• Imaging Science in Dentistry
• /
• v.53 no.1
• /
• pp.27-34
• /
• 2023

Purpose: The aim of this study was to clarify the influence of training with a different kind of lesion on the performance of a target model. Materials and Methods: A total of 310 patients(211 men, 99 women; average age, 47.9±16.1 years) were selected and their panoramic images were used in this study. We created a source model using panoramic radiographs including mandibular radiolucent cyst-like lesions (radicular cyst, dentigerous cyst, odontogenic keratocyst, and ameloblastoma). The model was simulatively transferred and trained on images of Stafne's bone cavity. A learning model was created using a customized DetectNet built in the Digits version 5.0 (NVIDIA, Santa Clara, CA). Two machines(Machines A and B) with identical specifications were used to simulate transfer learning. A source model was created from the data consisting of ameloblastoma, odontogenic keratocyst, dentigerous cyst, and radicular cyst in Machine A. Thereafter, it was transferred to Machine B and trained on additional data of Stafne's bone cavity to create target models. To investigate the effect of the number of cases, we created several target models with different numbers of Stafne's bone cavity cases. Results: When the Stafne's bone cavity data were added to the training, both the detection and classification performances for this pathology improved. Even for lesions other than Stafne's bone cavity, the detection sensitivities tended to increase with the increase in the number of Stafne's bone cavities. Conclusion: This study showed that using different lesions for transfer learning improves the performance of the model.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Environmental Restoration Technology
• /
• v.20 no.5
• /
• pp.43-58
• /
• 2017

This study aims to provide basic understanding for evaluating the quantitative and qualitative progress of national protected areas, through the theoretical review of Aichi Biodiversity Target 11 in order to comply with recommendations of international community and to conserve biodiversity. As a result of the study, Aichi Biodiversity Target 11 sets out the specific contents that the Parties should achieve for protected areas by identifying them as temporal and spatial goals. The temporal goal, the time schedule for achieving the goal, is 2020, and the spatial goal is divided into quantitative expansion goals and qualitative improvement goals. The quantitative expansion goals present the target coverage of protected areas separately terrestrial and marine. The qualitative improvement goals include the target areas for conservation and five conservation considerations. The conservation targets focus on the important areas with regard to biodiversity and ecosystem services. The five conservation considerations mean effective management, equitable management, ecological representativeness, connectivity, and integration into the landscape and seascape for protected areas. Finally, it suggests that two tracks of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures(OECMs) should be used as conservation measures to build an integrated system. The results of this study can be applied to quantitative and qualitative evaluation methods for protected areas and it can contribute to achieve quantitative expansion goals and qualitative improvement goals for them.

• Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology
• /
• v.34 no.6
• /
• pp.601-609
• /
• 2020

This study aims to draw suggestions for establishing the Post-2020 national policy direction and goals related to protected areas in Korea by analyzing the trends of major discussion issues on protected areas in the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and reviewing the achievement progress of the Aichi target-11. Regarding the CBD decisions on protected areas, two decisions (Decisions II/7 and II/8) were adopted in 1995, and then the Program of Work on Protected Areas (PoWPA), which presented an ideal blueprint for protected areas, was adopted at the 7th Conference of the Parties (COP) in 2004. At the 10th COP in 2010, the "Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and the Aichi Biodiversity Target" (Decision X/2) was adopted along with the Decision X/31, which presented ten key issues related to protected areas. The global outcomes of the Aichi Target-11 include 15% of the earth's land area and 7.4% of the ocean being designated as protected areas. In Korea, 16.63% of the land and 2.12% of the ocean have been designated as protected areas. However, the outcomes of the effective and equitable management, protection of areas important to biodiversity and ecosystem services, and identifying "Other effective area-based conservation measures" (OECMs) and linking them with protected areas have been found to be significantly short of global goals. The first draft of the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (Post-2020 GBF) prepared in January 2020 presented multi-step objectives. They included protecting at least 60% of particularly important sites for biodiversity through protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, at least 30% of the entire land and sea areas, and at least 10% of them under strict protection by 2030. The Updated Zero drafted in August 2020 concisely set out one quantitative goal of at least 30% of the globe by 2030, adding qualitative goals that these areas should be protected and conserved through "well connected and effective system of protected areas and OECMs at least 30 % of the planet with the focus on areas particularly important for biodiversity." Based on the draft Post-2020 GBF's targets related to protected areas and Korea's national targets reflecting the current state of Korea and established national plans, we suggest the national targets "to protect and conserve at least 30% of the land area and 10% of the marine area and to strengthen the means of qualitative achievement by establishing sub-targets through an effective system of protected areas and OECMs by 2030.".

