Priority for Re-wild of Abandoned Land to Enhance Biodiversity
in Agricultural Landscapes
11111Yongwon Mo , Giyeong Jeong , Minseon Kim , Gyumin Lee , Yeeun Lee ,2
Hae Jin Yeo1) Department of Landscape Architecture, College of Life and Applied Sciences, Yeungnam University, Gyeongsan, Republic of Korea, 2) Research Fellow, Architecture & Urban Research Institute, Sejong, Republic of Korea

Contact: csmo12@yu.ac.kr, webzin12@gmail.com** This presentation is based on the part of "Rural Spatial Restructuring Strategies of Eup·Myeon Township(농촌 읍·면소재지 공간 재구조화 전략 연구)" (Hae Jin Yeo et al., 2023, Architecture & Urban Research Institute) supported by
the National Research Council for Economics, Humanities and Social Sciences in 2022-2023.

Main Conclusions
We tried to find a priority area among abandoned lands to re-wild to increase biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. As the results, the abandoned land around theecological important area (EIA) appears to be a suitable area for re-wild for the future.
The interior of the abandoned land contained relatively more natural land cover, and as
a result of checking the external land cover, the proximity to the natural land cover was
also high. However, since the characteristics of abandoned land differ depending on theregion, strategies fitted to the region may be required. Compared to the evaluation
results in the development aspect (land suitability), the distance from the road and theproximity from the building area are considered for development, but the proximity andconnectivity with the natural area are not considered in the conservation aspect, so it
can be complemented through the methodology of this study.

Objectives Prioritiy for Re-wild considering EIA and Land Suitability

(a)

(b)



Proximity to EIA (A in Fig.2)
and land suitability index weresynthesized by evaluating
land use potential based on
three groups of Re-wild,Agriculture, and Development
through matrix analysis toprioritize.

Proximity with EIA
IIIII
IVIA

1) Re-wild2) Re-wild orAgriculture

BFig 5. Priority for Re-wild considering EIA and Land Suitability (left) and the Abandoned Lands in the Field Survey (right)

4) Agriculture orDevelopment

CD

Township office
Abandoned lands

1st (Re-wild)
2nd (Re-wild or Agriculture)
3rd (Agriculture)
4th (Agriculture or Development)
5th (Development)
Township boundary
Township office region

V Abandoned Land Characteristics by the Priority3) Agriculture5) Development

EFig 3. Priority Matrix Analysis

Results

Overview and Study sites¯ Research Flow

The area of the grade with development potential with low priority was the largest, and the area of the Rewild was small. The closer to the township location, the more development, and the further away, the more
Re-wild tends to appear (Fig 5). It was found that there are more abandoned lands with bigger potential fordevelopment compared to Re-wild.

Fig 2. Research flow

South Korea is one of the countries with a very high rate of population decline. The areas
most affected by population decline are rural areas. Even now, there are many
abandoned lands in rural areas. There are conflicting opinions about the ecological valueof abandoned lands
In landscape ecology, there are previous results that increase the heterogeneity of thelandscape so that various species can inhabit or have a positive effect on thesurrounding biodiversity.
Therefore, we tried to find a priority area among abandoned lands to re-wild to increase
biodiversity in rural areas. In particular, the value of abandoned lands as a buffer areasthat can contribute to conserving areas with ecological important areas(EIA).

North Korea

Land Suitability

Methods

 Priority for Re-wild considering EIA and Land Suitability

Table 2. Included ration of land-cover in the priority of abandoned lands (red : increase, blue : decrease) Ratio of Land-cover in Abandoned LandIt can be seen that areas with a high priority for Re-wild have a relatively high area ratio ofnatural land cover compared to areas with a low priority. For built up land cover, low priority
areas have a higher land cover area ratio. However, these trends were different depending on
the region (Table 2).
Overall, the distance from residential or agricultural areas tends to decrease as the priority islower, and for forests, areas with lower priority tend to have longer distances (Table 3).

Abandoned lands show various land cover conditions (Fig 4). The large proportions
were roads, forests, agricultural lands, other grasslands, and inland wetlands (Table 1).

