ENVIRONMENTAL AUDITING

I. National Policies for Natural Ecosystem Conservation

 

a. Major policies for natural ecosystem conservation

 

 a.1. Designation and management of well-conserved ecosystems  

The Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries designate and manage areas worthy of conservation as legally protected zones. Specifically, both ministries designate areas with well-preserved ecosystems and high biodiversity as ‘Ecosystem Conservation Areas’ and continuously care for them in accordance with the Natural Environment Conservation Act.

 

a.2. Protection of wild fauna and flora

 · The Ministry of Environment has designated the wild fauna and flora with ecological conservation value as ‘Endangered Wild Fauna and Flora’ or ‘Protected Wild Fauna and Flora’ while designating alien species which may threaten Korea's ecosystem as ‘Invasive Alien Species (the so-called “outlaws of the ecosystem”)’.  

 · The Cultural Heritage Administration of Korea has designated Korea’s rare native species as ‘Natural Monuments.’

 

a.3. Major Steps Taken to Conserve the Natural Environment

· Ecosystem conservation project: wetland survey, sand dune survey, and natural cave survey

· Measures against soil pollution from inactive mining sites and their implementation

· Implementation of wildlife protection measures and establishment of the National Biological Resources Center

· Implementation of measures to prevent poaching of wild birds and mammals

· Purchase and management of lands in ecosystem conservation areas

· Conservation project for endangered wild fauna and flora

   ·Development of Geographical Information System (GIS) database for conservation of the natural environment

 

  a.4. Natural Environment Conservation System

The tasks of natural environment conservation are the designation and management of the natural environment protection areas for preserving areas with ecological value or the protection of wild fauna and flora. They are carried out individually, corresponding to the respective responsibilities and duties of the Ministry of Environment, the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, the Cultural Heritage Foundation and the Korea Forest Service in accordance with the relevant laws.

 

II. Audit Results on Natural Ecosystem Conservation Policies

 

b. Title of the audit project

Audit on natural ecosystem conservation policy measures

 

 c. Audit scope

   Among works related to natural ecosystem conservation policy measures implemented by central and local governments of the Republic of Korea, all works except the management of national parks

  * Audit on the management of national parks is conducted in accordance with separate auditing plans.

 

 d. Type of audit:  Performance audit

 

 e. Audit objective

   The objective of the audit was to assess the results of implementing natural ecosystem conservation policy measures  by the  Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, including the designation and management of well-preserved ecosystems and protection measures for wild fauna and flora, and to suggest alternatives to address identified problems, thereby ensuring  the effectiveness of natural ecosystem conservation policies and contributing to the improvement of people’s quality of life.

 

 f. Audit Focus

- Evaluate whether the designation and management of areas with well-preserved ecosystem are properly done  

- Evaluate whether the wildlife conservation programs and policies were appropriate and reasonable

- Evaluate whether the control of invasive alien species were properly managed

 

 g. Auditees

Headquarters of the Ministry of Environment and five local environmental offices, the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, the Cultural Heritage Administration of Korea and the Seoul Metropolitan City

 

 h. Audit procedure

   Data collection and analysis - Preliminary assessment - On-site Audit for Confirmation - Consultations with Relevant Organizations and experts - Final Decisions on the audit results by the Counsel of the Commissioners of the BAI

 

 i. Audit findings and recommendations

 

  i.1 Finding 1  Inappropriate designation of ecosystem conservation areas and wetland protection areas

 In accordance with the provisions of the Natural Environment Conservation Act and the Wetland Conservation Act, the Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries designate areas with high biodiversity or areas inhabited or migrated by endangered wild species as ecosystem conservation areas or wetland protection areas for the special protection.

 

i.1.1 Inappropriate criteria for designating Ecosystem Conservation Areas

Once an area is designated as an Ecosystem Conservation Area in accordance with the Natural Environment Conservation Act, land-use activities such as construction and expansion of buildings and land adjustment are restricted.  This may cause difficulties in designating areas as Ecosystem Conservation Areas due to opposition from stakeholders, even though the area concerned might have well-preserved ecosystems. In order to persuade stakeholders, there is a need to devise designation criteria, which can verify that the area concerned is worthy of conservation owing to its ecological excellence.

Nevertheless, the Ministry of Environment has designated Ecosystem Conservation Areas without setting objective criteria such as an ecological grading scheme for use when evaluating. As a result, areas with high ecological value such as plains, tidal flats and reed fields have not been designated as Ecosystem Conservation Areas due to opposition from local residents.

