Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14249/eia.2015.24.3.217

User assessment about ecological stream restoration of Jeonjucheon - Focused on Environmental Characteristics and Importance-Satisfaction Analysis -  

Lim, Hyunjeong (Graduate school of Jeonbuk National University)
Lee, Myungwoo (Jeonbuk National University)
Jeong, Moonsun (Cheongju University)
Publication Information
Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment / v.24, no.3, 2015 , pp. 217-232 More about this Journal
Abstract
This study is to examine the section-based stream management with environmental characteristics and user monitoring. In Jeonjucheon, upstream section located near to Jeonju Hanok village has very good water quality and natural stream landscape. In case of mid/down streams, water quality is good and heavy concentration of facility leads to high use rates of these sections. The questionnaire consists of 5 parts: user characteristics, use behavior, citizen participation, importance rank, and Importance-Satisfaction(IS). 383 out of 454 responses with listwise deletion are used for demographic analysis and IS Analysis. In terms of citizen participation through 'ecological experience activity' and 'stream stewardship activity', 'occasional participation' shows the average of 78% in all three sections. For importance rank, the results arranged in order of priority show 'water quality' > 'green corridor' > 'trail' in up/down streams and 'water quality' > 'vegetation management' > 'trail' in midstream. Therefore, 'water quality' appears to be the most important variable among 13 variables. At last, the results of ISA indicate that all 10 variables need to be improved as satisfaction is lower than importance. In addition, 'plant management' variable falls into 'concentrate here' quadrant where importance is high and satisfaction is low.
Keywords
Jeonjucheon; user characteristics; Importance-Satisfaction; stream management;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 5  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 강석진. 2014. 지방도시 수변공간 이용자 행태 및 현황분석에 관한 연구: 남강, 태화강, 금호강을 중심으로, 한국농촌건축학회지, 16(1), 53-61.(Kang SJ. 2014. A Study of Analysis of Present Condition and Users' behavior on Waterfront in Local City: Focusing on Nam River, Taewha river, Gumho river, Journal of the Korean institute of rural, 16(1), 53-61.)
2 김동찬, 김도경, 김승환. 2010. 대구시 신천 둔치의 이용후 평가에 관한 연구, 한국인간식물환경학회지, 13(6), 75-85.(Kim DC, Kim DK, Kim SW. 2010. A Study on Postoccupancy Evaluation of Sincheon Riverside in Daegu City, Journal of Korean Society for People, Plants and Environment, 13(6), 75-85.)
3 김명진. 2007. 생태하천 복원 방안, 한국환경영향평가지, 16(1), 59-68.(Kim MJ. 2007. Suggestions for Ecological Stream Restoration, Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment, 16(1), 59-68.)
4 김혜진, 이경훈. 2012. 서울시 하천수변보행공간 이용만족도의 영향요인 분석: 성내천, 양재천, 청계천을 중심으로, 대한건축학회논문집 계획계, 28(11), 143-150.(Kim HJ, Lee KH. 2012. Analysis of Factors Affecting Satisfaction for Using the Pedestrian Space of the Rivers in Seoul- Focusing on Seongnaecheon, Yangjaecheon, Cheonggyecheon, Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea: Planning & Design, 28(11), 143-150.)
5 노용호, 김병용, 김학윤. 2010. 도심 생태관광지 방문객의 만족과 행동의도: 대구시 신천을 중심으로, 한국지역지리학회지, 16(3), 315-323.(Roh YH, Kim BY, Kim HY. 2010. Urban Ecotourism Site Visitors' satisfaction and Behavioral Intentions to Revisit: A Case Study of the Sincheon Ecotourism Site in Daegu, Journal of the Korean Association of Regional Geographers, 16(3), 315-323.)
6 물환경정보시스템, http://water.nier.go.kr/waterMeasurement/selectWater.do(Water information system. http://water.nier.go.kr/waterMeasurement/selectWater.do)
7 박종영, 김수환, 고명훈, 오민기, 신진철. 2009. 전주천의 자연형 하천 복원에 따른 어류상 변화 및 군집분석, 한국환경생태학회지, 23(5), 381-391.(Park JY, Kim SH, Ko MH, Oh MK, Shin JC. 2009. Change of Ichthyofauna and Fish Community on Natural Stream Restoration in Jeonju-chon Stream, Jeollabuk-do, Korean journal of environment and ecology, 23(5), 381-391.)
8 변무섭, 오현경, 김영하, 김연. 2005. 전주천일대의 관속식물상과 도시화지수, 한국환경생태학회지, 19(3), 231-245.(Beon MS, Oh HK, Kim YH, Kim Y. 2005. Vascular Plants and Urbanization Index in the Jeionju Stream Area, Korean Journal Environment Ecology, 19(3), 231-245.)
9 전주생태하천협의회. 2009. 전주천 10년의 기록.(Jeonju Eco River Council(JERC). 2009. History of Jeonjucheions' 10 years.)
10 전주생태하천협의회. 2014. 전주생태하천협의회 2014년도 사업보고서.(Jeonju Eco River Council(JERC). 2014. Jeonju Eco River Council 2014 Project Report.)
11 양진우, 백경훈, 여운상. 2012. 도시하천 환경평가 및 지속관리방안: 온천천을 대상으로, 부산발전연구원.(Yang JW, Beak KH, Yeo WS. 2012. Environmental Analysis and Sustainable Management of Urban Streams, Busan Development Institute.)
12 이명우, 박종영, 변무섭, 황보철, 송동하, 양현. 2007. 전주시 자연형 하천의 구간별 특성 및 효과분석, 전북지역환경기술 개발센터.(Lee MW, Park JY, Beon MS, Hwang BC, Song DH, Yang H. 2007. Characteristics of Each Section of Natural stream in Jeonju and The Effectiveness Analysis, Jeonbuk Regional Environmental Technology Development Center.)
13 Crompton JL, Duray NA. 1985. An Investigation of the Relative Efficacy of Four Alternative Approaches to Importance-Performance Analysis, Journal of the Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 13(4), 69-80.   DOI
14 이민욱. 2007. 도시 자연형 하천 친수공간시설 만족도 분석에 관한 연구, 석사논문, 한양대학교 도시대학원.(Lee MW. 2007. A Study on the Satisfaction of Hydrophilic Space Facility in Natural Stream in Urban areas: Focused on the Natural Stream Cases of Seoul, Master's Thesis, Hanyang University.)
15 최정우. 2008. 중요도-성취도 분석을 활용한 한강공원 관리운영방안, 한국도시행정학회지, 21(3), 135-155.(Choi KW. 2008. An Application of Importance-Performance Analysis to Management of Hangang Park, The Journal of the Korean Urban Management Association, 21(3), 135-155.)
16 한국환경공단. 2014. 생태하천 복원사업 사업효과 분석 연구.(Korea Environment Corporation(KEC). 2014. Analysis on Effectiveness of Construction of Ecological Stream Restoration.)
17 Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group(FISRWG). 1998. Stream Corridor Restoration: Principles, Processes, and Practices. GPO Item No. 0120-A; SuDocs No. A 57.6/2:EN 3/PT.653.
18 Martilla JA, James JC. 1977. Importance- Performance Analysis, Journal of Marketing, 41(1), 77-79.   DOI
19 Tonge J, Moore SA. 2007. Importance-Satisfaction Analysis for Marine-Park Hinterlands: A Western Australian Case Study, Tourism Management 28, 768-776.   DOI