Ecosystem functions and benefits are typically preserved through the designation of greenbelt zones. However, the lifting of these restrictions, often due to property and livelihood rights issues, directly diminishes ecosystem services in urban areas. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to identify changes in ecosystem services resulting from the release of greenbelt zones in Changwon-Si according to spatial and temporal dynamics based on systems thinking and to propose urban green management strategies to enhance ecosystem services. The results of this study were as follows: First, the release of greenbelt zones in Changwon-Si was primarily driven by the need for available land for economic development in the area. Second, through causal loop diagram analysis between the release of greenbelt zones and ecosystem services, it was observed that this release led to a decrease in the value of ecosystem services in agricultural areas, forests, wetlands, and grasslands. The fragmentation rate of green spaces emerged as a significant variable accelerating this process. Third, the continuous release of greenbelt zones and the promotion of development projects have resulted in a reduction of ecosystem services, thereby decreasing urban livability and increasing the occurrence of disasters and hazards. This system ultimately confirms the occurrence of the 'tragedy of the commons' in Changwon-Si, which in turn diminishes population and economic development. Furthermore, the 'green space fragmentation rate' has been identified as a key strategic factor exacerbating this phenomenon. Lastly, we propose enhancing the "diversity" of forested areas and promoting "connectivity" through the establishment of urban forests as part of green network management strategies to reduce green space fragmentation rates. These findings are expected to contribute to the development of management plans aimed at sustaining ecosystem service values in Changwon-Si, particularly in light of the complete release of greenbelt zones in the future.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: