Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment (환경영향평가)

Korean Society of Environmental Impact Assessment (한국환경영향평가학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Assessing Habitat Quality and Risk of Coastal Areasin Busan

부산 연안역의 서식지 질 및 위험도 평가

  • Jeong, Sehwa (Department of Ecological Engineering, Pukyong National University) ;
  • Sung, Kijune (Department of Ecological Engineering, Pukyong National University)
  • Received : 2022.01.20
  • Accepted : 2022.03.21
  • Published : 2022.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Busan, where the coastal ecosystem health is deteriorating due to high development pressure and intensity of use, needs ecosystem management that considers humans and the natural environment together for sustainable use and ecosystem preservation of the coastal areas. In this study, the InVEST model was applied to assess the habitat status of the coastal land and coastal sea to manage the ecosystem based on habitats. As a result of the assessment of the coastal land, the habitat quality of Gadeok-do, Igidae, and Sinseondae, Gijang-gun are high, and Seo-gu, Jung-gu, Dong-gu, and Suyeong-gu are low. In the case of the coastal sea, the habitat risk of the Nakdong river estuary is low, and some areas of Yeongdo-gu, Saha-gu, Gangseo-gu are high. Therefore, for the sustainable use and preservation of coastal ecosystems, it is necessary to prepare ecosystem-based management measures to improve damaged habitats and reduce threats. In addition, the impact on coastal seas should be fully considered when planning coastal land development. The results of the InVEST habitat quality model in coastal land show similar tendencies to the biotope and environmental conservation value assessment map. The results of the habitat risk assessment in the coastal sea are expected to be utilized to identify habitats in the coastal sea and management of threat factors.

높은 개발 압력과 이용 강도로 인해 연안생태계 건강성이 악화되고 있는 부산은 연안역의 지속가능한 이용 및 생태계 보전을 위해 인간과 자연환경을 함께 고려하는 생태계 관리가 필요한 실정이다. 본 연구에서는 서식지 중심의 생태계 기반 관리를 위하여 InVEST 서식지 질 및 위험도 모델을 적용하여 부산 연안 육역과 연안 해역의 서식지를 평가하였다. 평가 결과 연안 육역은 강서구 가덕도, 남구 이기대·신선대, 기장군 일대 지역의 서식지의 질이 높고, 서구, 중구, 동구, 수영구는 낮은 것으로 나타났다. 연안 해역의 경우 낙동강 하굿둑 하부 지역의 위험도가 낮았으며, 영도구, 사하구, 강서구 일부 지역의 위험도가 높은 것으로 나타났다. 이에 연안 생태계 서식지의 가치를 높이고 지속가능한 이용 및 보전을 위하여 훼손된 서식지를 개선하고 위협요인을 줄여 생태계서비스를 증진할 수 있는 관리 방안을 마련해야 할 것으로 판단된다. 또한 연안 육역의 개발사업 계획 시 연안 해역에 미치는 영향을 충분히 고려하여야 할 것이다. 본 연구의 연안 육역의 서식질 질 모형 결과는 도시생태현황지도와 국토환경성평가지도와 유사한 경향성을 가지는 것으로 파악되었으며, 연안 해역의 서식지 위험도 평가 결과 또한 해역의 서식지 파악, 위협요인 관리 등에 활용될 수 있을 것으로 기대된다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

