No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Ecological representation and conservation gaps of South Korea’s protected areas
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 September 2025
Summary
The Convention on Biological Diversity, ratified by 196 countries including South Korea, aims to protect at least 30% of the world’s land, inland waters and marine areas by 2030 as part of the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Beyond increasing protected areas (PAs), promoting biodiversity by protecting different ecosystem types is crucial. We investigated whether South Korea’s PAs evenly cover various ecosystem types. We examined overlaps between the Korean Database of Protected Areas (KDPA) and the Korean adapted Ecosystem Typology (KET) map, which modified the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Global Ecosystem Typology (GET) three-level ecosystem functional group map based on South Korea’s land cover. Compared to the biogeographical ecoregion map, the KET map provides finer ecological detail on representation within PAs and reveals the under-representation of human-influenced ecosystems; eight human-influenced ecosystem functional groups, including rice paddies and urban and industrial ecosystems that may contribute to biodiversity or cultural value, had <10% protection. The T2.2 deciduous temperate forest type dominates, covering 54.79% of PA area across 18 of 27 PA categories. This concentrated protection has led to up to 24 overlapping PA designations in certain locations. Expanding protection for under-represented ecosystems and diversifying governance could help South Korea align with global biodiversity goals.
Keywords
Information
- Type
- Research Paper
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Foundation for Environmental Conservation
References
Balmford, A, Bennun, L, Brink, BT, Cooper, D, Cote, IM, Crane, P et al. (2005) The Convention on Biological Diversity’s 2010 target. Science 307: 212–213.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brooks, TM, Bakarr, MI, Boucher, T, Da Fonseca, GAB, Hilton-Taylor, C, Hoekstra, JM et al. (2004) Coverage provided by the global protected-area system: is it enough? BioScience 54: 1081–1091.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchanan, GM, Butchart, SH, Chandler, G, Gregory, RD (2020) Assessment of national-level progress towards elements of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. Ecological Indicators 116: 106497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CBD (2022) Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, CBD/COP/DEC/15/4 [www document]. URL https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-15/cop-15-dec-04-en.pdf
Google Scholar
CBD (2024) Republic of Korea – Country Profile: Biodiversity Facts [www document]. URL https://www.cbd.int/countries/profile?country=kr
Google Scholar
Chape, S, Harrison, J, Spalding, M, Lysenko, I (2005) Measuring the extent and effectiveness of protected areas as an indicator for meeting global biodiversity targets. Philosophical Transaction of the Royal Society B 360: 443–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deguignet, M, Arnell, A, Juffe-Bignoli, D, Shi, Y, Bingham, H, MacSharry, B et al. (2017) Measuring the extent of overlaps in protected area designations. PLoS ONE 12: e0188681.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Di Marco, M, Watson, JEM, Venter, O, Possingham, HP (2016) Global biodiversity targets require both sufficiency and efficiency. Conservation Letters 9: 395–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diaz, JL, Alvarez, A, Cáceres, MD, Herrando, S, Vayreda, J, Retana, J (2019) Are protected areas preserving ecosystem services and biodiversity? Insights from Mediterranean forests and shrublands. Landscape Ecology 34: 2307–2321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dudley, N, Parrish, JD, Redford, KH, Stolton, S (2010) The revised IUCN protected area management categories: the debate and ways forward. Oryx 44: 485–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erisman, JW, Van Eekeren, N, Koopmans, C, De Wit, J, Cuijpers, W, Oerlemans, N et al. (2016) Agriculture and biodiversity: a better balance benefits both. AIMS Agriculture and Food 1: 157–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Etter, A, Andrade, A, Nelson, CR, Cortés, J, Saavedra, K (2020) Assessing restoration priorities for high-risk ecosystems: an application of the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems. Land Use Policy 99: 104874.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fan, X, Xu, W, Zang, Z, Ouyang, Z (2023) Representativeness of China’s protected areas in conserving its diverse terrestrial ecosystems. Ecosystem Health Sustain 9: 0029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farhadinia, MS, Waldron, A, Kaszta, Ż, Eid, E, Hughes, A, Ambarlı, H et al. (2022) Current trends suggest most Asian countries are unlikely to meet future biodiversity targets on protected areas. Communications Biology 5: 1–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gannon, P, Dubois, G, Dudley, N, Ervin, J, Ferrier, S, Gidda, S et al. (2019) Editorial essay: an update on progress towards Aichi Biodiversity Target 11. Parks 25: 7–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gurney, GG, Adams, VM, Álvarez-Romero, JG, Claudet, J (2023) Area-based conservation: taking stock and looking ahead. One Earth 6: 98–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobbs, RJ, Arico, S, Aronson, J, Baron, JS, Bridgewater, P, Cramer, VA et al. (2005). Novel ecosystems: theoretical and management aspects of the new ecological world order. Global Ecology and Biogeography 15: 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobbs, RJ, Higgs, E, Harris, JA (2009) Novel ecosystems: implications for conservation and restoration. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 24: 599–605.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hong, JP (2017) A Study on Improving the National Protected Areas System-Focusing on Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures. PhD dissertation. Seoul, Republic of Korea: Seoul National University.Google Scholar
Huang, P, Xu, W, Zang, Z, Du, A (2024) Integration approaches for overlapping protected areas in the Qinghai-Xizang Plateau, China. Global Ecology and Conservation 51: e02925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Islebe, GA, Hooghiemstra, H, Brenner, M, Curtis, J, Hodell, DA (1996) Holocene vegetation history from lowland Guatemala. Holocene 6: 265–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
IUCN (2019) Recognizing and reporting other effective area-based conservation measures [www document]. URL https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/PATRS-003-En.pdf
Google Scholar
IUCN (2024) Ecosystem in the Global Biodiversity Framework [www document]. URL https://iucn.org/sites/default/files/2024-10/policy-brief-ecosystem-in-the-global-biodiversity-framework.pdf
Google Scholar
Jenkins, CN, Joppa, L (2009) Expansion of the global terrestrial protected area system. Biological Conservation 142: 2166–2174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kang, TH, Yoo, SH, Lee, SW, Choi, OI, Lee, CB (2008) A study on the habitat use of waterbirds and grading assessment of the tidal flat at Muan Bay in Jeollanamdo, Korea. Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology 22: 521–529.Google Scholar
KDPA (2023) Korea Database on Protected Areas (KDPA) Annual Release 2023 [www document]. URL http://www.kdpa.kr
Google Scholar
Keith, DA, Ferrer-Paris, JR, Nicholson, E, Bishop, MJ, Polidoro, BA, Ramirez-Llodra, E et al. (2022) A function-based typology for Earth’s ecosystems. Nature 610: 513–518.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keith, DA, Ferrer-Paris, JR, Nicholson, E, Kighsford, R (2020) IUCN Global Ecosystem Typology 2.0 [www document]. URL https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/2020-037-En.pdf
Google Scholar
Kil, SH, Lee, DK, Sung, HC, Lee, GG, Kim, HG, Koo, M, Mo, YW (2014) Application of IUCN category regarding the designation of overlapping protected areas. Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment 23: 157–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
KNPS (2024) The characteristic of the Seorak Mountain National Park [www document]. URL https://knps.or.kr/front/portal/visit/visitCourseMain.do?parkId=120400&menuNo=7020093
Google Scholar
Kremen, C, Merenlender, AM (2018) Landscapes that work for biodiversity and people. Science 362: eaau6020.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lecina-Diaz, J, Alvarez, A, De Cáceres, M. Herrando, S, Vayreda, J, Retana, J (2019) Are protected areas preserving ecosystem services and biodiversity? Insights from Mediterranean forests and shrublands. Landscape Ecology 34: 2307–2321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, MJ, Lee, GG, Sung, HC, Lee, DK, Lee, HW, Kim, JS (2013) A comparative study on protected area management in South Korea, Japan and China. Journal of the Korean Society of Environmental Restoration Technology 16: 71–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, WS, Park, CR, Rhim, SJ (2000) Characteristics of bird community in Han River area. The Korean Journal of Ecology 23: 273–279.Google Scholar
