Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture (한국조경학회지)

The Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture (한국조경학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Analysis of the Priority of Evaluation Criteria and Detailed Index for Selecting Street Trees

가로수 선정 평가기준과 세부지표의 중요도 분석

  • Received : 2020.12.23
  • Accepted : 2021.01.19
  • Published : 2021.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Street trees improve the cityscape and air quality, reduce heat islands, and create wildlife habitats. Hence, they are essential parts of a city's green infrastructure. Therefore, several trees that are well adapted to the urban environment were planted. However, this caused the problem of simple trees being planted around the world. This study is to select more various street trees. To accomplish this, evaluation criteria and detailed indexes were created. The importance was indicated through the Analytic Hierarchy Process. For commercial roads, the priority of landscape characteristics is 0.2640, and among detailed indicators, the priority of shape is 0.1245. For work roads, the priority of landscape characteristics is 0.2496, and among detailed indicators, the priority of shape is 0.1177. For work roads, the priority of characteristics of civil service is 0.2250, and among detailed indicators, the priority of shape is 0.1177. For general roads, the priority of maintenance characteristics is 0.2479, and among detailed indicators, the priority of shape is 0.1062. For historical and cultural roads, the priority of regional characteristics is 0.3488, and among detailed indicators, the priority of regional characteristics is 0.1643. For ecological roads, the priority of ecosystem characteristics is 0.3488, and among detailed indicators, the priority of the diversity of species is 0.1643. For automotive-only roads, the priority of the ecosystem characteristics is 0.4639, and among detailed indicators, the priority of reducing emissions is 0.1643. This study will provide objective criteria for the selection of street trees.

가로수는 도시환경개선과 환경회복기능, 그리고 차단된 도시녹지의 연결통로로 소생태계 서식처 제공의 역할 등 녹색 네트워크의 핵심 및 자연성 회복의 수단으로 중요성이 더욱 강조되고 있다. 그러나 가로수는 일반적으로 도시환경에 적응이 우수한 몇 가지 수종을 선별하여 대단위 식재를 해오고 있어 전 세계적으로 편중화에 대한 문제가 지적되었다. 본 연구는 가로수 선정을 위한 평가기준과 세부지표를 마련하고, 계층적 분석기법(AHP:analytic hierarchy process)을 통해 그 중요도를 도출하였다. 가로유형별 중요도를 보면 상업가로는 경관향상성이 0.2640, 세부지표는 수형이 0.1245로 가장 높았다. 업무가로도 경관향상성이 0.2496, 세부지표는 수형이 0.1177로 가장 높아 상업가로와 유사한 결과를 보였다. 주거가로는 시민편의성이 0.2250, 세부지표는 수형이 0.0936으로 가장 높았다. 일반생활가로는 유지관리성이 0.2479, 수형이 0.1062이었다. 역사경관가로는 지역특성이 0.3488, 세부지표는 상징성이 0.1586, 기념성이 0.1095로 높았다. 생태네트워크가로는 생태계균형성이 0.4266, 세부지표는 종다양성이 0.1643, 자생종이 0.1556으로 높았다. 자동차중심가로는 대기오염저감성이 0.4639, 세부지표는 배기가스 저감이 0.1928, 미세먼지 저감이 0.1765, 이산화탄소 저감이 0.0945로 높게 나타났다. 가로유형별 세부지표 중 수형의 중요도가 공통적으로 높았는데, 이는 가로의 위치 특성 상 가로 경관에 대한 중요성에 대해 높이 인식하고 있는 것으로 판단된다. 본 연구는 가로수 수종 선정 시 가로유형별 특성을 고려하여 평가기준과 세부지표를 설정하고 중요도의 정량적 기준 제시를 통하여 객관적 수종 선정 기준을 도출하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. Behrens, F. L.(2011) Selecting Public Street and Park Trees for Urban Environments: The Role of Ecological and Biogeographical Criteria, A Thesis for the Degree of Doctor, Lincoln University, New Zealand.
  2. Choi, M. C.(2020) Evaluation of analytic hierarchy process method and development of a weight modified model. Daehan Academy of Management Information System 'Management & Information Systems Review' 39(2): 145-162.
  3. Duke, J. M. and R. Aull-Hyde(2002) Identifying public preferences for land preservation using the analytic hierarchy process. Ecological Economics 42: 131-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00053-8
  4. Jim, C. Y.(1999) A planning strategy to augment the diversity and biomass of roadside trees in urban Hong Kong. Landscape and Urban Planning 44(1): 13-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(98)00113-3
  5. Jim, C. Y and H. T. Liu(2001) Species diversity of three major urban forest types in Guangzhou City, China. Forest Ecology and Management 146: 99-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(00)00449-7
  6. Kim, M. K.(2020) The problem of partialization persist of street tree and Seoul effort to improve resilience. Seoul Isnstitute of Technology Spotlight Vol 8.
  7. Li, Y. Y., X. R. Wang and C. L. Huang(2011) Key street tree species selection in urban areas. African Journal of Agricultural Research 6(15): 3539-3550.
  8. Miller, R. W., H. J. Richard and L. P. Werner(2019) Urban Forestry Planning and Managing Urban Greenspaces. 3th edition, PDF, ePub eBook.
  9. Pauleit S.(2003) Urban street tree plantings: Identifying the key requirements. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Municipal Engineers 156(1): 43-50.
  10. Sanders, R. A.(1981) Diversity in the street trees of syracuse, New York : Urban Ecology. 5: 33-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4009(81)90019-X
  11. Santamour, F. S.(1990) Trees for urban planting: Diversity, uniformity and common sense. Proc. 7th Conf. Metropolitan Tree Improvement Alliance(METRIA), 7: 57-65.
  12. Satty, T. L.(1980) The Analytic Hierarchy Process, New York : McGraw-Hill.
  13. Thaiutsa B., L. Puangchit, R. Kjelgren, and W. Arunpraparut(2008) Urban green space, street tree and heritage large tree assessment in Bangkok, Thailand. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 7(3):219-229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2008.03.002
  14. http://data.seoul.go.kr