• Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.43 no.1
• /
• pp.69-81
• /
• 2015

Under the premise that parks have been a performing field of welfare ideology that benefits the citizen from the past, the present study began with a basic question on what substance a park has and how it has worked. Therefore, this study tried to find out the theoretic background that can explain the roles of a park as an instrument for welfare, of which topic is currently being discussed, and examine how the ideology in the debate regarding welfare characteristics of parks are differentiated from those of social welfare. In addition, this study divided the process of development of parks defined by Galen Cranz in an attempt to view how welfare benefits offered by parks have changed in their development and looked into the roles and types of welfare functions that parks provided to the citizens under a certain social situation by period. Furthermore, the characteristics and development of the ideology underlying a welfare park were examined by function and element in its progression. The results of this study are as follows. The functions that parks have performed so far can be classified into three categories. First, they have a remedial function. Parks have given direct services to 'the socially disadvantaged' such as relief, fostering, and rehabilitation. Second, parks have played a preventive function. They aim to reinforce the functions of individual, family, group, and community. Third, they have exerted a developmental function. They function to promote change of society in a way for it to contribute to social development. Looking into the roles and functions of parks from the perspective of their beneficiary class and benefits, the following were discovered. First, the beneficiaries of welfare characteristics in parks have expanded to the general public from the poor class, and the benefits of parks have spread into the public including the underprivileged in a real sense. Second, the significance of welfare characteristics in parks has also changed from literal benefits to caring for basic human rights. Third, the purpose of welfare characteristics in parks has changed from providing minimal conditions to optimal conditions. At its beginning, the ideology of welfare in parks remained ideal, confining itself to their idealistic characteristics; but as time went on, they created several social benefits in response to various social demands, developing into a field where welfare ideology manifests and is realized in an active manner. Furthermore, it was witnessed that the parks and welfare of the present times are standing at the point of contact for participation and universal well-being. The present study reconsidered the meaning and value of parks from perspective of them as a provider of welfare benefits as well as examined how the welfare ideology of parks is connected to practice. By doing so, this study discovered the various roles, values, and ideology that parks should bear in the future. Therefore, this study is expected to be a good example for future research related to the topic.

• The Journal of Engineering Geology
• /
• v.32 no.4
• /
• pp.437-448
• /
• 2022

This work aims to assess the threat to human health of hazardous materials in groundwater that is used domestically and for drinking. Two distinct sub-assessments are considered: cancer and non-cancer risk. The studied groundwater is in an agricultural area of Gyeongnam Province, Korea, and is contaminated by arsenic at a mean level of 16.27 ㎍/L, far greater than the WHO guideline (10 ㎍/L for drinking water). We collected groundwater data from the National Groundwater Information Center (gims.go.kr) and assessed the risk to human health following the methodology of the United States Environmental Protection Agency. We considered three exposure scenarios: domestic use (scenario 1) and drinking use with different doses (scenarios 2 and 3). Scenario 1 had a median hazard quotient (HQ) of 0.77 and a cancer risk (CR) of 0.013. Scenario 2 had a median HQ of 0.08 and a CR of 3.69 × 10^-5, and the values for scenario 3 were 0.11 and 4.82 × 10^-5, respectively. Scenario 1 is likely the most hazardous to human health. Further study of the origin of arsenic in groundwater in the study area is required, as are remedial measures to mitigate its health effects.