Martínez-Tilleria, K, Núñez-Ávila, M, León, CA, Pliscoff, P, Squeo, RA, Armesto, JJ (2017) A framework for the classification Chilean terrestrial ecosystems as a tool for achieving global conservation targets. Biodiversity Conservation 26: 2857–2876.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNeely, JA (1993) Parks for Life: Report of the IVth World Congress on National Parks and Protected Areas [www document]. URL https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/1993-007.pdf
Google Scholar
MOE (2024) About the OECM designation in the Fifth National Biodiversity Strategy [www document]. URL https://www.me.go.kr/home/web/board/read.do?menuId=10524&boardMasterId=39&boardCategoryId=55&boardId=1643910
Google Scholar
Murray, NJ, Keith, DA, Duncan, A, Tizard, R, Ferrer-Paris, JR, Worthington, TA et al. (2020) Myanmar’s terrestrial ecosystems: status, threats and conservation opportunities. Biological Conservation 252: 108834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagendra, H (2008) Do parks work? Impact of protected areas on land cover clearing. Ambio 37: 330–337.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olson, DM, Dinerstein, E, Wikramanayake, ED, Burgess, ND, Powell, GVN, Underwood, EC et al. (2001) Terrestrial Ecoregions of the World: a new map of life on Earth. Bioscience 51: 933–938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ottinger, M, Clauss, K, Kuenzer, C (2016) Aquaculture: relevance, distribution, impacts and spatial assessments – a review. Ocean & Coastal Management 119: 244–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, S, Lee, J, Choi, JU, Heo, N, An, S (2016) Study on the long-term changes in water quality and benthic ecology and evaluation on effect of the barrage in Nakdong River estuary. Journal of Wetlands Research 18: 58–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodrigues, ASL, Andelman, SJ, Bakarr, MI, Boitani, L, Brooks, TM, Cowling, RM et al. (2004) Effectiveness of the global protected area network in representing species diversity. Nature 428: 640–643.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schutz, J (2018) Creating an integrated protected area network in Chile: a GIS assessment of ecoregion representation and the role of private protected areas. Environmental Conservation 45: 269–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sink, KJ, Adams, LA, Franken, M, Harris, LR, Currie, J, Karenyi, N et al. (2023) Iterative mapping of marine ecosystems for spatial status assessment, prioritization, and decision support. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 11: 1108118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sohn, HJ, Won, SY, Jeon, JE, Park, EH, Kim, DH, Han, SH, Song, YK (2023) A study on the application of IUCN Global Ecosystem Typology Using Land Cover Map in Korea. Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology 37: 209–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steibl, S, Sigl, R, Bräumer, PE, Clauß, V, Goddemeier, S, Hamisch, S et al. (2021) Diversity patterns and community structure of the ground-associated macrofauna along the beach–inland transition zone of small tropical islands. Diversity 13: 377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanentzap, AJ, Lamb, A, Walker, S, Farmer, A (2015) Resolving conflicts between agriculture and the natural environment. PLoS Biology 13: e1002242.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thompson, RC, Crowe, TP, Hawkins, SJ (2002) Rocky intertidal communities: past environmental changes, present status and predictions for the next 25 years. Environmental Conservation 29: 168–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, M, Darling, JE, Venter, ES, Maron, O, Walston, M, Possingham, J et al. (2016) Bolder science needed now for protected areas. Conservation Biology 30: 243–248.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wu, J (2008) Changing perspectives on biodiversity conservation: from species protection to regional. Sustainability 16: 205–213.Google Scholar
Kim et al. supplementary material 1
Kim et al. supplementary material
File
1.2 MB
Kim et al. supplementary material 2
Kim et al. supplementary material
File
374 KB
Kim et al. supplementary material 3
Kim et al. supplementary material
File
159.7 KB
Kim et al. supplementary material 4
Kim et al. supplementary material
File
190.5 KB
Kim et al. supplementary material 5
Kim et al. supplementary material
File
16.8 KB