한국습지학회지 (Journal of Wetlands Research)

  • 제18권4호
  • /
  • Pages.456-464
  • /
  • 2016
  • /
  • 1229-6031(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2384-0056(eISSN)
한국습지학회 (Korean Wetlands Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

생태지리적 입지에 따른 내륙습지 가치평가

Value Assessment for Inland Wetlands according to Ecological Geographic Distribution

  • 이정환 (국립환경과학원 국립습지센터) ;
  • 임란영 (국립환경과학원 국립습지센터) ;
  • 이관규 (강원대학교 조경학과) ;
  • 박현철 (강원대학교 조경학과)
  • Lee, Jung-Hwan (National Wetlands Center, National Institute of Environmental Research) ;
  • Im, Ran-Young (National Wetlands Center, National Institute of Environmental Research) ;
  • Lee, Gwan-Gyu (Department of Landscape Architecture, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Park, Hyun-Chul (Department of Landscape Architecture, Kangwon National University)
  • 투고 : 2016.07.13
  • 심사 : 2016.11.08
  • 발행 : 2016.11.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

한국은 2000년부터 2010년까지 전국을 조사하여 총 1,916개소의 내륙습지 인벤토리를 구축한 바 있다. 본 연구는 국가보호지역과 내륙습지와의 입지상관관계를 분석함으로써 내륙습지의 관리가치 측면을 평가하고자 하였다. 그 결과, 내륙습지의 상당수가 자연환경의 보호가치가 높아 국가가 보호지역으로 지정하여 관리하는 지역 내에 입지(527개소, 31.61%)하고 있는 것으로 나타났다. 보호지역 반경 1km 까지 범위를 넓혀 보면 959개소로 전체 국가내륙습지의 57.53%에 해당하는 수가 보호지역 내 및 인근에 입지하고 있음을 알 수 있다. 그 중에서도 하천수계 반경 1km 내에 46.79%가 분포하여 보호지역 내 분포하는 습지 중 81.33%를 기록하고 있어서 현재의 내륙습지의 입지는 대부분 하천수계에 접하여 있는 것으로 분석되었다. 각종 보호지역과의 이격거리를 분석하여 중첩 분석한 결과를 상, 중, 하로 평점구분하고 내륙습지와의 입지관계를 분석한 결과, 보호가치가 '상'인 지역에 분포한 습지의 개소가 998(59.87%)에 해당하였다. 보호가치가 '하'인 지역에도 289개소(17.34%)가 분포되어 있는데, 이는 인공화된 지역에 입지한 습지로써 환경압력에 더욱 노출되어 있는 습지임을 의미하므로 훼손방지를 위한 대책수립을 고려해야 할 내륙습지로 의사결정할 수 있다.

Korea established an inventory of 1,916 sites of inland wetlands during a nationwide investigation from 2000 to 2010. If inland wetlands is included in or near various protected areas designated by the government, it can be selected as a wetland to be managed with priority. This study evaluated the aspect of management of inland wetlands by analyzing the correlation between locations of national protected areas and inland wetlands. As a result, it was shown that a considerable percentage of current inland wetland was located in areas that were designated and managed as protected areas by the government, as they had a high value of natural environment protection (527 sites, 31.61 %). When the range was widened to a radius of 1 km for protected areas, 959 sites were included and 57.53 % of sites were located in or nearby the protected areas. Among them, 46.79 % of sites were distributed up to or within a 1 km radius of waterside areas and rivers; it accounted for 81.33 % of wetlands located in protected areas. Therefore, it was found that locations of current inland wetlands were mostly in contact with rivers. The results of overlay analysis were classified into high, medium and low; the correlation of location with inland wetlands was analyzed through the analysis of separation distance of various protected areas. The number of wetlands located in areas of a 'high' value of protection was 998 (59.87 %); 289 sites (17.34 %) were distributed in areas of a 'low' value of protection. This implies that these wetlands are located in artificial areas and are more exposed to environmental pressures. Thus, these wetlands could be determined as inland wetlands, which we considered for the establishment of measures to prevent damage.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Banai, R (1993). Fuzziness in geographical information systems: contributions from the analytic hierarchy process, International J. of Geographical Information Systems, 7(4), pp. 315-329. https://doi.org/10.1080/02693799308901964
  2. Cowardin, LM, Carter, V, Golet, FC and LaRoe, ET (1979). Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States, US Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS, 79(31), pp. 131.
  3. Cylinder, PD, Bogdan, KM, Davis, EM and Herson, AI (1995). Wetlands Regulation: A Complete Guide to Federal and California Programs, Solano Press Books, California, USA.
  4. Graymore MLM, Wallis, AM and Richards, AJ (2009). An index of regional sustainability: A GIS-based multiple criteria analysis decision support system for progressing sustainability, Ecological Complexity, 6(4), pp. 453-462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecocom.2009.08.006
  5. Kim, TS, Jeong, JW, Moon, SG, Yang, HS and Yang, BG (2013). Introduction of national mid-term fundamental plan for wetlands conservation and management, J. of Wetlands Research, 15(4), pp. 519-527. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.17663/JWR.2013.15.4.519
  6. Lee, GG (2011). Distributional characteristics and improvements for wildlife Protection Areas in South Korea, J. of Environment Impact Assessment, 20(5), pp. 685-695. [Korean Literature]
  7. Mistry of Environment (2011). The 3rd Inland Wetlands Investigation Guidelines Research, Sejong, Korea. [Korean Literature]
  8. Mistry of Environment (2013). The Current Situation of registration of wetland conservation area and ramsar wetland (2012.12), Sejong, Korea. [Korean Literature]
  9. Mitsch, WJ and Gosselink, JG (1993). Wetlands, 2nd Edition, Wiley, New York, USA.
  10. Mitsch, WJ and Gosselink, JG (2000). The value of wetlands: importance of scale and landscape setting, Ecological Economics, 35(1), pp. 25-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(00)00165-8
  11. National Wetlands Center (2013). The 1st Inland Wetlands Monitoring Guidelines, Changnyeong, Korea. [Korean Literature]
  12. Neter, J, Kutner, M, Wasserman, W and Nachtsheim, C (1996). Applied Linear Statistical Models 4th Edition, Irwin, Chicago, USA.
  13. Neter, J, Wasserman, W and Kutner, MH (1990). Applied Linear Statistical Models: Regression, Analysis of Variance, and Experimental Designs, Irwin, Homewood, USA.
  14. Vladimir, S, Wangb, W and Hardle, WK (2013). Local quantile regression, J. of Statistical Planning and Inference, 143(7), pp. 1109-1129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspi.2013.03.008
  15. You, JH, Jung, SG, Choi, WY and Lee, WS (2006). Rank Decision of Ecological Environment Assessment Field Introducing Fuzzy Integral, J. of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture, 34(5), pp. 39-51. [Korean Literature]