Journal of the Korean Society of Environmental Restoration Technology (한국환경복원기술학회지)

The Korea Society of Environmental Restoration Technology (한국환경복원기술학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Assessing the ecological aspects of urban parks based on ecological design indicators and location characteristics

생태적 설계지표와 입지특성에 따른 도시공원 생태성 평가

  • Sohn, heejung (Interdisciplinary Program in Landscape Architecture, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kim Nayeong (National Institute of Ecology Research Center for Endangered Species) ;
  • Song, Youngkeun (Dept. of Environmental Design, Graduate School of Environmental Studies, Seoul National University)
  • 손희정 (서울대학교 대학원 협동과정 조경학) ;
  • 김나영 (국립생태원 멸종위기센터) ;
  • 송영근 (서울대학교 환경대학원 환경설계학과)
  • Received : 2023.08.14
  • Accepted : 2023.08.24
  • Published : 2023.08.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

As urbanization progresses, there is a growing and continuous demand for green spaces that provide ecosystem services. However, increasing the quantity of green spaces within major cities is challenging. Therefore, it is essential to pursue qualitative improvements that consider ecological characteristics of existing green spaces. In this study, we focus on local neighborhood parks in Seoul and present the following two questions through an evaluation utilizing ecological design indicators and land use data: 1. Which factor, design or location, has a greater influence on the ecological quality of neighborhood parks in Seoul? 2. Additionally, when evaluating ecological characteristics, is there similarity between assessments based on land-use data and those utilizing ecological design indicators? For this study, we conducted research on 30 neighborhood parks in Seoul and classified them into mountainous types (adjacent to mountains, natural terrain parks) and urban types (independently designed within 300m without existing forests) based on previous studies. Firstly, we conducted evaluations according to park location types. When comparing the evaluation scores of urban types (14 parks) and mountainous types (16 parks), significant differences were observed with scores of 16.86 and 35.94, respectively. Statistical analysis showed a significant difference between park types. In terms of habitat quality, the average values for urban and mountainous parks were 0.33 and 0.53, respectively, and statistically significant differences were observed between park types indicating differences in ecological potential according to park location. Secondly, when comparing the results of ecological potential evaluations based on park design and external connectivity, a correlation was found between habitat quality and total scores according to evaluation indicators. The correlation analysis showed significant linear relationships between habitat quality and total scores, biodiversity scores, and ecosystem function scores, with high positive correlation coefficients of 0.829, 0.861, and 0.802, respectively. This study holds significance in analyzing the ecological aspects of urban parks through the lens of both park location characteristics and design indicators. The analysis results underscore the importance of planning and managing ecologically sound urban parks contingent upon their location. Moreover, the utilization of appropriate ecological design indicators can help alleviate environmental limitations surrounding parks. Integrating these considerations could enhance the ecological quality and ecosystem services of urban green spaces.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

본 연구는 환경부의 재원으로 한국환경산업기술원의 습지생태계 가치평가 및 탄소흡수 가치증진 사업의 지원을 받아 수행되었음(2022003630004).

