Chapter 4. Policy Direction for River Management in Consideration of
2. Direction of Future River Management Policies
1) Setting Policy Direction for Future River Management
The world trend of the times will be distinctively dominant by reflexive modernism and it is predicted that a more multitudinous thinking of human beings and pluralistic
Policy Direction for River Management in Consideration of a Paradigm Shift
SPECIAL REPORT 2013
30
31
A Paradigm Shift and Policies for River Management in KOREA
values of the environment will be emphasized. The multitudinous thinking of humans is the ultimate human pursuit of happiness which can be classified into physical and mental aspects. The happiness in the mental aspect can be obtained by feeling a mental satisfaction and the happiness in the physical aspect can be obtained by behavioral satisfaction through the process of use.
In addition, emphasis of pluralistic values of the environment is that the surrounding environment is ultimately newly recognized and it can be classified into environmental conservation and environmental use. The new understanding on the surrounding environment from the perspective of environmental conservation is to preserve/manage natural environment through conservation. The new understanding on surrounding environment from the viewpoint of environmental use is to enhance the vitality of the regional economy through the process of connection. In addition, the
Section Existing concepts Future concepts
Purpose of river management
To maintain existing river functions -To maintain water utilization, flood
control, and river environmental functions Ultimate purposes
-To enhance public interests
New river functions will be added.
-Landscape/ecological/cultural functions will be added.
-Ultimate purpose: Concepts of harmony with nature and coexistence will be added
Scope of river management
Riverside foreland section -River area, river facilities, and river
water
Will be extended to nearby areas -Harmonious collaboration with nearby
areas
The subject who conducts river
management
Top-down management led by government
-Advantageous in terms of conformity and securing sense of responsibility -Disadvantageous in terms of diversity
by section and region
Utilization of regional water governance concept will be added.
-Diversity and regional characteristics will be considered.
-Clear motivation and voluntary participation are required.
River management method
One-way management led by river management authority
-Management according to unified standards and regulations -Insufficient consideration on river
users and collecting their opinions
Two-way management in consideration of river users
-Quick communication and collecting opinions
-Consideration on the socially weak class -Pursuit for diversity, creativity, safety,
and convenience Table 7. Comparison of River Management Concepts
32 SPECIAL REPORT
2013
process of creation-use-conservation-connection can be done naturally when there is a voluntary participation of the regions.
In consideration of the structure of logic process, the policy direction for future river management according to the paradigm shift can be set in the following five ways:
Paradigm structure
Embodiment of a paradigm
Respecting multitudinous thinking of humans
New understanding on the value of
humans
Mental aspect
Creation Enhancing mental
satisfaction
Creation and vitalization of various
river cultures
Rediscovery of environmental values
Environmental conservation
Conservation Conservation and management of nature
Conservation of river environment and
strengthening various functions Enhancing the
quality of life
Physical aspect
Composition of regional governance and vitalization of operation Use
Participation Enhancing behavioral
satisfaction
Vitalization of sound utilization of river
Emphasis on the correlation of ecological system
Environmental use
Connection Enhancing vitality of
regional economy
Provision of cluster use and vitalization of
regional economy Emphasis on pluralistic values
of environment
Coexistence of humans with nature Humans’ pursuit
of happiness
New understanding on surrounding
environment Figure 6. Structure and Embodiment Process of a River Shift Paradigm
33
A Paradigm Shift and Policies for River Management in KOREA
2) Setting an Idealistic River Model
Through the survey on recognition for present and future rivers, this study investigated desirable river models that people think as a general image. Based on the results, this study analyzed the paradigm shift between present and future rivers that people recognize. This study conducted a survey with a total of 180 subjects by classifying them each into 60 river management authorities, 60 river management agencies, and 60 river users, respectively. As to the survey method, we contacted them on the phone in advance to get permission for the survey and sent a questionnaire via email and collected their
Section Description
River management
paradigm Creation of new river values and expansion of governance for river management Theme of
implementation
Humans pursuit of happiness, creation of new river values, and coexistence with human beings
Perspectives of
implementation <Purpose of implementation> <Policy directions>
Humans pursuit of happiness
Enhancing mental satisfaction Creation and vitalization of river culture
Enhancing behavioral satisfaction Vitalization of sound utilization of river
New understanding on surrounding environment
Creation of new values of river
environment various functions of rivers
Enhancement of vitalization of regional economy
Vitalization of regional economy through the collaboration with
nearby regions Basis for
implementation
Vitalization of network among
social members Vitalization of regional governance Table 8. Policy Direction for Future River Management
Section No. of subjects No. of respondents Response rate
River management authorities 60 51 85.0%
River management agencies 60 55 91.7%
River management users 60 54 90.0%
Total 180 160 88.9%
Table 9. Participants and Respondents of a Survey for Setting a Desirable River Model
34 SPECIAL REPORT
2013
responses. The total survey period was 5 days lasting from September 3 to September 7, 2012. The valid respondents were 160 in total: 51 river management authorities, 55 river management agencies, and 54 river users. The response rate was at 88.9%.
