|
|
|
Çѱ¹Á¶°æÇÐȸ / v.38, no.4, 2010³â, pp.11-24
|
ºñ¿ÀÅéÀÇ ÀÚ¿¬Ã¼Çè ¹× È޾簡ġ Æò°¡¸ðÇü °³¹ß°ú Àû¿ë
( Development and Application of an Evaluation Model for Biotope Appraisal as Related to Nature Experiences and Recreation ) |
| Á¶ÇöÁÖ;ÀÌÇöÅÃ;»ç°øÁ¤Èñ;³ªÁ¤È; °æºÏ´ëÇб³ ´ëÇпø Á¶°æÇаú;°æºÏ´ëÇб³ Á¶°æÇаú;Ãæ³²¹ßÀü¿¬±¸¿ø ȯ°æ»ýÅ¿¬±¸ºÎ;°æºÏ´ëÇб³ Á¶°æÇаú;
|
|
|
 |
|
| |
| ÃÊ ·Ï |
| º» ¿¬±¸´Â Áö±¸´ÜÀ§ Â÷¿ø¿¡¼ ÀÚ¿¬Ã¼Çè ¹× ÈÞ¾ç °¡Ä¡¸¦ Æò°¡Çϱâ À§ÇØ °´°üÀûÀÎ Æò°¡ÁöÇ¥¸¦ µµÃâÇϰí, À̸¦ Åä´ë·Î ü°èÀûÀÎ Æò°¡¸ðÇüÀ» ¼³Á¤Çϴµ¥ °¡Àå Å« ¸ñÀûÀ» µÎ¾ú´Ù. ¿ì¼± ¹®ÇåºÐ¼® °á°ú, ÀÚ¿¬Ã¼Çè ¹× È޾簡ġ Æò°¡¸¦ À§ÇÑ Æò°¡ÁöÇ¥ µé·Î´Â ÃþÀ§±¸Á¶, Æ÷ÀåÀ², Çì¸Þ·Îºñ(hemeroby) µî ÃÑ 10°³ÀÇ Ç׸ñÀÌ µµÃâµÇ¾ú´Ù. ¶ÇÇÑ, Àü¹®°¡ ¼³¹®ºÐ¼® °á°ú, Æò°¡ÁöÇ¥ Ç׸ñ ¸ðµÎ°¡ 4.4 ÀÌ»óÀ¸·Î ³ôÀº Á߿䵵 Æò±Õ°ªÀ» ³ªÅ¸³»¾ú´Ù. ƯÈ÷ Çì¸Þ·Îºñ ¹× µ¶Æ¯ÇÑ °æ°ü¿ä¼Ò Ç׸ñÀº 5.8 ÀÌ»óÀ¸·Î ¸Å¿ì ³ô°Ô ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù. ´õºÒ¾î Æò°¡ÁöÇ¥µéÀ» Ư¼ºº°·Î À¯ÇüÈÇϱâ À§ÇØ ¿äÀκм®À» ¼öÇàÇÑ °á°ú, '°æ°ü±¸Á¶ ¹× ÀÚ¿¬Ã¼Çè Áú', 'ÀϹÝÀû À̿뼺', '¹Ì ½Ã°¢ Áú' µî ÃÑ 3°³ÀÇ ¿äÀÎÀ¸·Î ±¸ºÐµÇ¾ú´Ù. ÀÌ»ó°ú °°Àº ¼³¹®ºÐ¼® °á°ú¸¦ Åä´ë·Î °¢ ¿äÀκ° °¡ÁßÄ¡¸¦ »êÁ¤ÇÑ °á°ú, '¹Ì ½Ã°¢ Áú' ¿äÀÎÀÌ 3.510À¸·Î °¡Àå ³ôÀº °ªÀ» º¸¿´À¸¸ç, ÀÌ¿¡ ¹ÝÇØ '°æ°ü±¸Á¶ ¹× ÀÚ¿¬Ã¼Çè Áú' ¿äÀÎÀº 3.035À¸·Î °¡Àå ³·Àº °ªÀ» ³ªÅ¸³»¾ú´Ù. ÀÌµé °á°ú¸¦ Á¾ÇÕÀûÀ¸·Î ºÐ¼®ÇÏ¿© ü°èÀûÀÎ °¡Ä¡Æò°¡ ¸ðÇüÀ» ¼³Á¤ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¶ÇÇÑ, µµÃâµÈ Æò°¡¸ðÇüÀÇ Å¸´ç¼ºÀ» °ËÁõÇØ º¸±â À§ÇØ ½Ç »ç·ÊÁö¸¦ ¼±Á¤ÇÏ¿© Àû¿ëÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¿ì¼± »ç·ÊÁöÀÇ ºñ¿ÀÅé À¯ÇüºÐ·ù °á°ú, ºñ¿ÀÅé À¯Çü±ºÀº À¯¼öÁö ºñ¿ÀÅé µî ÃÑ 13°³·Î ºÐ·ùµÇ¾úÀ¸¸ç, ÀÌ¿¡ ±Í¼ÓµÇ´Â ºñ¿ÀÅé À¯ÇüÀº ÃÑ 61°³·Î ±¸ºÐµÇ¾ú´Ù. ¸¶Áö¸·À¸·Î ±â ¼³Á¤µÈ Æò°¡¸ðÇüÀ» Àû¿ëÇÑ ºñ¿ÀÅé °¡Ä¡Æò°¡ °á°ú, I µî±ÞÀ¸·Î´Â ½Ä»ýÀÌ Ç³ºÎÇÑ ÀÚ¿¬Çü ÇÏõ, »ê¸²°ú Á¢ÇØ ÀÖ´Â ¼Ò±Ô¸ð ¼ö¸² µî ÃÑ 16°³ À¯ÇüÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù. ¹Ý¸é II µî±ÞÀº 9°³ À¯Çü, III µî±ÞÀº 8°³ À¯Çü, IV µî±ÞÀº 8°³ À¯Çü, °¡Ä¡°¡ ¸Å¿ì ³·Àº V µî±ÞÀº 19°³ À¯ÇüÀ¸·Î ºÐ¼®µÇ¾ú´Ù. |
|