   Furthermore, in order to ensure effective conservation and management of areas with ecological values, there is a need for the more detailed land-zoning of the designated conservation area instead of just designating the area in whole. That is, the area may be divided into ‘Core Area,’ which has high ecological conservation value and where activities are strictly controlled, and ‘Transition Area,’ which has relatively low conservation value and where agricultural and fishing activities of residents are permitted. However, the Ministry of Environment did not set any criteria dividing an Ecosystem Conservation area into a Core Area and Transition Area in the Natural Environment Conservation Act. As a result, the area which was designated as the Ecosystem Conservation Area with low ecological conservation value earned the grade 3 in the ecological naturalness and has been restricted in the land activities as the same level of the one in the areas of the grade 1 in naturalness. In turn, the economic activities of the residents in the area are being restricted as well.

 

   i.1.2 Unreasonable designation of Wetland Protection Areas

     According to a report commissioned by the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, tidal flats in some areas were assessed as areas worthy of wetland protection with high conservation value while tidal flats in other areas were assessed as Use Adjustment Areas and Wetland Improvement Areas with low conservation value. However, the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries designated tidal flats with low conservation value over other tidal flats with high value as Wetland Protection Areas because the residents of the concerned flats opposed the designation.  

 

   i.1.3 Inappropriate designation and notification of Ecosystem Conservation Areas and Wetland Protection Areas

    As written above, once an area is designated as an Ecosystem Conservation Area or Wetland Protection Area, land-use activities such as construction and expansion of buildings and land adjustment are restricted in the area under the Natural Environment Conservation Act and the Wetland Protection Act.

    In this regard, when designating Ecosystem Conservation Areas and Wetland Protection Areas, it is desirable that not only XY coordinates and latitude/longitude coordinates, but also a topographical map showing land registration are notified together to help stakeholders such as landowners to easily recognize designated scopes. However, the Ministry of Environment issued a public notice of the designation scopes of five Ecosystem Conservation Areas and five Wetland Protection Areas only in terms of the XY coordinates after the designation of those areas while the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries announced the designation scopes of two Ecosystem Conservation Areas and two Wetland Protection Areas only in terms of the latitude/longitude coordinate system after the designation of the areas.

    As such, it is difficult for stakeholders such as relevant public officials or landowners to accurately recognize designation scopes of the aforementioned Ecosystem Conservation Areas or Wetland Protection Areas.

 

i.1.4 Inappropriate definition of coastal wetlands

    According to the Ramsar Convention, coastal wetlands include intertidal mudflats, coastal salt flats and subtidal aquatic beds, and it is known that salt flats and subtidal aquatic beds are inhabited by more diverse wildlife than intertidal zones. Given this, in order to efficiently conserve coastal wetlands, it is desirable to include subtidal beds and salt flats in defining coastal wetlands. However, the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries defines coastal wetlands as merely intertidal zones in the provisions of the Wetland Protection Act, undermining the effectiveness of coastal wetland conservation.

 

Recommendations

  It is recommended that the Environment Minister, upon designating Ecosystem Conservation Areas, devise designation criteria which objectively prove that pertinent areas are ecologically well-preserved and are worthy of conservation.

Also it is recommended that ways be found to differentiate activity restrictions by classifying areas of use in a more detailed manner such as ‘Core Areas’ with high conservation value and ‘Transition Areas’ with low conservation value within an Ecosystem Conservation Area.

And when the designation Scopes for Ecosystem Conservation Areas and Wetland Protection Areas are announced, ways to notify the scopes not only with XY coordinates but also with a topographical map with land registration need to be promoted to help stakeholders easily recognize the designation scopes.

  It is recommended that the Minister of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries should not  designate areas with low conservation value as Wetland Protection Areas ahead while excluding areas assessed to have high conservation value as tidal flats. The Minister is advised to caution those who have designated tidal flats with low conservational value as Wetland Protection Areas.

  When the designation scopes for Ecosystem Conservation Areas and Wetland Protection Areas are announced, ways need to be sought to notify the scopes not only with latitude/longitude coordinates but also with a topographical map in order to help stakeholders easily recognize the designation scopes. Moreover, in order to ensure efficient conservation of coastal wetlands, it is recommended that ways be found to include not only intertidal zones but also salt flats and subtidal beds in the scope of coastal wetlands as specified in the Wetland Conservation Act.

