• Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology
• /
• v.36 no.3
• /
• pp.318-326
• /
• 2022

The Convention on Biodiversity (CBD) recommends that 17% of the land be designated as a protected area to counter global environmental problems. Korea also realized a need to designate protected areas according to the international level and explain the significance of designating protected areas. Accordingly, studies on ecosystem services are required. In Korea, the protected areas are designated as national parks, provincial parks, and county parks by hierarchy under the Natural Parks Act. However, as priority was on political and administrative aspects, research on ecosystem service value evaluation and habitat management were concentrated in national parks, and provincial and county parks were relatively neglected. Therefore, more studies on provincial and county parks are necessary. In this study, habitat quality for Gajisan Provincial Park, where there were few studies on habitat management and ecosystem service valuation, was evaluated using the InVEST Habitat Quality model among the InVEST models. The analysis results were compared with 16 mountainous national parks. The results showed that the habitat quality value of Gajisan Provincial Park was 0.83, higher than that of the surrounding areas. The analysis of habitat quality in three districts showed 0,84 for the Tongdosa and Naewonsa districts and 0.83 for the Seoknamsa district. By use district, the nature conservation district, the natural environment district, the cultural heritage district, and the park village district had the highest habitat quality value in that order. Compared with the existing habitat quality analysis results of national parks, Gajisan Provincial Park showed naturalness at the level of Mudeungsan National Park. These results can be used as objective data for establishing policies and management plans to preserve biodiversity and promote ecosystem services in provincial parks.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.46 no.1
• /
• pp.143-155
• /
• 2018

The Natural Landscape Rating System was introduced in the amendment of the NATURAL ENVIRONMENT CONSERVATION ACT in 2006. For landscape preservation, the system aims to consider the effects of development projects or plans implemented in a natural landscape on skylines, scenic resources, and view corridors. Currently, a lack of consistency in standards for determining Landscape Control Points (LCP) to assess landscape impact lowers the accuracy and reliability of the assessment results. As the perception of and the impact on a landscape varies, depending on the location of the LCP, it is necessary to establish a reasonable set of criteria to select viewpoints and avoid unreliability in the assessment due to unclear criteria. The intent of this study is to propose an objective and reasonable set of criteria for LCP selection to effectively measure the impact on the landscape from development projects that anticipate a change in the landscape and, ultimately, to suggest basic analysis methods to assess the landscape impact of development projects and to monitor the landscape in the future. Among the development projects affecting natural landscapes, as reported in the statement of the environmental impact assessment, cases of construction of a single building or other small-scale development projects were studied. Four spot development projects were analyzed in depth for their landscape impacts, in order to make recommendations for the LCP selection procedure, which aims to widen the scope of selection according to the direction of viewpoints from the target site. The existing results of analysis based on LCP have limitations because they failed to cover the viewshed of the target buildings when there are topographical changes in the surroundings. As a solution to this problem, a new viewshed analysis method has been proposed, with a focus on the development site and target buildings, rather than viewpoints, as used in past analysis.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Traditional Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.35 no.4
• /
• pp.110-125
• /
• 2017

The Cultural Properties Protection Act enacted 1962 to encourge culture level of people by preserving and using cultural properties introduced Cultural Properties Change Permission System in 2000 in order to cope with rather targeted range towards the national designated cultural properties, and introduced the Guidelines for Permission Standard regarding Construction Activities within the Historical Cultural Environment Preservation Area (2006) to complement permission process and targets, Notification of Minor Changes around the National Designated Cultural Properties (2008), etc and continuously put efforts to improve further ever since. Nonetheless, while it showed decrease in the number of process of change permission per individual cases after 2007, it began to increase again since 2010, reaching 1,554 cases by 2014 - about 29% of the cases being rejected or under observation, people living surrounding of cultural properties still experience inconveniences. This study has been carried out by creating integrated DB with total 7,403 cases of permission status from 5 Subcommittees (Building / Historic Sites / Natural Heritage / Modern Cultural Heritage / Important Folk Culture) in Cultural Heritage Committee that are related with changing status for the past 5 years (2010-2014), and by further analyzing 4,364 cases amongst, that were reviewed within historical and cultural environment preservation area - analyzed applying types and the characteristics, reviewed the improvement plans of operation guidelines for the Committee and acts of minor changes towards surroundings of the national designated cultural properties that regulate the status changing permission targets by categorizing analysis results and deriving implications. I hope that this will complement to the operational guidelines for the Committee, along with minor changing activities around cultural properties in short term, and to secure basic data for systematic improvement plans ie., for delegated works range from city/county/districts through our research. Also hope to improve administrative efficiency by reforming permission systems for building activities in historic cultural environment conservation area, and reduce inconvenience people might experience, by minimizing socioeconomic expense needed for the review.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.53 no.2
• /
• pp.110-139
• /
• 2020

Reclamation is the act of creating new lands by constructing dikes in offshore tidal flats to utilize them for various purposes, including the establishment of farmland to secure food for an increasing population. Based on the fact that reclamation has resulted in drastic changes in the environmental, economic, social, and cultural aspects of land expansion and development, population movement, and the formation of cities since ancient times, I reviewed the value of reclamation sites and addressed the issue of how to preserve and utilize them. "Reclamation culture" refers collectively to the recognition and concept system, behavior styles, and cultural products created by changes in the environment, and the tangible, intangible, and natural heritage generated directly and indirectly by reclamation is defined as "reclamation cultural heritage". It shows that the historical background of reclamation accords with prevailing trends, and that the reclamation sites possess cultural heritage value due to their historical, academic, and scarce characteristics. Numerous reclamation cultural heritage sites at the Gwangwhal and Gyehwa dikes are on the verge of being destroyed, with their original function having ended after the construction of Saemangeum Sea Wall. I propose measures to preserve these under the principle that utilization is based on the basic premise of conservation. First of all, modern and contemporary reclamation sites must necessarily be designated and managed as registered cultural properties, local cultural heritage, future heritage, and agricultural heritage. In particular, as it has been confirmed that reclamation sites created after the Goryeo and Joseon dynasties and the 1950s have not been designated as cultural heritage sites. It is necessary to review the characteristics and values of such reclamation sites through a full survey of national reclamation data. Effective and sustainable utilization of reclamation cultural heritage, which has not been acknowledged in the past due to its close relationship with our lives, is necessary to search for hidden stories found within that heritage, to organize governance for the efficient use of reclamation resources, and to build a museum to collect and display the history and culture of the reclaimed areas. Finally, through links with countries with experience in reclamation, we will be able to cope jointly with international issues such as those pertaining to society, culture, and environment, and would be able to implement various projects to further the advancement of human beings.