Limits...
Assessment of Coastal Ecosystem Services for Conservation Strategies in South Korea.

Chung MG, Kang H, Choi SU - PLoS ONE (2015)

Bottom Line: We found strong negative associations between the habitat risks and ecosystem services (aquaculture, carbon storage, recreation, and aesthetic quality) across the coastal counties.Our results showed that the intensity of the habitat risks and the provision of ecosystem services were significantly different between reclamation-dominated and conservation-dominated counties, except for coastal vulnerability.As cultural ecosystem services are evenly distributed throughout coastal areas of South Korea, decision makers may employ them to improve the conditions of coastal wetlands outside of protected areas.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea.

ABSTRACT
Despite the fact that scientific and political consideration for ecosystem services has dramatically increased over the past decade, few studies have focused on marine and coastal ecosystem services for conservation strategies. We used an ecosystem services approach to assess spatial distributions of habitat risks and four ecosystem services (coastal protection, carbon storage, recreation, and aesthetic quality), and explored the tradeoffs among them in coastal areas of South Korea. Additionally, we analyzed how the social and ecological characteristics in coastal areas interact with conservation and development policies by using this approach. We found strong negative associations between the habitat risks and ecosystem services (aquaculture, carbon storage, recreation, and aesthetic quality) across the coastal counties. Our results showed that the intensity of the habitat risks and the provision of ecosystem services were significantly different between reclamation-dominated and conservation-dominated counties, except for coastal vulnerability. A generalized linear model suggested that reclamation projects were dependent on economic efficiency, whereas demographic pressures and habitat conditions influenced the designation of protected areas at a county level. The ecosystem services approach provided guidelines to achieve both sustainable development and environment conservation. By using the approach, we can select the priority areas for developments while we can minimize the degradation of biodiversity and ecosystem services. As cultural ecosystem services are evenly distributed throughout coastal areas of South Korea, decision makers may employ them to improve the conditions of coastal wetlands outside of protected areas.

No MeSH data available.


Ecosystem services assessments of coastal areas in South Korea.Feature values of coastal vulnerability and terrestrial carbon storage are expressed in continuous values from poor (purple) to good (green) conditions. In addition, recreation and aesthetic quality are classified as low, moderate, high, or very high.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4519238&req=5

pone.0133856.g003: Ecosystem services assessments of coastal areas in South Korea.Feature values of coastal vulnerability and terrestrial carbon storage are expressed in continuous values from poor (purple) to good (green) conditions. In addition, recreation and aesthetic quality are classified as low, moderate, high, or very high.

Mentions: Fig 3 exhibits four ecosystem services: coastal vulnerability, carbon storage, recreation, and aesthetic quality. The spatial distribution of each ecosystem service is distinctly different throughout the coastal counties. By mapping coastal vulnerability, we identify the locations of low or high vulnerability. The west coast of Korea is more vulnerable to climate change and inundations than the south coast. The map of terrestrial carbon storage displays the location of high quantities of carbon storage. According to the map, the western counties are associated with low levels of carbon storage, whereas the most southern counties have the high levels of carbon storage. Northwestern counties are located near Seoul (the capital of South Korea), and they have rapidly developed for urbanization and industrialization under national policies. Southwestern counties have reclaimed coastal wetlands as large-scale reclamation projects (e.g., Saemangeum project) to stimulate the regional economy in a short period. Thus, western counties have deteriorated natural habitats and led to the low levels of carbon storages. However, national economic policies have not considered southern counties for the development, as the counties are traditionally agricultural and fishing areas.


Assessment of Coastal Ecosystem Services for Conservation Strategies in South Korea.

Chung MG, Kang H, Choi SU - PLoS ONE (2015)

Ecosystem services assessments of coastal areas in South Korea.Feature values of coastal vulnerability and terrestrial carbon storage are expressed in continuous values from poor (purple) to good (green) conditions. In addition, recreation and aesthetic quality are classified as low, moderate, high, or very high.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4519238&req=5

pone.0133856.g003: Ecosystem services assessments of coastal areas in South Korea.Feature values of coastal vulnerability and terrestrial carbon storage are expressed in continuous values from poor (purple) to good (green) conditions. In addition, recreation and aesthetic quality are classified as low, moderate, high, or very high.
Mentions: Fig 3 exhibits four ecosystem services: coastal vulnerability, carbon storage, recreation, and aesthetic quality. The spatial distribution of each ecosystem service is distinctly different throughout the coastal counties. By mapping coastal vulnerability, we identify the locations of low or high vulnerability. The west coast of Korea is more vulnerable to climate change and inundations than the south coast. The map of terrestrial carbon storage displays the location of high quantities of carbon storage. According to the map, the western counties are associated with low levels of carbon storage, whereas the most southern counties have the high levels of carbon storage. Northwestern counties are located near Seoul (the capital of South Korea), and they have rapidly developed for urbanization and industrialization under national policies. Southwestern counties have reclaimed coastal wetlands as large-scale reclamation projects (e.g., Saemangeum project) to stimulate the regional economy in a short period. Thus, western counties have deteriorated natural habitats and led to the low levels of carbon storages. However, national economic policies have not considered southern counties for the development, as the counties are traditionally agricultural and fishing areas.

Bottom Line: We found strong negative associations between the habitat risks and ecosystem services (aquaculture, carbon storage, recreation, and aesthetic quality) across the coastal counties.Our results showed that the intensity of the habitat risks and the provision of ecosystem services were significantly different between reclamation-dominated and conservation-dominated counties, except for coastal vulnerability.As cultural ecosystem services are evenly distributed throughout coastal areas of South Korea, decision makers may employ them to improve the conditions of coastal wetlands outside of protected areas.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea.

ABSTRACT
Despite the fact that scientific and political consideration for ecosystem services has dramatically increased over the past decade, few studies have focused on marine and coastal ecosystem services for conservation strategies. We used an ecosystem services approach to assess spatial distributions of habitat risks and four ecosystem services (coastal protection, carbon storage, recreation, and aesthetic quality), and explored the tradeoffs among them in coastal areas of South Korea. Additionally, we analyzed how the social and ecological characteristics in coastal areas interact with conservation and development policies by using this approach. We found strong negative associations between the habitat risks and ecosystem services (aquaculture, carbon storage, recreation, and aesthetic quality) across the coastal counties. Our results showed that the intensity of the habitat risks and the provision of ecosystem services were significantly different between reclamation-dominated and conservation-dominated counties, except for coastal vulnerability. A generalized linear model suggested that reclamation projects were dependent on economic efficiency, whereas demographic pressures and habitat conditions influenced the designation of protected areas at a county level. The ecosystem services approach provided guidelines to achieve both sustainable development and environment conservation. By using the approach, we can select the priority areas for developments while we can minimize the degradation of biodiversity and ecosystem services. As cultural ecosystem services are evenly distributed throughout coastal areas of South Korea, decision makers may employ them to improve the conditions of coastal wetlands outside of protected areas.

No MeSH data available.