Main category

Sub category

Used Area(Built up)

HouseRoad

Agricultural Land

South Korea

4th

5th

37.70

15.96

20.09

25.69

12.89

19.39

22.42

30.39

34.08

15.73

37.14

18.79

36.92

13.04

11.56

34.59

38.67

39.48

45.95

32.94

15.74

23.31

71.39

65.15

49.18

30.04

33.44

1st

32.32

94.81

30.59

31.54

29.07

63.21

33.73

44.58

31.98

32.39

Deciduous Forest

34.76

54.60

55.36

50.19

51.31

69.21

30.32

40.01

40.19

38.00

Evergreen Forest

16.23

58.84

34.86

38.76

38.07

26.02

21.83

16.48

16.62

14.97

Grass

Other grasslands

34.63

50.33

42.77

39.06

31.46

43.49

43.52

39.05

38.51

33.55

WetlandInland Wetland

24.73

29.11

18.21

30.89

77.62

40.98

49.31

37.30

BarrenBarren

30.85

40.14

26.51

31.87

45.76

32.84

4th

5th0.06

18.59

Table 3. Distance from the land-use according to the priority of abandoned lands (red : increase, blue : decrease)

JapanSeokseong-myeon,
Buyeo-gunHamchang-eup,
Sangju-si

Fig 1. Study sites in South Korea, (a) Seokseong-myeon, Buyeo-gun, Chungcheongnam-do, (b) Hamchang-eup,
Sangju-si, Gyeongsanbuk-do



0.03

Not-cultivated Paddy

1stSeokseong-myeon
2nd
3rd
4th

5th

1stHamchang-eup
2nd
3rd

Residential area

283.51216.56118.27182.33102.28237.26165.19190.62238.50104.15Agricultural area

273.09206.94

69.22

92.09

55.56

115.84142.27115.46

49.43

68.08

Forest

1.02

50.85

76.29

155.88

79.99

0.61

133.2963.69

186.05156.48Water

627.90393.79431.35248.91

310.64650.06408.5

382.43287.37634.62Road----------

Main category

5th

1stHamchang-eup
2nd
3rd

Not-cultivated Dry Field

ForestAbandoned land

Seokseong-myeon
2nd3rd4th

We tried to select an area where there was a difference in the caused of abandoned lands as
the study sites. Specifically, Seokseong-myeon (Buyeo-gun) where land use changes havebeen occurring due to a rapid population decline in the agricultural township location, andHamchang-eup (Sangju-si) where the central function of the township location is weakening
due to the development of the downtown area in the region.
Firstly we confirmed the re-wild potential of the abandoned land by checking the current land
cover area ratio in the abandoned land in order to grasp the status of the abandoned land.
Second, the re-wild priority was derived using the Matrix methodology. We synthesized theresult of land suitability evaluation (land suitability index) and priority derived based on proximity
to EIA (ecologically natural map 1st grade, national land environmental assessment map 1stgrade, and biotope map 1st grade). Finally, we verified by analyzing the land cover ratio and thedistance from the surrounding land use for each priority region, and conducting a field survey.

Fig 4. Land-cover sub category and abandoned land in the study sites
Table 1. Rank of included ratio of land-cover in the abandoned lands
Seokseong-myeon
Parcels Ave. %Std

Sub category

1

Dairy Farm

250

51.67

38.45

100

Deciduous Forest

114

46.3

34.1

100

2

Cultivated Dry Field

28

40.81

34.51

100

Dairy Farm

153

45.3

39

100

3

Inland Wetland

1238.41

31.43

80.6

Lake

269

44.9

38

100

4

Deciduous Forest

75

37.78

35.9

100

Mixed Forest

359

44.5

40.8

100

5

Schoolyard

200

37.68

36.74

100

Evergreen Forest

342.6

29.8

77.6

6Riverside

1,26535.6332.79

100

Other Grasslands

3141.6

41.3

100

7

Cultivated Paddy

333.4956.74

99

Environmental Facility

416

40.7

37.1

100

8

Road

816

33.23

28.98

100

Road

1,686

38.8

32.7

100

199

33.23

32.59

100

Barren595

35.9

35.7

100

130

33.09

32.16

100

Grave

1,563

35.3

32.1

100

Not-Cultivated Paddy
 9 Habitat
10

Other Grasslands

Max %Sub category

Hamchang-eup
Ave. %
StdRankParcels

Max %Discussions


The abandoned lands located around EIA appear to be suitable areas for Re-wild. The proximity to thenatural land cover was high, and the natural land cover was relatively more distributed inside theabandoned lands. However, since the characteristics of abandoned lands are different for each region, it isnecessary to check the distribution characteristics of abandoned lands by region.
Land suitability evaluation considers proximity from just the development site, such as distance from roads,
but it does not include the concepts of proximity and connectivity with natural areas. Therefore, if the land
suitability index is complimented using the abandoned land priority developed in this study, areas withecological potential can be found for the re-wild.