The questionnaire consists of a total of 11 items in consideration for policy direction on future river management according to the paradigm shift that we have investigated as stated above. The questionnaire was divided into two sections at large recognition on the rivers of the present and the recognition on the rivers of the future. The former consists of 5 items: river management level of the present, river functions that are focused on currently, accessibility to the river and convenience to use, the most preferred activities of the present in rivers, and frequency of river use. The first item is to find out the overall satisfaction of people on current river management level. It is to indirectly grasp the level of river environment management such as water quality and waste treatment and facility management. The second item is to investigate the perspective of the present river management direction. It can grasp the recognition for the people regarding the present focus on river function policies. The third item is to investigate the recognition for the accessibility to rivers and the convenience of river use. This item provides knowledge on the installation and management level of river facilities such as an access road, parking lot, bicycle road, convenience facilities, travel facilities, sports facilities, etc. It implies the necessity for introducing a universal design. The fourth item is to investigate the most preferred present activities in rivers in terms of river use. This item can grasp the types and places of river use activities. It can find out whether the preferred activities are passive or active, static or dynamic, and water or waterside activities. Therefore, we can learn the necessity for a river terrace, the necessary facilities, and what we should focus on in case of a river management that is influenced by the type and place of river use activities. Compared to the replies to the most desirable future river model, the survey results provided the changes in recognition for the present and future rivers. The fifth item is to investigate the frequency in terms of river use. This item is to grasp the level of concerns on the river and frequency of use.
As for the recognition for the future rivers, it consists of a total of six items: future wish activities; necessity for the utilization of rivers by connecting with the resources of nearby regions; necessity for the creation of a cluster near rivers and river zones;
necessity for composing water governance for river management by regions; river functions that should be more focused in the future; and the idealist future river model.
35
A Paradigm Shift and Policies for River Management in KOREA
The sixth item is to investigate what activities people want to do in future rivers.
Compared with the replies to the fourth item on the most preferred activities in rivers, this item can grasp the changes in recognition for river use and the direction of the change.
Also it can comprehend indirectly what river management agencies should consider in case of future river management. The seventh item is to investigate the necessity for the utilization of rivers connected with the history, culture, tourism, and special resources of the nearby regions in terms of human multitudinous thinking. This item can not only grasp the recognition directly on whether any synergy effect can be obtained when rivers are utilized by connecting with nearby regions but can also indirectly find out the
Section Related paradigm and questionnaire items Item No.
Facts on river
management Current river management level 1)
Related to multitudinous thinking of humans
Mental aspect -Creation and vitalization of various river culture 7)
Physical aspect
-Vitalization of sound river use
* Convenience for accessing to rivers 3)
* Trend of current river use (Preferred activities) 4)
* Prediction of future river use (wish activities) 6)
-Frequency of river use 5)
Related to pluralistic values of
environment
Environmental conservation
-Strengthening inherent river functions
*Current key river functions 2)
*Key river functions of the future 10)
Environmental use
*Vitalization of regional economies and enhancement
of cultural value 8)
Foundation for embodiment
Regional
governance -Provision and operation of regional governance 9)
Goal of embodiment An ideal river model
-A desirable river model
*Creation of river culture: Culture/art-type
11)
*Sound river use: Water-friendly and rest-type, health/leisure-type
*Conservation of river environment:
Environment/ecology type
*Vitalization of regional economy: Regional theme-type, total park-theme-type, etc.
Table 10. Embodiment of a River Management Paradigm and the Connection with the Items of a Questionnaire
36 SPECIAL REPORT
2013
recognition for the necessity for the creation of new river values. The eighth item is to investigate the recognition for creating a cluster, district, or zone in nearby regions where river use is promoted for the vitalization of a regional economy in terms of pluralistic values of the river environment. This can discover whether rivers can be used for the vitalization of regional development and regional economy and as well learn about the necessity for providing a cluster for river utilization. The ninth item is to investigate the recognition for the necessity of water governance for river management regions where multitudinous thinking of humans and pluralistic values of the environment can be embodied. This item can teach the recognition for the necessity of water governance for river management.
