Analysis of the Status and Limitation of the Biotope Area Ratio on Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment and Environmental Impact Assessment

전략환경영향평가 및 환경영향평가 사업에서의 생태면적률 적용 현황 및 한계점 분석

  • Park, Jin-Han (Department Ecosystem Science and Management, Texas A&M University) ;
  • Lee, Dong-Kun (Department of Landscape Architecture and Rural Systems Engineering, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kim, Hyo-min (Smart City Strategy Planning Division, Korea Institute of Civil Engineering and Building Technology) ;
  • Sung, Hyun-Chan (Environmental GIS/RS Center, Korea University) ;
  • Jeon, Seong-Woo (Department of Environmental Science and Ecological Engineering, Korea University) ;
  • Choi, Jae-yong (Department of Environment and Forest Recourses, Chungnam National University) ;
  • Lee, Chang-Seok (Faculty of Chemistry and Bio-Environmental Sciences, Seoul Women's University) ;
  • Hwang, Sang-Yeon (Human Resources Development Division, National Institute of Environmental Human Resources Development)
  • 박진한 ;
  • 이동근 (서울대학교 조경지역시스템공학부) ;
  • 김효민 (한국건설기술연구원 스마트시티전략기획단) ;
  • 성현찬 (고려대학교 환경 GIS/RS 센터) ;
  • 전성우 (고려대학교 환경생태공학부) ;
  • 최재용 (충남대학교 산림환경자원학과) ;
  • 이창석 (서울여자대학교 화학생명환경과학부) ;
  • 황상연 (국립환경인력개발원 인력개발과)
  • Received : 2018.01.22
  • Accepted : 2018.02.26
  • Published : 2018.02.28


To improve the ecological function of urban areas, the guideline for applying the Biotope Area Ratio to the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was developed in 2005 and modified in the July, 2017. This study investigates whether the guideline has been actually practiced in the real world by searching reports including 648 cases of the Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment (SEIA) and 471 cases of the EIA. The results show that the 38% of SEIA and the 43% of EIA include sections about Biotope Area Ratio, and the 15% of SEIA and the 25 % of EIA are satisfied the threshold of the Biotope Area Ratio suggested by the guideline. The statistical analysis results show that this low level of practice was not improved through the modification of the guideline in 2017. This is because the guideline is forcibleness, its explanation is unclear, and stockholders' understanding of it lacks. In addition, lack of tracking management on SEIA and EIA also contributes to the low level of practice of the guideline. To promote the practice, the efforts to legislate and publicize the guideline are required.


