Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment (환경영향평가)

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

DOI QR Code

A Review on Environmental Impact Assessment and Policy Utilization through the Establishment of Ecological Outlook and Evaluation System

자연생태 전망평가체계 마련을 통한 환경영향평가 및 정책 활용방안 고찰

  • Who-Seung Lee (Environmental Assessment Group, Korea Environment Institute)
  • 이후승 (한국환경연구원 환경평가본부)
  • Received : 2023.01.19
  • Accepted : 2023.09.25
  • Published : 2023.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

As the risk of biodiversity reduction and extinction becomes serious due to climate change and indiscriminate development, the importance of conservation of the natural environment and ecosystem is increasing. In this situation, Ireviewed that overseas cases of the ecological outlook and evaluation system aimed at providing information on natural resources and ecosystem change. As a results, other countries showed that various research institutes have been carrying on field surveys by classification group, but it was different from us that the investigated data are collected and managed in an integrated manner and repeatedly provided within a short period of time. In addition, it was analyzed that it was highly utilized in policy and environmental impact assessment by providing evaluation-based prediction and outlook information along with basic survey data. Based on this, the limitations of information use in our wildlife surveys and environmental impacts assessments were analyzed, and the estabilishment of a ecology outlook and evaluation system and policy support measures were considered. In addition, based on the proposed outlook and evaluation system preparation plan, a policy direction that can be effectively used in domestic natural ecosystem policies was proposed.

기후변화와 무분별한 개발 등으로 인해 생물다양성의 감소와 멸종 위험이 심각해짐에 따라 자연생태계에 대한 보전의 중요성이 높아지고 있다. 이러한 상황에서 본 연구는 자연자원과 생태계 변화 등에 대한 정보제공을 목적으로 한 평가기반의 자연생태 전망평가체계에 대한 국외 사례를 검토하였다. 결과로서 국외에서는 국내와 유사하게 다양한 조사기관에서 분류군별 조사를 수행하고 있으며 조사된 자료가 통합적으로 수집·관리되고 단기간내 지속적으로 제공되고 있다. 또한 기초조사 자료와 함께 평가기반의 예측·전망 정보를 제공함으로써 국가정책 및 환경영향평가 등에서의 활용도가 높은 것으로 조사되었다. 이를 바탕으로 국내 자연생태 조사 현황과 환경영향평가 등에서의 정보이용의 한계성을 분석하고 자연생태 정책수립 지원 등 정보로서의 자연생태 전망평가체계 작성 필요성에 대해 고찰하였다. 또한 제안된 자연생태 전망평가 등의 다양한 정보를 통해 국내 자연생태계 정책에 효과적으로 활용할 수 있는 정책방향을 제안하였다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

논문에 대해 많은 시간을 들여 심사와 의견을 주변 편집위원과 익명의 심사위원들게 진심으로 감사드립니다. 본 연구는 산업통상자원부(MOTIE)와 한국에너지기술평가원(KETEP) '신재생에너지핵심기술개발사업(No.20203030020080)'의 지원을 받아 한국환경연구원이 수행한 "해상풍력 단지 해양공간 환경영향 분석 및 데이터베이스 구축(2023-005(R))" 사업의 연구결과로 작성되었습니다.

