Top

Landscape and Ecological Engineering

Published in:

19-08-2022 | Original Paper

The importance of the Mujechineup wetland for biodiversity: an evaluation of habitat quality and ecosystem service value

Authors: Youngsun Seok, Dong Gun Kim, Jaewoo Son, Jeryang Park, Junga Lee

Published in: Landscape and Ecological Engineering | Issue 4/2022

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

Wetlands are important multifunctional systems that provide various ecological services for animal populations, particularly with regard to regulation and support. The biodiversity of wetlands is threatened by human activities that cause habitat fragmentation and destruction. The international community needs to make efforts to measure habitat quality and recognize the value of biodiversity. This study aimed to evaluate the value of Nannophya koreana habitat restoration in the Mujechineup wetland. First, through a literature review, this study estimated the expected ecosystem service value of the Mujechineup wetland compared to existing wetlands. The Mujechineup wetland's ecosystem service value ranged from a minimum of $109,296.00 (SD $32,752.00) to a maximum of $679,457.14 (SD $4,611,730.90). Second, we quantified the habitat quality of the Mujechineup wetland in Ulsan for biodiversity measurements using the integrated valuation of ecosystem services and tradeoffs (InVEST). The analysis showed that there was a difference in the quality of the habitat depending on the spatial unit. Samdong-myeon was processed for 2 min with a mean value of 0.094. Ulju-gun was processed for 1 h 14 min with a mean value of 0.146. In addition, as a result of the field survey, the ratio of Hemiptera, Odonata and Coleoptera (HOC) groups in the Mujechineup wetland where Nannophya koreana lives was more than 50%, but the ratio of predators was approximately 10% on average. Third, this study investigated the willingness to pay to restore the habitat of Nannophya koreana, which lives in the Mujechineup wetland. The average amount that people would be willing to pay annually for the restoration of the Mujechineup wetland was $33,652. The study found that awareness of the importance of Nannophya koreana and the need for restoration of its habitat environment was high. These findings can be used to recognize the value of the Mujechineup wetland as a habitat for Nannophya koreana and to communicate its importance.

previous article Assessing the long-term impact of land-use and land-cover changes on soil erosion in Ethiopia’s Chemoga Basin using the RUSLE model

next article Effects of advance and retreat of agricultural landscapes on Rana japonica and R. ornativentris

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Available only for authorised users

Allen CD, Savage M, Falk DA, Suckling KF, Swetnam TW, Schulke T, Stacey PB, Morgan P, Hoffman M, Klingel JT (2002) Ecological restoration of southwestern ponderosa pine ecosystems: a broad perspective. Ecol Appl 12:1418–1433. https://doi.org/10.2307/3099981CrossRef

Aneseyee AB, Noszczyk T, Soromessa T, Elias E (2020) The InVEST habitat quality model associated with land use/cover changes: a qualitative case study of the winike watershed in the omo-gibe basin. Southwest Ethiopia Remote Sens 12:1103. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12071103CrossRef

Austin G (2014) Green infrastructure for landscape planning: integrating human and natural systems. Informa UK Limited, Routledge, Oxfordshire. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315856780CrossRef

Bae YJ, Yeom JH, Cha JY, Yoon IB (1999) Morphology, habitat, and distributional records of Nannophya pygmaea ramber (Libellulidae, Odonata). Korean J Entomol 29:287–290

Bae YJ, Yum JH, Kim DG, Suh KI, Kang JH (2020) Nannophya koreana sp. nov. (Odonata: Libellulidae): a new dragonfly species previously recognized in Korea as the endangered pygmy dragonfly Nannophya pygmaea rambur. J Species Res 9:1–10. https://doi.org/10.12651/JSR.2020.9.1.001

Balmford A, Bruner A, Cooper P et al (2002) Economic reasons for conserving wild nature. Science 297:950–953. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1073947CrossRefPubMed

Bhagabati NK, Ricketts T, Sulistyawan TBS, Conte M, Ennaanay D, Hadian O, McKenzie E, Olwero N, Rosenthal A, Tallis H, Wolny S (2014) Ecosystem services reinforce Sumatran tiger conservation in land use plans. Biol Conserv 169:147–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2013.11.010CrossRef

Biggs R, Schlüter M, Biggs D et al (2012) Toward principles for enhancing the resilience of ecosystem services. Annu Rev Environ Resour 37:421–448. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-051211-123836CrossRef

Boutwell J, Westra J (2013) Benefit transfer: a review of methodologies and challenges. Resources 2:517–527. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources2040517CrossRef

Brande L (2013) Guidance manual on value transfer methods for ecosystem service. Publishing Services Section UNON, Nairobi