Supported by : 환경부


  1. An K-H․Jang D-H and Choi Y-S. 2015. Quantitative Research on the Changes and Effects in the Urban Climate by the Space Type Elements and Plan for Usage - by Applying Biotops Area Ratio Calculation-. JOURNAL OF THE ARCHITECTURAL INSTITUTE OF KOREA Planning & Design. 31:3-10. (in Korean with English summary)
  2. Bolund P and Hunhammar S. 1999. Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecological Economics [Internet]. 29:293-301. Available from:
  3. Choi Y-G․Jung J-G, Shim U-B․Lee M-W․ Lim E-S․Kim M-S․Wang G-I․Seo Y-M and Park J-E. 2008. Climate Change and Sustainable Land Management Strategies in Korea. Korea Research Institute for Human Settlements. (in Korean with English summary)
  4. Heo, Miyoung and Changwon Lim. 2017. A Minimum Combination T -Test Method for Testing Differences in Population Means Based on a Group of Samples of Size One. The Korean Journal of Applied Statistics 30(2): 301-9. (in Korean with English summary)
  5. Keeley M. 2011. The green area ratio: An urban site sustainability metric. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. 54: 937-958.
  6. Kim G-S. 2009. A Study on the Difference of Users' View to Biotops Area Ratio Calculation in Urban Redevelopment of Apartment Housing. Journal of the Regional Association of Architectural Institute of Korea. 11:109-116. (in Korean with English summary)
  7. Kim J-H․Kim H-W․Kim J-T and Tea C-S. 2014. A Study on the Improvement of Ecological Environment Certification Criteria in the G-SEED. JOURNAL OF THE ARCHITECTURAL INSTITUTE OF KOREA Planning & Design. 30:195-202. (in Korean with English summary)
  8. Kim, Hag-Yeol․Joon-Kyung Yoon and JaeHyun Ahn. 2016. Analysis of Residents' Perceptions Before and After the Maintenance Project for Natural Disaster-Prone Areas. Journal of the Korean Urban Management Association 29(4): 197-216. (in Korean)
  9. Kim, Seung-Nyeon, and Sangjik Lee. 2018. Importance of Economic Factors in Korean ODA Distribution among African Countries. Journal of international area studies 21(5): 47-76. (in Korean with English summary)
  10. Lee D-K and Jeon S-W. 1997. A Conceptual Study of Sustainable City Indicators: with Priority Given to Environmental Indicators. Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment [Internet]. 6:33-46. Available from: link?id=A3204378 (in Korean with English summary)
  11. Lee D-K․Sung H-C․Jeon S-W․Choi J-Y․Kim W-H․Lee C-W․Lee C-S and Sung N-P. 2015. A Study on improvement plan of the Guideline for the Biotope Area Ratio. Ministry of Environment. (in Korean)
  12. Lee G․Jeong Y․Min B and Kim S. 2014. Study of Improving the Biotope Area Ratio System for Urban Agriculture Vitalization - Focus on Daylight Condition Analysis-. Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society. 15:7393-7402. (in Korean with English summary)
  13. Lee H-Y and No S-C, 2012, Advanced Statistical Analysis Theory, Goyang: Moonwoosa (in Korean)
  14. Lee I․Jeong D-S and Lee J-H. 2005. A Study to Improve the FAR Incentive System in the District Unit Plan of Seoul. Journal of the Urban Design Institute of Korea. 5:65-83. (in Korean with English summary)
  15. Lee J-E․Lee S and Lee M-H. 2010. Analyzing the Realized Characteristics of Development Density in Seoul. Journal of Korea Planners Association. 45:53-63. (in Korean with English summary)
  16. Ministry of Environment. 2005. A Guideline for Using the Biotope Area Ratio. (in Korean)
  17. Ministry of Environment. 2011. A Guideline for Using the Biotope Area Ratio. (in Korean)
  18. Ministry of Environment. 2016. A Guideline for Using the Biotope Area Ratio. (in Korean)
  19. Oh C-H and Kim H-S. 2006. Analysis about Biotope Area Ratio of New Town Housing Complex in the Metropolitan Area of Korea. Journal of Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture. 34:105-115. (in Korean with English summary)
  20. Shin, Hyun-Jun and Chang-Suk Oh. 2009. Attack Detection Method Using T-Test and Correlation Analysis. Journal of the Korea Entertainment Industry Association 3(3): 54-63. (in Korean with English summary)
  21. Shin, Woo-Hwa and Woo-Jin Shin. 2016. A Comparative Study on Before and After Building Dureu Resident-Centered Safe Community from Crime. Journal of Korea Planning Association 51(2): 19-30. (in Korean with English summary)
  22. Son D-P. 2015. The Preliminary Study for the Introduction of Biotope Area Ratio in Renewal Project Area -Focused on Cost-Effectiveness Analysis-. Journal of Korea Planners Association. 50:109-122. (in Korean with English summary)
  23. Song, In-Sub, 1997, Understanding of Statistics Including SPSS Analysis, Seoul: Hakjisa (in Korean)
  24. Szulczewska B․Giedych R․Borowski J․ Kuchcik M․Sikorski P․Mazurkiewicz A and Stamnczyk T. 2014. How much green is needed for a vital neighbourhood? In search for empirical evidence. Land Use Policy. 38:330-345.
  25. Wright Wendel HE․Zarger RK and Mihelcic JR. 2012. Accessibility and usability: Green space preferences, perceptions, and barriers in a rapidly urbanizing city in Latin America. Landscape and Urban Planning. 107:272-282.