| The main focus of this research is the establishment of a systemic evaluation model based on objective evaluation indices, which are drawn to assess the experiencing of nature and recreational value at the level of the district unit. First of all, as a result of a literature review, a total of 10 indices can be drawn including vegetation structure, pavement rate, and hemeroby to evaluate an assessment of natural experiences and recreational value. Also, as a result of expert survey analysis, all evaluation index items were above 4.4, which is a high importance average. Hemeroby and unique landscape factor items in particular were above 5.8, which is very high. In addition, as a result of implementing a factor analysis to classify evaluation indices according to characteristics, three factors arise: 'landscape structure and quality of natural experience', 'typical availability', and 'quality of aesthetic and visual sense.' Based on the above survey analysis results, the 'quality of aesthetic and visual sense' was the highest, at 3.510. The classification 'landscape structure and quality of natural experience' was the lowest, at 3.035. A systemic value evaluation model was established by comprehensively analyzing these results. To verify the validity of the evaluation model drawn, real sites are selected and applied. First of all, as a result of a biotope types classification of sites, biotope type groups are classified into a total of 13 including the stream biotope while its subordinate biotope types are classified into a total of 61 groups. Lastly, as a result of biotope value evaluation, which was a previously established evaluation model, there are a total of 16 types including vegetation-abundant natural rivers and small-scale woodlands near forests in grade I. There are 9 types in grade II, 8 in grade III, 8 in grade IV, 19 in the least-valuable grade V. |
| |
| Ű¿öµå |
| ÆòÀÚÁöÇ¥;¹®ÇåºÐ¼®;Àü¹®°¡ ¼³¹®ºÐ¼®;Ÿ´ç¼º °ËÁõ;ºñ¿ÀÅé À¯ÇüºÐ·ù;Evaluation Index;Literature Analysis;Expert Survey Analysis;Verify Validity;Biotope Types Classification; |
| |
|
|
 |
|
Çѱ¹Á¶°æÇÐȸÁö / v.38, no.4, 2010³â, pp.11-24
Çѱ¹Á¶°æÇÐȸ
ISSN : 1225-1755
UCI : G100:I100-KOI(KISTI1.1003/JNL.JAKO201013240702278)
¾ð¾î : Çѱ¹¾î |
|
| ³í¹® Á¦°ø : KISTI Çѱ¹°úÇбâ¼úÁ¤º¸¿¬±¸¿ø |
|
|
|
|
|
|