Clarkson BR, Ausseil AE, Gerbeaux P (2013) Wetland ecosystems services. In: Dymond JR (ed) Ecosystem services in New Zealand: conditions and trends. Manaaki Whenua Press, Lincoln, pp 192–202

Costanza R, d’Arge R, de Groot R et al (1997) The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387:253–260. https://doi.org/10.1038/387253a0CrossRef

Costanza R, d’Arge R, de Groot R et al (1998) The value of ecosystem services: putting the issues in perspective. Ecol Econ 25:67–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(98)00019-6CrossRef

Costanza R, de Groot R, Sutton P, van der Ploeg S, Anderson SJ, Kubiszewski I, Farber S, Turner RK (2014) Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Glob Environ Change 26:152–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.04.002CrossRef

Cylinder PD, Bogdan KM, Davis EM, Herson AI (1994) Wetlands regulation: a complete guide to federal and California programs. Solano Press Books Point Arena, California

Davies ZG, Edmondson JL, Heinemeyer A, Leake JR, Gaston KJ (2011) Mapping an urban ecosystem service: quantifying above-ground carbon storage at a city-wide scale. J Appl Ecol 48:1125–1134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2011.02021.xCrossRef

Desvousges WH, Johnson FR, Banzhaf HS (1998) Environmental policy analysis with limited information: principles and application of the transfer method. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA

Duarte GT, Ribeiro MC, Paglia AP (2016) Ecosystem services modeling as a tool for defining priority areas for conservation. PLoS ONE 11:e0154573. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0154573CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Ehrenfeld JG (2000) Defining the limits of restoration: the need for realistic goals. Restor Ecol 8:2–9. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1526-100x.2000.80002.xCrossRef

Gao J, Li F, Gao H, Zhou C, Zhang X (2017) The impact of land-use change on water-related ecosystem services: a study of the guishui river basin, Beijing, China. J Clean Prod 163:148–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.01.049CrossRef

Hanemann WM (1984) Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. Am J Agric Econ 66:332–341. https://doi.org/10.2307/1240800CrossRef

Kim DG, Yum JW, Yoon T, Bae YJ (2010) Life history of an endangered dragonfly, nannophya pygmaea rambur, in Korea (Anisoptera: Libellulidae). Odonatologica 39:39–46

Kim T, Song C, Lee WK, Kim M, Lim CH, Jeon SW, Kim J (2015) Habitat quality valuation using InVEST model in Jeju Island. J Korea Soc Environ Restor Technol 18:1–11. https://doi.org/10.13087/kosert.2015.18.5.1

Kim M, Oh CO, Kim N, Joo W (2020) Assessing beneficiary benefits for the introduction of payments for ecosystem services in wetland protected areas. J Environ Policy Adm 28:19–39. https://doi.org/10.15301/jepa.2020.28.3.19

Kong MJ, Lee BM, Kim NC, Son JK (2014) The analysis of function and factors for the value assessment of ecosystem service at rice paddy wetland. J Wetl Res 16:251–259. https://doi.org/10.17663/JWR.2014.16.2.251

Lee J, Kang D, Sung K (2010) Assessment of the wetland soil development of constructed wetlands using soil properties of a reference wetland. J Wetl Res 12:1–14

Lee H, You S, Chon J (2015) The management methods of multi-purpose ecological reservoir by system thinking—focused on Anteo eco park. J Korea Soc Environ Restor Technol 18:1–17. https://doi.org/10.13087/kosert.2015.18.2.1

McPhearson T, Andersson E, Elmqvist T, Frantzeskaki N (2015) Resilience of and through urban ecosystem services. Ecosyst Serv 12:152–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.07.012CrossRef

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: opportunities and challenges for business and industry. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC

Ministry of Environment (1997) Report on the survey results of the Mujechineup wetland of Jeongjoksan (first year). Ministry of Environment, Gwacheon

Ministry of Environment (2009) Development of preservation, restoration, and propagation techniques on two endangered wetland insects, Lethocerus deyrollei and Nannophya pygmaea, in Korea. Ministry of Environment, Gwacheon

Ministry of Environment (2018) Comprehensive plan for conservation of endangered wildlife (2018–2027). Ministry of Environment, Sejong

Mitsch WJ, Gosselink JG (2000) The value of wetlands: importance of scale and landscape setting. Ecol Econ 35:25–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(00)00165-8CrossRef

National Institute of Ecology (2019) A guideline for ecosystem services assessment of wetland protected areas. Ministry of Environment and National Institute of Ecology, Seocheon

Nelson E, Mendoza G, Regetz J et al (2009) Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Front Ecol Environ 7:4–11. https://doi.org/10.1890/080023CrossRef

