Browse > Article

Quantitative Analysis of Seoul Green Space Network with the Application of Graph Theory  

Kang, Wan-Mo (Graduate School of Environmental Studies, Seoul National University)
Park, Chan-Ryul (Division of Forest Ecology, Korea Forest Research Institute)
Publication Information
Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology / v.25, no.3, 2011 , pp. 412-420 More about this Journal
Abstract
This study was conducted to quantitatively analyze the temporal change of green space network at multi-scales from 1975 to 2006 with the application of graph theory in Seoul, Korea. Remarkable change of connectivity was detected in green space networks at the scale ranging from 1,000 ~ 1,600 m during 30 years. Green spaces and their networks have been restoring after 1990 since forest areas had been fragmented in 1975. In 2006, we identified the important core habitat areas that can sustain diverse wildlife species and stepping stones composed of small patches that can link these core habitat areas. Green spaces showed high correlation with the relative importance value of green space connectivity. So, this study could graphically represent green space networks of Seoul City. Green spaces of core areas distributed at the northern and southern boundary, and those of stepping stones possessing the high value of betweenness centrality consisted at the middle, eastern and western boundary. These results indicate that green space network can be graphically and quantitatively explained by degree centrality, betweenness centrality and relative importance value of connectivity with the application of graph theory.
Keywords
BETWEENNESS CENTRALITY; BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION; NETWORK CENTRALITY;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Bunn, A., D. Urban and T. Keitt(2000) Landscape Connectivity: A Conservation Application of Graph Theory. J. Environ. Manage. 59: 265-278.   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Calabrese, J.M. and W.F. Fagan(2004) A Comparison-shopper's Guide to Connectivity Metrics. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2(10): 529-536.   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Donnelly, R. and J. Marzluff(2006) Relative Importance of Habitat Quantity, Structure, and Spatial Pattern to Birds in Urbanizing Environments. Urban. Ecosystems. 9(2): 99-117.   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Drinnan, I.(2005) The Search for Fragmentation Thresholds in a Southern Sydney Suburb. Biol. Conserv. 124(3): 339-349.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Andersson, E. and O. Bodin(2009) Practical Tool for Landscape Planning? An Empirical Investigation of Network Based Models of Habitat Fragmentation. Ecography 32: 123-132.   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Andren, H.(1994) Effects of Habitat Fragmentation on Birds and Mammals in Landscapes with Different Proportions of Suitable Habitat - a Review. Oikos 71: 355-366.   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Bengtsson, J., P. Angelstam, T. Elmqvist, U. Emanuelsson, C. Folke, M. Ihse, F. Moberg and M. Nystrom(2003) Reserves, Resilience and Dynamic Landscapes. Ambio. 32(6): 389-396.
8 Theobald, D.M.(2001) Topology Revisited: Representing Spatial Relations. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 15(8): 689-705.   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Achard, F., H.D. Eva, H.J. Stibig, P. Mayaux, J. Gallego, T. Richards and J.P. Malingreau(2002) Determination of Deforestation Rates of the World's Humid Tropical Forests. Science 297: 999-1002.   DOI
10 Walker, B.H. and D.A. Salt(2006) Resilience Thinking: Sustaining Ecosystems and People in a Changing World. Island Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
11 R Development Core Team(2010) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
12 Urban, D., E. Minor, E. Treml and R. Schick(2009) Graph Models of Habitat Mosaics. Ecol. Lett. 12(3): 260-273.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Taylor, P., L. Fahrig, K. Henein and G. Merriam(1993) Connectivity is a Vital Element of Landscape Structure. Oikos 68(3): 571-573.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Soule, M.E.(1986) Conservation Biology: The Science of Scarcity and Diversity. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
15 Sutherland, G., A. Harestad, K. Price and K. Lertzman(2000) Scaling of Natal Dispersal Distances in Terrestrial Birds and Mammals. Conserv. Ecol. 4(1): 16.
