All Issue

2022 Vol.44, Issue 4 Preview Page

Article

Research of International Comparison about Ranging the Marines Protected Areas (MPA)

국가 해양보호구역 지정규모에 관한 국제비교 연구

Duckhee Jang1
,
Changyoul Lee1*
,
Eun-Young Cho2
장 덕희1
,
이 창열1*
,
조 은영2
1Ocean Law and Policy Institute, Korea Institute of Ocean Science & Technology, Busan 49111, Korea
2Department of Law, Chung-Ang University, Graduate School, Seoul 06974, Korea
1한국해양과학기술원 해양법･정책연구소 (49111) 부산광역시 영도구 해양로 385
2중앙대학교 일반대학원 법학과 (06974) 서울특별시 동작구 흑석로 84
*Corresponding Author
30 December 2022. pp. 339-353
PDF XML Citation
Abstract

The purpose of this research is to conduct an empirical analysis regarding Korea’s ‘Marine Protected Areas (MPA)’ from an international comparative perspective. The authors would like to present the policy direction of marine protected areas based on the result of the research. The result of this study can be summarized in the following manner: First, the total designated size of marine protected areas in Korea is very small compared to the sizes of other OECD nations. Second, while some nations have expanded the extent of marine protected areas in accordance with international agreements and criteria, Korea has not done so. Accordingly, we propose the designated dimensions of marine protected areas should be constantly expanded to keep pace with international trends.