Oh KC, Ro KH, Lee HG, Kim DG (2017) Suggestions for protecting and preserving the level II endangered species Nannophya pygmaea in Korea. Environ Biol Res 35:545–548. https://doi.org/10.11626/KJEB.2017.35.4.545

Osland MJ, Hughes AR, Armitage AR et al (2022) The impacts of mangrove range expansion on wetland ecosystem services in the southeastern United States: current understanding, knowledge gaps, and emerging research needs. Glob Change Biol 28:3163–3187. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16111CrossRef

Pimentel D, Wilson C, McCullum C, Huang R, Dwen P, Flack J, Tran Q, Saltman T, Cliff B (1997) Economic and environmental benefits of biodiversity. Bioscience 47:747–757. https://doi.org/10.2307/1313097CrossRef

Ramsar Convention Secretariat (2013) The Ramsar convention manual: a guide to the convention on wetlands (Ramsar, Iran, 1971). Ramsar Convention Secretariat, Gland, Switzerland

Rosenberger RS, Loomis JB (2001) Benefit transfer of outdoor recreation use values: a technical document supporting the forest service strategic plan (2000 revision). General technical report RMRS-GTR-72. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO

Seppelt R, Dormann CF, Eppink FV et al (2011) A quantitative review of ecosystem service studies: approaches, shortcomings and the road ahead. J Appl Ecol 48:630–636. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01952.xCrossRef

Sharp R, Douglass J, Wolny S et al (2015) InVEST user’s guide. Stanford University, University of Minnesota, The Nature Conservancy, World Wildlife Fund, Minneapolis, MN

Treweek J (1995) Ecological impact assessment. Impact Assess 13:289–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/07349165.1995.9726099CrossRef

Vidal-Legaz B, Martínez-Fernández J, Picón AS, Pugnaire FI (2013) Trade-offs between maintenance of ecosystem services and socio-economic development in rural mountainous communities in southern Spain: a dynamic simulation approach. J Environ Manag 131:280–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.09.036CrossRef

Vigerstol KL, Aukema JE (2011) A comparison of tools for modeling freshwater ecosystem services. J Environ Manag 92:2403–2409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.06.040CrossRef

Yi H, Güneralp B, Filippi AM, Kreuter UP, Güneralp İ (2017) Impacts of land change on ecosystem services in the San Antonio river basin, Texas, from 1984 to 2010. Ecol Econ 135:125–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.11.019CrossRef

Yi H, Güneralp B, Kreuter UP, Güneralp İ, Filippi AM (2018) Spatial and temporal changes in biodiversity and ecosystem services in the San Antonio river basin, Texas, from 1984 to 2010. Sci Total Environ 619–620:1259–1271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.10.302CrossRefPubMed

Zhang Y, Jin R, Zhu W et al (2020) Impacts of land use changes on wetland ecosystem services in the Tumen River Basin. Sustainability 12:9821. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12239821CrossRef

Title: The importance of the Mujechineup wetland for biodiversity: an evaluation of habitat quality and ecosystem service value
Authors: Youngsun Seok
Dong Gun Kim
Jaewoo Son
Jeryang Park
Junga Lee
Publication date: 19-08-2022
Publisher: Springer Japan
Published in: Landscape and Ecological Engineering / Issue 4/2022
Print ISSN: 1860-1871
Electronic ISSN: 1860-188X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11355-022-00520-y

Acknowledgments

Acknowledgment

The long-term effect of initial restoration intervention, landscape composition, and time on the progress of Pannonic sand grassland restoration

Open Access
Original Paper

Modelling of road-kill hotspots in steppe landscape in Turkey

Original Paper

A tale of two cyclists: a cross-cultural comparison between Taiwanese and Filipino perceptions on cycling infrastructure landscapes

Original Paper

Effects of advance and retreat of agricultural landscapes on Rana japonica and R. ornativentris

Report

Assessing the long-term impact of land-use and land-cover changes on soil erosion in Ethiopia’s Chemoga Basin using the RUSLE model

Original Paper

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Acknowledgments

The long-term effect of initial restoration intervention, landscape composition, and time on the progress of Pannonic sand grassland restoration

Modelling of road-kill hotspots in steppe landscape in Turkey

A tale of two cyclists: a cross-cultural comparison between Taiwanese and Filipino perceptions on cycling infrastructure landscapes

Effects of advance and retreat of agricultural landscapes on Rana japonica and R. ornativentris

Assessing the long-term impact of land-use and land-cover changes on soil erosion in Ethiopia’s Chemoga Basin using the RUSLE model