• Journal of the Korean Society of Environmental Restoration Technology
• /
• v.21 no.3
• /
• pp.57-65
• /
• 2018

The study is conducted to establish the National Protected Areas Integrated System(NPAIS) which includes National Protected Areas(NPAs) and other conservation measures in terms of effective ways for biodiversity conservation. Additionally, it is carried out to evaluate progress toward quantitative expansion goals in Aichi biodiversity Target 11. The NPAIS consists of NPAs and other effective area-based conservation measures(OECMs). There are two different types of OECMs. OECMs type I, including water-source protection Areas(WPA), riparian zones(RZ), fishery-resource protection zones (FPZ), and urban natural park zones(UNPZ), is a potential protected area which is recommended to be incorporated into the NPAs for effective management. OECMs type II means development restriction zones(DRZ), natural recreation forests(NRF), and buffer zones for Korea national arboretum(BKNA). As a result of evaluating the quantitative expansion goals of the NPAIS, terrestrial and inland water protected areas exceed 17% of the quantitative goal in Aichi biodiversity Target 11. The larger the area of individual OECMs and the lower the degree of overlap with NPAs, the higher the contribution of them to the terrestrial and inland water protected areas. DRZ contributes to enlarge more than 3% of quantitative expansion. And RZ and NRF contribute more than 1%. The marine protected areas are expanded by $1,425km^2$ through FPZ, but the expanded area is very small as comparing with the total marine area. It adds only 0.321% to the quantitative expansion. The rest of OECMs also has very poor quantitative expansion contributions in the marine area. Consequently, the NPAIS is effective for quantitative expansion of land areas, but not for marine areas.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Environmental Restoration Technology
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.83-94
• /
• 2018

This study presents an integrated evaluation method to assess the level of achievement of quantitative expansion goals and qualitative improvement goals based on the Aichi Biodiversity Target 11 for quantitatively expanding and qualitatively improving national protected areas. The quantitative evaluation indicators for national protected areas are the percentage of terrestrial and inland water areas protected and the percentage of marine and coastal areas protected. The quantitative evaluation indicators for national protected areas are selected as 6 indicators: 1) ecologically important areas, 2) ecological representativeness, 3) management effectiveness, 4) connectivity, 5) social equity and 6) integration. Ecologically important areas are an indicator which evaluates how many areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services are included in national protected areas. Ecological representativeness is to assess how well national protected areas represent the ecosystem. Management effectiveness is an indicator which evaluates how effectively national protected areas are conserved and managed, and connectivity is an indicator to assess how well national protected areas are connected. Social equity is evaluating how equitably national protected areas are managed and the integration is assessing how much national protected areas are integrated into the wilder landscape and seascape. This study is significant in that it provides a perspective of qualitative improvement as well as quantitative expansion of national protected areas for biodiversity conservation through accurately understanding Aichi Biodiversity Target 11.

• Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology
• /
• v.31 no.6
• /
• pp.586-594
• /
• 2017

This study was carried out to identify the potential protected areas recognized by experts to conform to the international definition of protected areas for effective implementation of CBD Aichi Target-11. A policy forum of 13 experts on the protected area was formed and conducted four forums, two surveys, and examination in the context of international perspective to identify four potential protected areas including the water source protection area, riparian buffer zone, fishery resources protected area, and urban natural park area. Excluding the existing protected areas, the total size of the potential protected areas was about $5,643.9km^2$ composed of the terrestrial areas of $3,117.9km^2$ and the marine areas of $2,526km^2$. As such, we can expect the expansion of coverage of national protected areas by up to 3.11% of the terrestrial land and up to 0.67% of the terrestrial marine area. This study is meaningful in that it provides the fundamental information to achieve the national target of protected areas in response to CBD Aichi Target-11. Further research on improving the protected areas qualitatively and quantitatively and identifying and linking with other effective regional OECM are required to enhance the national protected area system.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment & Safety
• /
• v.29 no.3
• /
• pp.270-280
• /
• 2023

The creation of marine protected areas is an important aspect of marine ecosystem sustainability. However, South Korea has not achieved its Aichi Biodiversity Target to designate 10% of its sea as marine protected by 2020. Local residents have strong opposition to the designation of protected areas in South Korea; there has been little trust in the government since the 1970s, when residents felt that their property rights were being ignored in favor of creating national parks. Here, we present a case where creation of a marine protected area was led by residents of TongYeong City. The success of a participation income project to remove marine debris in the city seems to be an important factor that led to the designation of the marine protected area. The case of TongYeong City is compared with that of nearby Geoje City, where an ecologically important stream has not been designated as a wetland protection area, although a similar participation income project enrolled the city's residents. The comparison provides a tentative assessment of the conditions needed to increase trust among residents. The results suggest that, if the projects are well-designed and well-managed, participation income projects to remove marine debris can be effective in building trust among stakeholders in potential marine protected areas.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Environmental Restoration Technology
• /
• v.20 no.6
• /
• pp.93-105
• /
• 2017