    

 i.2 Finding 2  Inappropriate designation of the Habitat for Giant Mottled Eel as a Natural Monument

   In accordance with the Cultural Properties Protection Act, the Cultural Heritage Administration of Korea designated on December 3, 1962 the 114,500㎡ area around the Cheonjiyeon Waterfall in Seogwipo City, Jeju Island as the "Habitat for Jeju Island Giant Mottled Eel (Natural Monument No.27)," a state-designated cultural property, and has managed it ever since.

   According to the Cultural Properties Protection Act, when an area is designated to protect Natural Monuments, a further review should be conducted regarding the appropriateness of the designation after a certain period has elapsed. If an area designated as a Natural Monument has lost its protection value due to damage or loss, the designation is cancelled. On the other hand, if a new area worthy of the designation is found, it is necessary to conduct a validity survey and designate the area as a Natural Monument.  Seogwipo City conducted an investigation from May 1998 to December 2003 to ascertain whether giant mottled eels inhabit the Cheonjiyeon Waterfall. As a result, it was confirmed that giant mottled eels were not found in the Cheonjiyeon Waterfall area due to the environmental degradation of the surrounding areas (development of the nearby Seogwipo Port and subsequent increase in movement of boats). Nevertheless, the area is still managed as a Natural Monument, whereas the Cheonjieyeon Waterfall area which giant mottled eels were found to inhabit (July 8, 2001) has not been designated as a Natural Monument.

 

Recommendations

   It is recommended that the Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration of Korea seek ways to designate the Cheonjieyeon area found to be inhabited by giant mottled eels as a Natural Monument in order to ensure efficient conservation and management of giant mottled eels.    

 

   i.3 Finding 3  Inadequate management of Ecosystem Conservation Areas

   The Ministry of Environment designates areas with well-preserved  ecosystems, and thus with high conservational value, as Ecosystem Conservation Areas in accordance with the Natural Environment Conservation Act. After the designation, in accordance with the Act and the Enforcement Decree of the Act, the Ministry relegates the management of the areas to administrators of local environmental administration agencies.

In order to protect and manage Ecosystem Conservation Areas, there is a need to designate adjacent areas of the protected ecosystems as ‘Buffer Zones’, thereby restricting damage to those protected ecosystems. As of December 2003, there had been no cases where adjacent areas of 20 designated Ecosystem Conservation Areas were designated as Buffer Zones.

 

<Cases of ecosystem damage in adjacent areas of Ecosystem Conservation Areas>

Rafting businesses were permitted in the boundary area of the Seomjin River Otter Habitat.

Lumbering was permitted in the adjacent area of Mt. Daedeok/ Geumdaebong.

Fishing is not restricted in the upstream area of the Tancheon Ecosystem Conservation Area.

 

  Recommendations

   It is recommended that in accordance with the Natural Environment Conservation Act, the Environment Minister seek ways to designate appropriately-sized Buffer Zones in adjacent areas of Ecosystem Conservation Areas and devise provisions for the restriction of activities in Buffer Zones.

 

i.4 Finding 4 Inappropriateness of the sewage treatment facility construction project

  Paju City is currently implementing the Tongil Dongsan ('reunification hill') sewage treatment facility construction project.

  According to the Cultural Properties Protection Act and the Enforcement Decree of the Act, those who intend to carry out activities that cause noise and vibration in an area within 500m of the outer boundary of state-designated cultural properties, which may affect the conservation of such properties, are required to obtain permission for changing the existing situation of cultural properties from the Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration of Korea.

  The aforementioned sewage treatment facility site is a mere 120m away from the outer boundary of the ‘Sanctuary of Migratory White-Naped Cranes in the Lower Stream of the Han River’ designated as a Natural Monument on May 24, 1995.

There is a possibility that noise and vibration generated during the construction may affect the conservation of the state-designated cultural property and that even after the completion of the sewage treatment facilities, effluent released into the Han River may affect the ecosystem in the sanctuary of white-naped cranes. For the construction of the sewage treatment facilities, Paju City should have sought approval for changing the existing cultural property from the Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration of Korea in accordance with the Cultural Properties Protection Act and the Enforcement Decree of the Act.

However, without obtaining such approval, Paju City entered into the construction of sewage treatment facilities on February 7, 2003 and has thus been notified by the Cultural Heritage Administration of Korea to suspend all activities for changing the existing cultural property until legal procedures are completed.

