• Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology
• /
• v.16 no.1
• /
• pp.55-67
• /
• 2002

Lately a few of new ecological management policies have been developed and implemented to need objectives of national parks in effective ways. Examples include trail closing for preserving bears, no pets allowance for possible diesease expansion, and no fire in national parks. Such new policies can cause visitors and local residents inconvenience and dissatisfaction. Decision-making processes based on public participation became more important as a primary mean to decrease such undesirable reactions. This study examined conflicts between collective value and individual preference in process building an ecological management policy by analysis of questionnaire survey results. The subjects of the present study were 242 university students. The majority(93.%) accepted the need of public participation in decision-making processes, and the most important reason was that such processes can properly help decison makers understand what the public and local residents want(51.7%). They also answered that individual property right can be limited for preserving species but the limited right should be compensated by the government(93.0%). The great majority(97.1%) of respondents supported the trail closing policy designed to protect bears(Urus thibetanus) from being captured no matter what their personal preference is. On the contrary, more than half of the respondents answered that local residents should be allowed to gather herbs and plants even within national park area since they have been doing for a long time. The results of the present study seem to support major findings of some previous studies that it is critical for policy makers to encourage the public to consider issues under debate from the perspective of collective value rather than individual preference and provide them with necessary information and chances to discuss to each other in public participation processes.