이 논문은 부경대학교 자율창의학술연구비(2021년)에 의하여 연구되었습니다

References

  1. Ansong J, Gissi E, Calado H. 2017. An approach to ecosystem-based management in maritime spatial planning process. Ocean&Coastal Management. 141: 65-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2017.03.005
  2. Busan Development Institute (BDI). 2020. 2020 Biotop map in Busan metropolitan city. Busan Metropolitan City Publishing; pp. 51-60. [Korean Literature]
  3. Byun YH, Park JK, Jung HS. 2002. A comparison of ensemble method between models in prediction of season. Journal of Korean Meteorlogical Society 12(1): 1-3. [Korean Literature]
  4. Cantor SB, Sun CC, Tortolero-Luna G, RichardKortum R and Follen M. 1999. A comparison of C/B ratios from studies using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 52: 885-892. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00075-X
  5. Caro C, Marques JC, Cunha PP, Teixeira Z. 2020. Ecosystem services as a resilience descriptor in habitat risk assessment using the InVEST model. Ecological Indicators 115: 106426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106426
  6. Choi JY, Lee YS, Lee SD. 2019. A study on the ecosystem services value assessment according to city development: In case of the Busan eco-delta city development. J Environ Impact Assess. 28(5): 427-439. [Korean Literature]
  7. Chung MG. 2012. Mapping ecosystem services and statistical analysis for ecosystem-based management of coastal areas. Master. dissertation. Yonsei University, Seoul. [Korean Literature]
  8. Dormann CF. 2007. Effects of incorporating spatial autocorrelation into the analysis of species distribution data. Global Ecology and Biogeography 16(2): 129-138. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2006.00279.x
  9. Elith J, Graham CH, Anderson RP, Dudik M, Ferrier S, Guisan A, Hijmans RJ, Huettmann F, Leathwick JR, Lehmann A, Li J, Lohmann LG, Loiselle BA, Manion G, Moritz C, Nakamura M, Nakazawa Y, Overton J McC, Peterson AT, Phillips SJ, Richardson KS, Scachetti-Pereira R, Schapire RE, Soberon J, Williams S, Wisz MS and Zimmermann NE. 2006. Novel methods improve prediction of species' distributions from occurrence data. Ecography 29: 129-151. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2006.0906-7590.04596.x
  10. Environmental Geographic Information Service (EGIS) [Internet]. c2020. Korea: Ministry of Environment (ME); [cited 2021 Oct 31]. Available from: https://egis.me.go.kr/main.do
  11. Environmental Conservation Value Assessment Map (ECVAM) [Internet]. c2021. Korea: Ministry of Environment (ME); [cited 2021 Oct 31]. Available from: https://ecvam.neins.go.kr/main.do
  12. Gibson L, Barrett B and Burbidge A. 2007. Dealing with uncertain absences in habitat modelling: a case study of a rare grounddwelling parrot. Diversity and Distributions 13(6): 704-713. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2007.00365.x
  13. Goulding M, Venticinque E, Ribeiro MLB, Barthen RB, Leites RG, Forsberg B, Petry P, SilvaJunior UL, Ferraz PS, Canas C. 2018. Ecosystem-based management of Amazon fisheries and wetlands. Fish and Fisheries 20(1): 138-158. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12328
  14. Guerry AD, Ruckelshaus MH, Arkema KK, Bernhardt JR, Guannel G, Kim CK, Marsik M, Papenfus M, Toft JE, Verutes G, Wood SA, Beck M, Chan F, Chan KMA, Gelfenbaum G, Gold BD, Halpern BS, Labiosa WB, Lester SE, Levin PS, McField M, Pinsky ML, Plummer M, Polasky S, Ruggiero P, Sutherland DA, Tallis H, Day A, Spencer J. 2012. Modeling benefits from nature: Using ecosystem services to inform coastal and marine spatial planning. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management 8: 107-121. https://doi.org/10.1080/21513732.2011.647835
  15. Harvey BJ, Nash KL, Blanchard JL, Edwards DP. 2018. Ecosystem-based management of coral reefs under climate change. Ecology and Evolution 8(12): 6354-6368. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.4146
  16. Hyun BK, Jung SJ, Sonn YK, Park CW, Zhang YS, Song KC, Kim LH, Choi EY, Hong SY, Kwon SI and Jang BC. 2010. Korean Journal of Soil Science and Fertilizer 43(5): 696-704. [Korean Literature]
  17. Kim NY. 2018. Assessment of habitat potential at the isolated green patches in Seoul. M.A. Degree. thesis. Seoul National University, Seoul. [Korean Literature]
  18. Kim TY, Song CH, Lee WK, Kim MI, Lim CH, Jeon SW, Kim JS. 2015. Habitat quality valuation using InVEST model in Jeju island. J. Korean Env. Res. Tech. 18(5): 1-11. [Korean Literature]
  19. Korea National Park Research Institute (KNPRI). 2019. 2019 National park ecological service value evaluation study - Focusing of Seoraksan mountain.Deogyusan mountain.Mudeungsan mountain.Byeonsan peninsula national park -. Korea National Park Publishing; pp. 293-311. [Korean Literature]
  20. Korea Ocean Data Market Center (KOMC) [Internet]. 2021. Korea: Korea Hydrographic and Oceanographic Agency; [cited 2021 Oct 31]. Available from: http://www.khoa.go.kr/komc/
  21. Lee HW, Kim CK, Hong HJ, Roh YH, Kang SI, Kim JH, Shin SC, Lee SJ, Kim TY, Kang JY, Spencer W, David F. 2015. Development of decision supporting framework to enhance natural capital sustainability: Focusing on ecosystem service analysis. Korea Environment Institute Publishing; pp. 93-104. [Korean Literature]
  22. National Spatial Data Infrastructure Portal (NSDI) [Internet]. 2021. Korea: Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport; [cited 2021 oct 31]. Available from: http://www.nsdi.go.kr/lxportal/?menuno=2679
  23. Sallustio L, Toni AD, Strollo A, Febbraro MD, Gissi E, Casella L, Geneletti D, Munafo M, Vizzarri M, Marchetti M. 2017. Assessing habitat quality in relation to the spatial distribution of protected areas in Italy. Journal of Environmental Management 201: 129-137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.06.031
  24. Seo SB. 2017. Analysis of habitat quality in the Nam-Han River Upstream Watershed using InVEST model. M.A. Degree. thesis. Ewha Womans University, Seoul. [Korean Literature]
  25. Sharp R, Douglass J, Wolny S. 2020. InVEST User's Guide - Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs Version 3.9.0. Natural Capital Project.
  26. Studwell A, Hines E, Nur N, Jahncke J. 2021. Using habitat risk assessment to assess disturbance from maritime activities to inform seabird conservation in a coastal marine ecosystem. Ocean and Coastal Management 199: 105431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2020.105431
  27. What is Ecosystem-Based Management[Internet]. 2021. USA: NOAA; [cited 2021 Dec 16]. Available from: https://ecosystems.noaa.gov/EBM101/WhatisEcosystem-BasedManagement.aspx
  28. Xu L, Chen SS, Xu Y, Li G, Su W. 2019. Impacts of land-use change on habitat quality during 1985-2015 in the Taihu lake basin. Sustainability 11(13): 3513. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11133513
  29. Zhai T, Wang J, Fang Y, Qin Y, Huang L, Chen Y. 2020. Assessing ecological risks caused by human activities in rapid urbanization coastal areas: Towards an integrated approach to determining key areas of terrestrial-oceanic ecosystems preservation and restoration. Science of the Total Environment 708: 135-153.
  30. Zhang Y, Jin R, Zhu W, Zhang D, Zhang X. 2020. Impacts of land use changes on wetland ecosystem services in the Tumen river basin. Sustainability 12(23): 9821. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12239821