References

  1. Ahern, J. (2013). "Urban landscape sustainability and resilience: the promise and challenges of integrating ecology with urban planning and design." Landscape Ecology 28(6): 1203-1212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-012-9799-z
  2. Apfelbeck, B., Snep, R. P. H., Hauck, T. E., Ferguson, J., Holy, M., Jakoby, C., Scott Macivor, J., Schar, L., Taylor, M., & Weisser, W. W. (2020). Designing wildlife-inclusive cities that support human-animal coexistence. Landscape and Urban Planning, 200, 103817.
  3. Campagne, C. S., Roche, P., Gosselin, F., Tschanz, L., & Tatoni, T. (2017). Expert-based ecosystem services capacity matrices: Dealing with scoring variability. Ecological Indicators, 79, 63-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.03.043
  4. Carroll, C., McRae, B. H., & Brookes, A. (2012). Use of Linkage Mapping and Centrality Analysis Across Habitat Gradients to Conserve Connectivity of Gray Wolf Populations in Western North America. Conservation Biology, 26(1), 78-87. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01753.x
  5. Cerreta, A., McCarthy, K., Fowles, G., (2023). "Habitat suitability and landscape connectivity for an expanding population of bobcats." Landscape Ecology 38: 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-022-01554-1
  6. Chiesura, A. (2004). "The role of urban parks for the sustainable city." Landscape and Urban Planning 68(1): 129-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2003.08.003
  7. Clergeau, P., Jokimaki, J., & Savard, J.-P. L. (2002). Are urban bird communities influenced by the bird diversity of adjacent landscapes? Journal of Applied Ecology, 38(5), 1122-1134. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2664.2001.00666.x
  8. Drielsma, M. J., Love, J., Taylor, S., Thapa, R., & Williams, K. J. (2022). General Landscape Connectivity Model (GLCM): a new way to map whole of landscape biodiversity functional connectivity for operational planning and reporting. Ecological Modelling, 465, 109858.
  9. Fonseca A, Zina V, Duarte G, Aguiar FC, Rodriguez-Gonzalez PM, Ferreira MT, Fernandes MR. (2021). Riparian Ecological Infrastructures: Potential for Biodiversity-Related Ecosystem Services in Mediterranean Human-Dominated Landscapes Sustainability 13, no. 19: 10508.
  10. Kim, E.-Y., Kim, J.-Y., Jung, H.-J, Song, W,-K (2017) Development and Feasibility of Indicators for Ecosystem Service Evaluation of Urban Park, J. Environ. Impact Assess. 26(4): 227~241 [Korean Literature]
  11. Kim, H.-J., Kang, E.-J., Cho, J.-H.(2010). An Evaluation on Management Types by Characteristics of Urban Parks. Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture 38(5), 21-30 [Korean Literature]
  12. Kim, T.-Y., Song, C.-H., Lee, W.-K., Kim, M.-I., Lim, C.-H., Jeon, S.-W., Kim, J,-S.(2015). Habitat Quality Valuation Using InVEST Model in Jeju Island, J. Korean Env. Res. Tech. 18(5):1~11 [Korean Literature]
  13. Krauss, J., Steffan-Dewenter, I., & Tscharntke, T. (2003). How does landscape context contribute to effects of habitat fragmentation on diversity and population density of butterflies? Journal of Biogeography, 30(6), 889-900. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2699.2003.00878.x
  14. Langemeyer, J., Wedgwood, D., McPhearson, T., Baro, F., Madsen, A. L., & Barton, D. N. (2020). Creating urban green infrastructure where it is needed - A spatial ecosystem service-based decision analysis of green roofs in Barcelona. Science of The Total Environment, 707, 135487.
  15. Li, F., Wang, R., Paulussen, J., & Liu, X. (2005). Comprehensive concept planning of urban greening based on ecological principles: a case study in Beijing, China. Landscape and Urban Planning, 72(4), 325-336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2004.04.002
  16. Morey, B., Deshkar, S., Sukhwani, V., Mitra, P., Shaw, R., Mitra, B. K., Sharma, D., Rahman, M. A., Dasgupta, R., & Das, A. K. (2022). Towards Circulating and Ecological Sphere in Urban Areas: An Indicator-Based Framework for Food-Energy-Water Security Assessment in Nagpur, India. Sustainability, 14(13), 8123.
  17. Normander, B., Levin, G., Auvinen, A.-P., Bratli, H., Stabbetorp, O., Hedblom, M., Glimskar, A., & Gudmundsson, G. A. (2012). Indicator framework for measuring quantity and quality of biodiversity-Exemplified in the Nordic countries. Ecological Indicators, 13(1), 104-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.05.017
  18. Park, S.-C. and B.-H. Han (2021). "Using the City Biodiversity Index as a Method to Protect Biodiversity in Korean Cities." Sustainability 13(20): 11284. [Korean Literature]
  19. Pe'Er, G., et al. (2011). "Breaking Functional Connectivity into Components: A Novel Approach Using an Individual-Based Model, and First Outcomes." PLoS ONE 6(8): e22355.
  20. Peng, Y. and Zhang, H. (2022). "Global Sustainable Development Evaluation Methods With Multiple-Dimensional: Sustainable Development Index." Frontiers in Environmental Science 10.
  21. Polasky, S., Nelson, E., Pennington, D., & Johnson, K. A. (2011). The Impact of Land-Use Change on Ecosystem Services, Biodiversity and Returns to Landowners: A Case Study in the State of Minnesota. Environmental and Resource Economics, 48(2), 219-242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-010-9407-0
  22. Roche, P. K. and Campagne, C. S. (2019). "Are expert-based ecosystem services scores related to biophysical quantitative estimates?" Ecological Indicators 106.
  23. Sallustio, L., De Toni, A., Strollo, A., Di Febbraro, M., Gissi, E., Casella, L., Geneletti, D., Munafo, M., Vizzarri, M., & Marchetti, M. (2017). Assessing habitat quality in relation to the spatial distribution of protected areas in Italy. J Environ Manage, 201, 129-137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.06.031
  24. Sowinska-Swierkosz. (2017). "Review of cultural heritage indicators related to landscape: Types, categorisation schemes and their usefulness in quality assessment." Ecological Indicators 81: 526-542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.06.029
  25. Sung, H.-C. (2015). "A Study on the Ecological Attributes Assessment and Comparison of Urban Parks according to Types of the Surrounding Green Areas." Journal of the Korea Society of Environmental Restoration Technology 18(2): 119-131.[Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.13087/kosert.2015.18.2.119
  26. Stanislav, A. and Chin, J. T. (2019). "Evaluating livability and perceived values of sustainable neighborhood design: New Urbanism and original urban suburbs." Sustainable Cities and Society 47: 101517.
  27. Tallis, H., Ricketts, T., Guerry, A., Wood, S., Sharp, R., Nelson, E., Ennaanay, D., Wolny, S., Olwero, N., Vigerstol, K. (2013). InVEST 2.5. 3 Users' Guide. The Natural Capital Project, Stanford, CA.
  28. Uchiyama, Y. and Kohsaka, R. (2019). "Application of the City Biodiversity Index to populated cities in Japan: Influence of the social and ecological characteristics on indicator-based management." Ecological Indicators 106.
  29. Walz, U. and Syrbe, R.-U. (2013). "Linking landscape structure and biodiversity." Ecological Indicators 31: 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.01.032
  30. Woo-sung, L., and Gab-sue, J. (2017). "Classification of Neighborhood Parks Considering Environmental Characteristics for effective Urban Park Management." Journal of the Korean Association of Geographic Information Studies 20(1): 26. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.11108/KAGIS.2017.20.1.026
  31. Wu, J. (2019). "Linking landscape, land system and design approaches to achieve sustainability." Journal of Land Use Science 14(2): 173-189. https://doi.org/10.1080/1747423X.2019.1602677
  32. Zhang, Z., Meerow, S., Newell, J. P., & Lindquist, M. (2019). Enhancing landscape connectivity through multifunctional green infrastructure corridor modeling and design. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 38, 305-317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2018.10.014