The replies structured by item according to the purpose of survey are as follows:
As for the 1stitem asking about the current river management level, 58.1% replied to a “moderate” level, 21.9% replied to an “unsatisfactory” level and 18.8% replied to a
“satisfactory” level, respectively. However, whereas the unsatisfactory level ratio of river management authorities or river management agencies climbed up to 18%, the unsatisfactory level ratio of river users climbed up to 30%, which represents a subtle difference in recognition.
As for the 2nditem asking what functions as the main focus for the current river management, 72.5% of overall respondents replied to flood control, 12.5% replied to water utilization, 8.8% replied to river environment, 4.4% replied to a water-friendly function, and 1.9% replied a river culture, respectively. In this item as well, there was a difference in recognition among river management authorities, river management agencies, and river users. That is, whereas 75~85% of river management authorities or river management agencies replied to flood control, about 60% of river users replied to
Section Very
unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Moderate Satisfactory Very
satisfactory Total River management
authorities 0.0 17.6 74.5 7.8 0.0 100.0
River management
agencies 0.0 18.2 50.9 29.1 1.8 100.0
River users 1.9 29.6 50.0 18.5 0.0 100.0
Total 0.6 21.9 58.1 18.8 0.6 100.0
Table 11. Replies to the Level of Present River Management
37
A Paradigm Shift and Policies for River Management in KOREA
flood control. On the other hand, 13% of river users replied that the second most important thing following flood control is the river environment, which has a little difference in recognition from river management authorities or river management agencies having 6~7%.
As for the 3rditem regarding the accessibility to a river or the convenience for river use, 38.8% replied to “moderate” which took the highest percentage but 34.4% replied to
“inconvenient”. Overall, respondents felt a little inconvenience. In particular, while 44.4% of river users replied to “inconvenient”, 51% and 38% of the river management authorities and river management agencies replied to ‘moderate’, respectively, which showed a difference in recognition.
As for the 4thitem regarding the in a river, 65% replied to ‘rest and taking a walk’, followed by ‘taking a bicycle’ (12.5%), and ‘exercise’ (10.6%). About 88% of the entirety of respondents did static and passive waterside activities, which represent that activities in
Section Water control
Water utilization
Water-friendly
function Environment Culture Regional development Total River management
authorities 84.3 3.9 2.0 5.9 3.9 0.0 100.0
River management
agencies 76.4 7.3 7.3 7.3 1.8 0.0 100.0
River users 57.4 25.9 3.7 13.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Total 72.5 12.5 4.4 8.8 1.9 0.0 100.0
Table 12. Replies to the Present River Functions
Section Very
inconvenient Inconvenient Moderate Convenient Very
convenient Total River management
authorities 2.0 29.4 51.0 17.6 0.0 100.0
River management
agencies 1.8 29.1 38.2 27.3 3.6 100.0
River users 7.4 44.4 27.8 20.4 0.0 100.0
Total 3.8 34.4 38.8 21.9 1.3 100.0
Table 13. Replies to the Accessibility or the Convenience for River Use
38 SPECIAL REPORT
2013
rivers are very simple and restrictive. Those who directly come in contact with the water such as playing in water, ‘swimming’(1.3%), and ‘river fishing’(2.5%), or dynamic and active activities such as ‘camping’ showed a very low ratio. Although trust on the river water quality or legal regulations on river activities could be the direct reasons, it is required to develop necessary facilities and programs to provide active activities.
As for the 5th item asking the frequent use of a river per month, 75.6% of all respondents replied to 1~5 times, 11.9% replied to ‘not at all’ and 6.9% replied to ‘5~10 times’. In particular, 18.5% of river users replied to “none”.
As for the 6thitem asking the most wishful activity in rivers in the future, 40% of overall respondents still replied to “rest” and “taking a walk”, followed by 8.1% of respondents who replied to camping, observation and experience, and cultural events, respectively. 6.9% replied to water play and swimming, 6.3% replied to exercise, and 5.6% replied to taking a bicycle.
