생활권습지 기반 생태계서비스 간편평가지표(RAWES) 개선 연구

Abstract

This study was conducted to develop a Rapid Assessment Method of Wetland Ecosystem Services so that local residents can evaluate the ecosystem services of small wetlands in their living area after receiving a certain education. The evaluation method was verified through expert FGI verification and questionnaires, and the final evaluation method was proposed. The concept of ecosystem service was established and a total of 20 service items were set, 5 for each ecosystem service. For each of the 20 proposed service items, descriptions of service items along with evaluation indicators, matters to be considered in the field, and methods, procedures, and usage plans for evaluating ecosystem services and values ​​were presented. The five core services for each ecosystem service are as follows. In the provisioning services, freshwater use, food supply, fuel and raw material supply, biological resource supply, energy production, etc. were found, and in the Regulating services, water resources and flood control, water purification, biological control, regional microclimate control, disaster erosion control, etc. were found. Cultural services include landscape and aesthetic values, recreation and tourism, eco-educational research, local communities and communities, and cultural heritage, and supporting services include soil formation, primary production, nutrient circulation, water circulation, and habitat provision. The evaluation scale is a 5-point scale, with ‘very positive benefit (++: 5 points), positive benefit (+: 4 points), moderate (0: 3 points), marginal profit (—: 2 points), profit None or sometimes disadvantage (——: 1 point), evaluation difficulty (?: 0 point)’, etc. were set. A pilot evaluation was conducted on Du-ung Wetland, one of Ramsar Sites, to verify and evaluate its applicability as an indicator. Culture service > Supporting service > Control service > Provisioning service showed a similar trend to that of previous studies. Although it was more simple, the reliability and validity of the evaluation were maintained.