Keywords
MPA
empirical analysis
OECD
comparative research
References
1
허학영 (2020) Post-2020 국가 보호지역 목표 설정을 위한 국제동향 고찰-생물다양성협약 결정문 및 글로벌 목표 성취현황 분석을 중심으로-. 한국환경생태학회지 34(6):601-609 10.13047/KJEE.2020.34.6.601
2
Alphandéry P, Fortier A (2001) Can a territorial policy be based on science alone? The system for creating the Natura 2000 network in France. Sociol Ruralis 41(3):311-328 10.1111/1467-9523.00185
3
Alvarez Malvido M., Lazaro C, De Lamo X, Juffe-Bignoli D, Cao R, Bueno P, Sofrony C, Maretti C, Guerra F (2021) Latin America and the caribbean protected planet report 2020. Red-Parques, UNEP-WCMC, WCPA-IUCN, WWF, CONANP and IAPA Project, Mexico, Cambridge, Gland, Bogota, 27 p
4
Bastian O (2013) The role of biodiversity in supporting ecosystem services in Natura 2000 sites. Ecol Indic 24:12-22 10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.05.016
5
Blicharska M, Orlikowska EH, Roberge JM, Grodzinska- Jurczak M (2016) Contribution of social science to large scale biodiversity conservation: a review of research about the Natura 2000 network. Biol Conserv 199:110-122 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.05.007
6
Davies K, Murchie AA, Kerr V, Lundquist C (2018) The evolution of marine protected area planning in Aotearoa New Zealand: reflections on participation and process. Mar Policy 93:113-127 10.1016/j.marpol.2018.03.025
7
Dudley N (2008) Guidelines for applying protected area management categories. International Union for Conservation of Nature, Gland, 86 p 10.2305/IUCN.CH.2008.PAPS.2.en
8
Edgar GJ, Stuart-Smith RD, Willis TJ, Kininmonth S, Baker SC, Banks S, Barrett NS, Becerro MA, Bernard ATF, Berkhout J et al (2014) Global conservation outcomes depend on marine protected areas with five key features. Nature 506(7487):216-220 10.1038/nature1302224499817
9
Gantioler S, Rayment M, ten Brink P, McConville A, Kettunen M, Bassi S (2014) The costs and socio-economic benefits associated with the Natura 2000 network. IJS Soc 6(1-2):135-157 10.1504/IJSSOC.2014.057894
10
Global Ocean Alliance (2022) https://www.gov.uk/government/topical-events/global-ocean-alliance-30by30-initiative Accessed 6 May 2022
11
Goote M (1997) The Jakarta Mandate on marine and coastal biological diversity. IJMCL 12(3):377-389
12
Hill LS, Johnson JA, Adamowski J (2016) Meeting Aichi Target 11: equity considerations in marine protected areas design. Ocean Coast Manage 134:112-119 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2016.09.017
13
Humphreys J, Herbert RJ (2018) Marine protected areas: Science, policy & management. ECSA 215:215-218 10.1016/j.ecss.2018.10.014
14
Leenhardt P, Cazalet B, Salvat B, Claudet J, Feral F (2013) The rise of large-scale marine protected areas: conservation or geopolitics? Ocean Coast Manage 85:112-118 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2013.08.013
15
Maestro M, Pérez-Cayeiro ML, Chica-Ruiz JA, Reyes H (2019) Marine protected areas in the 21st century: current situation and trends. Ocean Coast Manage 171:28-36 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2019.01.008
16
Maiorano L, Falcucci A, Garton EO, Boitani L (2007) Contribution of the Natura 2000 network to biodiversity conservation in Italy. Conserv Biol 21(6):1433-1444 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00831.x18173467
17
Mücher CA, Hennekens SM, Bunce RG, Schaminée JH, Schaepman ME (2009) Modelling the spatial distribution of Natura 2000 habitats across Europe. Landscape Urban Plan 92(2):148-159 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2009.04.003
18
O'Leary BC, Ban NC, Fernandez M, Friedlander AM, García- Borboroglu P, Golbuu Y, Guidetti P, Harris JM, Hawkins JP, Langlois T et al (2018) Addressing criticisms of large- scale marine protected areas. Bioscience 68(5):359-370 10.1093/biosci/biy02129731514PMC5925769
19
OECD Statistics (2021) https://stats.oecd.org/# Accessed 16 Dec 2021
20
OSPAR (2019) 2018 Status report on the OSPAR network of marine protected areas. OSPAR Commission, Biodiversity and Ecosystem Series, 73 p
21
Protected Planet (2021) https://www.protectedplanet.net/en/thematic-areas/marine-protected-areas Accessed 16 Dec 2021
22
Rasheed AR (2020) Marine protected areas and human well- being - a systematic review and recommendations. Ecosystem Services 41:101048. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.101048 10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.101048
23
Trochet A, Schmeller D (2013) Effectiveness of the Natura 2000 network to cover threatened species. Nature Conservation 4: 35-53. doi:10.3897/natureconservation.4.3626 10.3897/natureconservation.4.3626
24
UNEP-WCMC (2019). User manual for the world database on protected areas and world database on other effective area-based conservation measures: 1.6. https://www.ibat-alliance.org/pdf/wdpa_manual.pdf Accessed 16 Dec 2021

국문 참고자료의 영문표기 English translation / Romanization of references originally written in Korean

1
Heo HY (2020) A review on the international trends for establishing post-2020 national targets relevant to protected areas - Focused on the CBD decisions and aichi target-11 achievement status -. J Ecol Environ 34(6):601-609 10.13047/KJEE.2020.34.6.601
Information
  • Publisher :Korea Institute of Ocean Science and Technology
  • Publisher(Ko) :한국해양과학기술원
  • Journal Title :Ocean and Polar Research
  • Journal Title(Ko) :Ocean and Polar Research
  • Volume : 44
  • No :4
  • Pages :339-353
  • Received Date :2022. 06. 15
  • Revised Date :2022. 09. 20
  • Accepted Date : 2022. 10. 04
  • DOI :https://doi.org/10.4217/OPR.2022022
Journal Informaiton Ocean and Polar Research Ocean and Polar Research
Online Submission
Archives
: 2019 ~ 이전
  • scopus_OPR
  • NRF
  • KISTI Current Status
  • KISTI Cited-by
  • KCI 문헌 유사도 검사
  • orcid
  • open access
  • ccl
Journal Informaiton Journal Informaiton - close