References

  1. Ahn KH, Shin YK, Kim JY, Lee YK, Lim JC, Ha JW, Kwon HS, Suh JH, Kim KG. 2015. A review on the public appeals of the ecosystem and nature map. Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment, 24(1): 99-109. [Korean Literature]  https://doi.org/10.14249/eia.2015.24.1.99
  2. Arneth A, Leadley P, Claudet J, Coll M, Rondinini C, Rounsevell MDA, Shin YJ, Alexander P, Fuchs R. 2023. Making protected areas effective for biodiversity, climate and food. Global Change Biology, 29: 3883-3894.  https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16664
  3. Audit Scotland. 2021. Environment, Sustainability and Biodiversity. 
  4. Brauman KA, Daily GC, Duarte TKE, Mooney HA. 2007. The nature and value of ecosystem services: an overview highlighting hydrologic services. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 32: 67-98.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.32.031306.102758
  5. Burkmar R. 2017. Monitoring and indicators of UK biodiversity change: a review for the tomorrow's biodiversity project. Field Studies Council, UK. 
  6. Cha YJ. 2000. Planning and management of urban ecological park. Nature Conservation. 110: 18-24. [Korean Literature] 
  7. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. 2022. UK Biodiversity Indicators.
  8. European Environment Agency. 2012. Streamlining European biodiversity indicators 2020: building a future on lessons learnt from the SEBI 2010 process. 
  9. Gilbert G, Gibbons DW, Evans J. 2012. Bird monitoring methods. RSPB. UK. 
  10. Green EJ, Buchanan GM, Butchart SHM, Chandler GM, Burgess ND, Hill SLL, Gregory RD. 2019. Relating characteristics of global biodiversity targets to reported progress. Conservation Biology, 33(6): 1360-1369.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13322
  11. Hu Y, Wang M, Ma T, Huang M, Huang G, Zhou W, Ping X, Lu Y, Wei F. 2022. Integrated index-based assessment reveals long-term conservation progress in implementation of Convention on Biological Diversity. Science 8: eabj8093. 
  12. JBO. 2010. Japan biodiversity outlook 1 - report of comprehensive assessment of biodiversity in Japan. Tokyo: Nature conservation Bureau, Ministry of the Environment, Government of Japan. 
  13. Jones GM, Tingley MW. 2021. Pyrodiversity and biodiversity: a history, synthesis, and outlook. Diversity and Distributions, 28: 386-403.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.13280
  14. Jun SW, Jung SM. 1998. A study on the remote exploration techniques for the preparation and utilization of ecological natural map - focusing on the preparation of land cover classification map. Korea Environment Institute. [Korean Literature] 
  15. Jung TJ, Song IB, Lee JS, Lee SJ, Cho KJ, Song KH, Kim GD, Cha JR, Cho JS, Lim HS, Jung HJ. 2017. The analysis on causes of areas with public appeals to the ecosystem and nature map. Journal of Korean Environment Research and Technology, 20(1): 25-34. [Korean Literature]  https://doi.org/10.13087/kosert.2017.20.1.25
  16. Jung HL, Rho PH, Lee HW. 2007. Ecosystem survey to improve the efficiency of natural environment policy establishment. Nature Conservation, 137: 18-29. [Korean Literature] 
  17. Ko KA, Cha EJ, Lee JH, Kim MJ, Joo WY. 2021. Developing and integrated system for the comprehensive management of national biodiversity strategies and action plans, management indicators, implementation assessment, and effectiveness assessment. Korea Environment Institute. [Korean Literature] 
  18. Ko KA, Lee HW, Oh IC, Hong HJ, Kim YJ, Chun JY, Jung SG. 2018. A study on the establishment of the 4th national biodiversity strategy and preparation of the CBD national report (I). Korea Environment Institute, Ministry of Environment [Korean Literature] 
  19. Kwon YS, Song KH, Kim MK, Kim KD. 2020. A study on the data cleaning and standardization of national ecosystem survey in Korea. Korean Journal of Ecology and Environment, 53(4): 380-389. [Korean Literature]  https://doi.org/10.11614/KSL.2020.53.4.380
  20. Lee B, Wallis E, Hobern D, Zerger A. 2021. The Atlas of Living Australia: history, current state and future directions. Biodiversity Data Journal, 9: e65023. 
  21. Lee HJ, Ha JU, Cha JY, Lee JH, Yoon HN, Jung CW, Oh HS, Bae SY. 2017. The habitat classiification of mammals in korea based on the National Ecosystem Survey. Journal of Environment Impact Assessment, 26(2): 160-170. [Korean Literature]  https://doi.org/10.14249/eia.2017.26.2.160
  22. Lee WS, Sagong H, Joo YJ, Ji MK, Jung SG. 2020. Development of ecoinformatics biodiversity assessment tools (II): utilization of biodiversity map in policy making. Korea Environment Institute. [Korean Literature] 
  23. Lee WS, Sagong H, Joo YJ, Jung SG. 2019. Development of ecoinformatics biodiversity assessment tools. Korea Environment Institute. [Korean Literature] 