16 Pascual-Hortal, L. and S. Saura(2006) Comparison and Development of New Graph-based Landscape Connectivity Indices: Towards the Priorization of Habitat Patches and Corridors for Conservation. Landscape. Ecol. 21(7): 959-967.   DOI   ScienceOn
17 McGarigal, K. and B.J. Marks(1995) FRAGSTATS: Spatial Pattern Analysis Program for Quantifying Landscape Structure. USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report PNW-351, 122pp.
18 Minor, E. and D. Urban(2007) Graph Theory as a Proxy for Spatially Explicit Population Models in Conservation Planning. Ecol. Appl. 17(6): 1771-1782.   DOI   ScienceOn
19 Minor, E. and D. Urban(2008) A Graph-theory Framework for Evaluating Landscape Connectivity and Conservation planning. Conserv. Biol. 22(2): 297-307.   DOI   ScienceOn
20 Minor, E. and T. Lookingbill(2010) A Multiscale Network Analysis of Protected-Area Connectivity for Mammals in the United States. Conserv. Biol. 24(6): 1549-1558.   DOI   ScienceOn
21 Meffe, G.K., L.A. Nielsen, R.L. Knight and D.A. Schenborn(2002) Ecosystem Management: Adaptive, Community-based Conservation. Island Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
22 Foley, J., R. DeFries, G. Asner, C. Barford, G. Bonan, S. Carpenter, F. Chapin, M. Coe, G. Daily, H. Gibbs, J. Helkowski, T. Holloway, E. Howard, C. Kucharik, C. Monfreda, J. Patz, I. Prentice, N. Ramankutty and P. Snyder(2005) Global Consequences of Land Use. Science. 309: 570-574.   DOI   ScienceOn
23 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment(2003) Ecosystems and Human Well-being. Island Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
24 Korea Forest Service(2007) Basic Statistics of Korea Forest. Korea Forest Service, Daejon, Korea. (in Korean)
25 Lee, J.T. and S. Thompson(2005) Targeting Sites for Habitat Creation: an Investigation into Alternative Scenarios. Landsc. Urban. Plan. 71: 17-28.   DOI   ScienceOn
26 Manel, S., M.K. Schwartz, G. Luikart and P. Taberlet(2003) Landscape Genetics: Combining Landscape Ecology and Population Genetics. Trends. Ecol. Evol. 18: 189-197.   DOI   ScienceOn
27 Hilty, J., W. Lidicker, A. Merenlender and A. Dobson(2006) Corridor Ecology: The Science and Practice of Linking Landscapes for Biodiversity Conservation. Island Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
28 Jeon, S.W., J.Y. Chun, H.C. Seong, W.K. Song and J.H. Park(2010) A Study on the Setting Criteria and Management Area for the National Ecological Network. J. Korean Env. Res. Tech. 13(5): 154-171. (in Korean with English abstract)
29 Joly, P., C. Moreand and A. Cohas(2003) Habitat Fragmentation and Amphibian Conservation: Building a Tool for Assessing Landscape Matrix Connectivity. C. R. Biol. 326: 132-139.
30 Freeman, L.(1979) Centrality in Social Networks: Conceptual Clarification. Soc. Networks. 1(3): 215-239.
31 Galpern, P., M, Manseau and A. Fall(2011) Patch-based Graphs of Landscape Connectivity: A Guide to Construction, Analysis and Application for Conservation. Biol. Conserv. 144(1): 44-55.   DOI   ScienceOn
32 Fahrig, L.(2001) How Much Habitat is Enough? Biol. Conserv. 100: 65-74.   DOI   ScienceOn
33 Estrada, E. and O. Bodin(2008) Using Network Centrality Measures to Manage Landscape Connectivity. Ecol. Appl. 18(7): 1810-1825.   DOI   ScienceOn
34 Fall, A., M. Fortin, M. Manseau and D. O'Brien(2007) Spatial Graphs: Principles and Applications for Habitat Connectivity. Ecosystems. 10(3): 448-461.   DOI   ScienceOn