This study aims to establish the integrated system of national protected areas by identifying OECMs which are not officially recognized as protected areas, but effectively and enduringly deliver the conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem service to expand them up to the level recommended by the international community. In order to identify them, candidates for OECMs were listed and it was developed a three-step systematic screening tool based on preconditions, essential characteristics, and sustainable means for conservation outcome of them. As a result of using the tool that considers domestic conditions, seven areas which included Development Restriction Zones, Urban Natural Park Areas, Fishery Resources Protection Zones, Riparian Zones, Natural Recreation Forest Zones, Water Source Protection Areas, and Buffer Zones for Korea National Arboretum were selected as OECMs. And the system of national protected areas was built by integrating them with national protected areas(NPA). Compared with the NPA, the system has been expanded by them and has reached to 17.88%, exceeding the target of 17% for terrestrial and inland water protections. It was proven that they were very effective in enlarging these protections. However, it failed to contribute to the target for marine protections. The expansion of marine protected areas requires different approaches, such as discovering new types of marine protected areas or linking them to biologically important marine areas all over the world.

• Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology
• /
• v.34 no.5
• /
• pp.436-445
• /
• 2020

The number of protected areas has been steadily increased in Korea to achieve Aichi Target 11, and there are studies on potential protected areas that required additional designation. However, there has been an insufficient assessment of the complementarity of protected areas to conserve biodiversity effectively. This study identified the potential habitat areas using the species distribution model for plant species from the 3rd National Ecosystem Survey and compared the plant species abundance in the existing protected area and the potential protected areas using the similarity indices, such as the Jaccard index, Sorenson index, and Bray-Curtis index. As a result, we found that the complementarity of the existing protected areas and most potential protected areas were low, leading to the preservation of similar plant species. Only the buffer zone for Korea National Arboretum had high complementarity and thus is important to conserve some species with the other protected areas. This study confirmed that it was necessary to select additional protected areas outside the existing or potential protected areas to protect plant species with a low inclusion ratio of potential habitats within the protected area. This study is significant because it identified the ecological representativeness of each protected area to examine if the individual protected area can conserve unique and various species and proposed a method of finding candidate areas for additional conservation spatially. The findings of this study can be a valuable reference for the qualitative improvement of protected areas through the complementarity assessments, including animals and the effectiveness assessment study of protected areas using the National Ecosystem Survey data in the future.

• Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology
• /
• v.31 no.3
• /
• pp.337-343
• /
• 2017

This study is going to contribute the activation of ecosystem services written in the 3rd National Basic Plan for Nature Conservation(2016~2025) in Korea. Meanwhile we considered the benefits that the nature has given to the humankind as free goods or services which we may consume traditionally without due payment therefore. But on account of the expansion of cities and expedition of development, as the carrying capacity of the nature has been breached, people have come to try to restore and enhance artificially such vulnerable capacity. It is necessary to compensate the opportunity cost which the land owners or occupiers have to pay for conservation and maintenance of natural capitals which yield the ecosystem services. Therefore the institutionalization of ecosystem services should be established that the consumers who enjoy such services should share the interest from enjoying services with the land owners or occupiers who produce the ecosystem services, under the legal system which will make it possible to connect the benefit sharing with the conservation of environment. However it is the first task that the present legal system could not realize the fair and equitable benefit sharing between the producers and consumers of ecosystem services. And the second task in such legal system is that the value of ecosystem services could not be fully considered in the process of development planning. According to the analysis of this study, the institutionalization of ecosystem services in the government side and the civilian side could be realized to somewhat extent, although not sufficient. Especially the transactions of ecosystem services through the private contract among stakeholder are possible in the course of development planning or without any relevancy to a development project. The final task in the institutionalization of ecosystem services is how to assess the ecosystem services and to value the economic benefits therefrom on the basis of what kinds of procedures relating to some development processes. To overcome such difficulties, it is necessary that the state, trend and change of ecosystem services confronting with a developing project should be assessed concretely at the threshold of development. It is possible to integrate the ecosystem services into the environmental impact assessment(IEA), not by way of the Act of IEA, but by way of the Decree thereof.