  24. McGuinness S, Muldoon C, Tierney N, Cummins S, Murray A, Egan S, Crowe O. 2015. Bird sensitivity mapping for wind energy developments and associated infrastructure in the Republic of Ireland. BirdWater Ireland, Kilcoole, Wicklow. 
  25. Ministry of the Environment. 2021. JBO3 - 2021 Report of comprehensive assessment of biodiversity and ecosystem services in Japan. 
  26. National Institute of Biological Resources. 2021. National Biodiversity Statistics Collection, Ministry of Environment. [Korean Literature] 
  27. Nature Conservation Bureau. 2002. Living with nature: the national biodiversity strategy of Japan. Nature Conservation Bureau, Ministry of the Environment, Tokyo. 
  28. OEH & CSIRO. 2019. Measuring biodiversity and ecological integrity in New South Wales: Method for the biodiversity indicator program. NSW government, Sydney. 
  29. Ogawa-Onishi Y, Berry PM. 2013. Ecological impacts of climate change in Japan: the importance of integrating local and international publications. Biological Conservation, 157: 361-371.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.06.024
  30. Oh HY, Han JE, Lee W, Jang HD, Lee JS, Shin SK, Kang DH, Oh YJ, Lee YH, Bong JM, Lim JH, Yoo CH, Song SH, Kim WH, Chu MK, Kim EN, Lee DG, Lee SY. 2022. Climate change impacts on phylogenetic diversity: assessment and prediction(2). National Institute of Biological Resources. [Korean Literature] 
  31. Park JH, Choi JG. 2018. A study on the improvement of the EIA items and the operating system based on the analysis of EIA items usage. Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment, 27(1): 1-16. [Korean Literature]  https://doi.org/10.14249/EIA.2018.27.1.1
  32. Park SC, Han BH, Park MJ, Yun HD, Kim MJ. 2016. A study on the possibility of utilizing both biotope maps and land cover maps on the calculation of the ecological network indicator of city biodiversity index. Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture, 44(6): 73-83. [Korean Literature]  https://doi.org/10.9715/KILA.2016.44.6.073
  33. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. 2020. Global Biodiversity Outlook 5. Montreal. 
  34. Segan DB, Murray KA, Watson JEM. 2016. A global assessment of current and future biodiversity vulnerability to habitat loss-climate change interactions. Global Ecology and Conservation 5: 12-21.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2015.11.002
  35. Shin YO. 2020. The role of wild animals, mainly bats, in the emergence of new viruses and the measures for the prevention. Nature Conservation. 180: 20-32. [Korean Literature] 
  36. Silvestro D, Goria S, Sterner T, Antonelli A. 2022. Improving biodiversity protection through artifial inteligence. Nature Sustainability, 5; 415-424.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-022-00851-6
  37. Smith F. 1996. Biological diversity, ecosystem stability and economic development. Ecological Economics, 16: 191-203.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-8009(95)00096-8
  38. Sobkowiak M. 2022. The making of imperfect indicators for biodiversity: a case study of UK biodiversity performance measurement. Business Strategy and the Environment. 32(1): 336-352.  https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3133
  39. Sobkowiak M. 2023. The making of imperfect indicators for biodiversity: a case study of UK biodiversity performance measurement. Business Strategy and the Environment, 32, pp.336-352.  https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3133
  40. Steffen W, Burbidge AA, Hughes L, Kitching R, Lindenmayer D, Musgrave W, Stafford SM, Werner PA. 2009. Australia's biodiversity and climate change: a strategic assessment of the vulnerability of Australia's biodiversity to climate change. A report to the Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council commissioned by the Australian Government. CSIRO Publishing. 
  41. Sung SY, Kwon YS, Kim KD. 2018. Development and applications of ecological data portal service (EcoBank) for sharing ecological information of Korea. Korean Journal of Ecology and Environment, 51(3): 212-220. [Korean Literature]  https://doi.org/10.11614/KSL.2018.51.3.212
  42. Thompson G, Thompson SA. 2020. A comparison of an environmental impact assessment (EIA) vertebrate fauna survey with a post-approval faunna salvage program: consequences of not adhering to EIA survey guidelines, a Western Australian example. Pacific Conservation Biology, 26(4): 412-419.  https://doi.org/10.1071/PC19002
  43. Wood CL, Lafferty KD, DeLeo G, Young HS, Hudson PJ, Kuris AM. 2014. Does biodiversity protect humans against infectious disease? Ecology, 95(4): 817-832.  https://doi.org/10.1890/13-1041.1
  44. Yun KS, Shin YH. 2015. The appropriateness and improvement for grade evaluation system of geomorphology part, the 3rd natural environment survey. Journal of the Korean Geomorphological Association, 22(1): 89-107. [Korean Literature]  https://doi.org/10.18339/JKGA.2015.22.1.89