구 수생태계 건강성 조사 및 평가" 사업은 장기적으로 수행되는 제도화된 생태조사로 생태계의 변화의 원인과 과정 등을 규명하기는 어렵지만 연간 100여 명 이상의 연구원들이 표준화된 조사지침에 따라 획득한 결과를 엄격히 관리해 하구의 보전과 관리 정책을 수립하는데 필요한 경험적 자료를 제공하고 있다. 제도화된 생태조사의 단점을 보완하기 위해 현재 조사 대상지 중 일부에서는 하구의 오염물 또는 퇴적물과 생물과의 관계를 파악하는 연구를 수행해 하구 생태계의 변화의 원인과 과정을 밝힐 수 있다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

본 논문은 환경부의 재원으로 국립환경과학원의 지원을 받아 수행하였습니다(NIER-2020-04-02-009).

References

  1. Aria, M. and C. Cuccurullo. 2017. bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics 11: 959-975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
  2. Carpenter, S.R., S.W. Chisholm, C.J. Krebs, D.W. Schindler and R.F. Wright. 1995. Ecosystem experiments. Science 269: 324-327. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.269.5222.324
  3. Caughlan, L. and K.L. Oakley. 2001. Cost considerations for long-term ecological monitoring. Ecological Indicators 1: 123-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-160X(01)00015-2
  4. Costanza, R., R. dArge, R. De Groot, S. Farber, M. Grasso, B. Hannon, K. Limburg, S. Naeem, R.V. Oneill and J. Paruelo. 1997. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387: 253-260. https://doi.org/10.1038/387253a0
  5. Hellawell, J.M. 2012. Development of a rationale for monitoring. p. 1-14. In: Monitoring for conservation and ecology. (Goldsmith, F.B., ed.). Springer Science & Business Media, London, UK.
  6. Likens, G. and L. David. 2018. Effective ecological monitoring. CSIRO publishing, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.
  7. Lim, J.-C., K.-H. Choi, B.-K. Lee and G.-Y. Lee. 2020. Investigation plan to strengthen the conservation and management of estuary ecosystems. The Journal of Korean Island 32: 317-334. https://doi.org/10.26840/JKI.32.4.317
  8. Lindenmayer, D.B. and G.E. Likens. 2009. Adaptive monitoring: a new paradigm for long-term research and monitoring. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 24: 482-486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2009.03.005
  9. Lindenmayer, D.B. and G.E. Likens. 2010. The science and application of ecological monitoring. Biological Conservation 143: 1317-1328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2010.02.013
  10. Lindenmayer, D.B., G.E. Likens, A. Andersen, D. Bowman, C.M. Bull, E. Burns, C.R. Dickman, A.A. Hoffmann, D.A. Keith and M.J. Liddell. 2012. Value of long-term ecological studies. Austral Ecology 37: 745-757. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2011.02351.x
  11. Lindenmayer, D.B., M.P. Piggott and B.A. Wintle. 2013. Counting the books while the library burns: why conservation monitoring programs need a plan for action. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 11: 549-555. https://doi.org/10.1890/120220
  12. Lotze, H.K., H.S. Lenihan, B.J. Bourque, R.H. Bradbury, R.G. Cooke, M.C. Kay, S.M. Kidwell, M.X. Kirby, C.H. Peterson and J.B. Jackson. 2006. Depletion, degradation, and recovery potential of estuaries and coastal seas. Science 312: 1806-1809. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1128035
  13. Nichols, J.D. and B.K. Williams. 2006. Monitoring for conservation. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 21: 668-673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2006.08.007
  14. Nisbet, E. 2007. Cinderella science. Nature 450: 489-890. https://doi.org/10.1038/450789a
  15. Pethick, J. 2002. Estuarine and tidal wetland restoration in the United Kingdom: policy versus practice. Restoration Ecology 10: 431-437. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1526-100X.2002.01033.x
  16. Pielke, J. and A. Roger. 2007. The honest broker: making sense of science in policy and politics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
  17. Reichman, O.J., M.B. Jones and M.P. Schildhauer. 2011. Challenges and opportunities of open data in ecology. Science 331: 703-705. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1197962
  18. Rho, P. and C.-H. Lee. 2014. Spatial distribution and temporal variation of estuarine wetlands by estuary type. Journal of the Korean Geographical Society 49: 321-338.
  19. Sun, J., M.-H. Wang and Y.-S. Ho. 2012. A historical review and bibliometric analysis of research on estuary pollution. Marine Pollution Bulletin 64: 13-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2011.10.034