  Consequently, as the construction of the sewage treatment facilities will be difficult to be completed by the expected occupation date for tenant companies (66 businesses) in the Tongil Dongsan and Paju Publication Complex, it is expected that tenant companies are inevitably having discomforts. Moreover, Paju City is forecasted to incur additional expenditure of around 4.9 billion won to alter the installation of sewage facilities for the purpose of obtaining approval from the Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration of Korea.

 

 Recommended Disciplinary Actions

   It is recommended that the Governor of Gyeonggi Province and the Mayor of Paju City take disciplinary actions against the people in charge who pushed ahead the sewage treatment facilities construction without receiving approval for changing the existing situation of cultural properties.

 

i.5 Finding 5 Inadequate measures to control invasive alien species

   The Ministry of Environment has introduced measures to control invasive alien species which may threaten Korea’s ecosystem.

   Invasive alien species such as American bullfrogs disturb Korea’s native ecosystem with their prolific breeding habits. However, it is difficult to consider the impact of these hazardous species upon Korea’s ecosystem in a short period of time and then to come up with appropriate follow-up control measures – capture and elimination. As such, there was a need to conduct the pre-assessment of the impact of invasive alien species on the Korean ecosystem before their introduction into the country. And if there was a possible hazard, control measures such as restricting imports thereof should have been formulated and implemented.

   However, the pre-assessment system of the possible hazards to the ecosystem was not in place upon the importation of invasive alien species. It is possible that nine types of invasive alien species may pose a threat to Korea's native ecosystem as shown by rainbow trout imported to Korea in 2002 and 2003 which devoured some of Korea's indigenous fish.

 

Recommendation

It is recommended that the Environment Minister seek ways to devise a system for the pre-assessment system of the possible hazards to the Korean ecosystem upon the importation of fauna and flora in order to prevent the introduction of alien fauna and flora which may pose a threat to the ecosystem.

 

i.6 Finding 6 Unreasonable application of provisions on prohibited activities in Ecosystem Conservation Areas

The Ministry of Environment applies provisions on restriction of activities in Ecosystem Conservation Areas in the Natural Environment Protection Act.

  In order to protect wildlife living in Ecosystem Conservation Areas, regulations should be applied in such a way that not only the capturing of animals but also fisheries activities, including recreational fishing, should be prohibited.

Although the above Act stipulates that prohibited activities within Ecosystem Conservation Areas include "capturing of animals or harvesting of spawn,” it is interpreted and applied that recreational fishing itself is not included in the provisions on prohibited activities.

 

 Recommendation

 It is recommended that the Environment Minister seek ways to properly restrict not only the capturing of animals or harvesting of spawn but also recreational fishing activities in Ecosystem Conservation areas.  

 

j. Best Practice

  One public official responsible for survey on the actual state of the country's wildlife species has found that it is difficult to efficiently observe changes in the ecosystem with only three surveyors, as there were as many as 12 natural ecosystems to be surveyed under the competent authorities, spanning an area as large as 464.2 million m2 where even survey points are not fixed.

Given this, he has systematically managed the areas as follows:

He first conducted research on the relevant documents and on-site surveys in the 12 areas and selected 2-3 survey points deemed ecologically important by each area. Following this, he created "ecosystem change observation area management cards" by each survey area and surveyed changes in ecosystems on a regular basis and implemented focused management. Furthermore, in order to efficiently manage the “Copper-Winged Bat Habitat Ecosystem Conservation Area," he surveyed the current habitation state and distribution of copper-winged bats in 18 closed caves in February 2003. Based on the surveys, he published and distributed a "Survey Report on the Current Habitation State of the Copper-Winged Bat," promoting the report to be utilized as academic research data. It is regarded that his active and exemplary works contributed to the conservation of natural ecosystems.

 

Recommendation

 It is recommended that the Environment Minister widely publicize his exemplary case and boost morale by awarding the person with an official commendation.

 

k. Disposals of Audit Results

    As the habitat for Giant Mottled Eels, a Natural Monument, has been altered, a new habitat has been designated as a cultural property following deliberations of relevant experts such as members of the Cultural Property Advisory Committee.

    Two public officials who went ahead with the sewage treatment facility construction project without obtaining approval for changing the existing state of cultural properties were subjected to disciplinary actions.

    The public official who contributed to the conservation of natural ecosystems

with his proactive works was awarded with a commendation by the Environment Minister.

  · Other recommendations are in due consideration for the implementation.