Section Rest/
walk
Observation/
experience Photo-taking
Taking a
bicycle Exercise Fishing Waterplay/
swimming Camping Culture
/event Others Total River
managemen t authorities
72.5 0.0 2.0 7.8 13.7 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 100.0
River managemen
t agencies
56.4 1.8 1.8 14.5 12.7 1.8 3.6 1.8 5.5 0.0 100.0
River users 66.7 5.6 1.9 14.8 5.6 3.7 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 100.0
Total 65.0 2.5 1.9 12.5 10.6 2.5 1.3 1.3 1.9 0.6 100.0
Table 14. Replies to the Most Preferred Activity of the Present
Section None 1~5
times
5~10 times
10~20 times
Almost
everyday Total River management
authorities 3.9 92.2 0.0 3.9 0.0 100.0
River management
agencies 12.7 63.6 12.7 5.5 5.5 100.0
River users 18.5 72.2 7.4 1.9 0.0 100.0
Total 11.9 75.6 6.9 3.8 1.9 100.0
Table 15. Replies to the Frequency of River Use
39
A Paradigm Shift and Policies for River Management in KOREA
Comparing preferred present activities (4thitem) and future wish activities, they replied to rest, taking a walk, taking a bicycle, and exercise at present, in that order.
However, as the environment has improved and the circumstances for water-friendly functions are provided, they have the desire to diversify the activities such as rest, taking a rest, camping, observation/experience, cultural events, etc. In particular, camping took up to 20%, which showed potential desire for active activities. Observation/experience also took up to 8.1%, cultural events took up to 8.1%, and playing in water/swimming took up to 6.9%. This means that the desire for activities will be diversified in the future compared to the present. As it is expected that the recognition for rivers will be diversified, developing various contents and programs such as experience activities and cultural events are required to satisfy such desires.
As for the 7thitem asking the necessity for collaboration activities combined with history, culture, tourism, regional special resources, etc. of the nearby regions, 55%
replied to “yes”, and 32.5% replied to “very much”. Therefore, 87.5% of the entirety of respondents agreed to the necessity for connected development. What is notable is that river management authorities, river management agencies, and river users showed similar
Section Rest/
walk
Observation/
experience Photo-taking
Taking a
bicycle Exercise Fishing Waterplay/
swimming Camping Culture
/event Others Total River
management authorities
41.2 9.8 0.0 7.8 2.0 2.0 13.7 17.6 5.9 0.0 100.0
River management
agencies
36.4 7.3 3.6 3.6 14.5 5.5 5.5 16.4 7.3 0.0 100.0
River users 42.6 7.4 0.0 5.6 1.9 3.7 1.9 25.9 11.1 0.0 100.0
Total 40.0 8.1 1.3 5.6 6.3 3.8 6.9 20.0 8.1 0.0 100.0
Table 16. Replies to the Most Wish Activity in Rivers in the Future
Section Rest/
walk
Observation/
experience Photo-taking
Taking
a bicycle Exercise Fishing Waterplay/
swimming Camping Culture
/event Others Total
Present 65.0 2.5 1.9 12.5 10.6 2.5 1.3 1.3 1.9 0.6 100.0
Future 40.0 8.1 1.3 5.6 6.3 3.8 6.9 20.0 8.1 0.0 100.0
Table 17. Replies to the Preferred Present Activities and Future Wish Activities
40 SPECIAL REPORT
2013
response rates, which showed a general bond of sympathy in the matter.
As for the 8thitem asking the necessity for creating a cluster or district near the regions where river is actively used in order to activate regional economy and enhance cultural values, 52.5% replied to “necessary”, and 28.1% replied to “very much”. On this question, river management authorities (33.3%) and river management agencies (34.5%) replied necessary, which is more than river users (16.7%). It will be predicted, however, that there will be changes in river policies in the future.
As for the 9thitem asking the necessity for river management organizations (water governance) by region in which central government, regional government, community residents, regional organizations, and regional experts participate for river management, 54.4% replied to “yes”, and 30.6% replied to ‘very much’. In regards to the question, river management authorities (64.7%) and river users (59.35%) replied yes more than river management agencies (40.0%), which implies that it will require more time for change in recognition on river management led by the government.
As for the 10thitem asking what river function should be focused on for future management, 40% replied to ‘environment’, followed by ‘water-friendly function’
Section Not at all No Moderate Yes Very much Total River management
authorities 0.0 3.9 9.8 56.9 29.4 100.0
River management
agencies 0.0 1.8 14.5 52.7 30.9 100.0
River users 0.0 3.7 3.7 55.6 37.0 100.0
Total 0.0 3.1 9.4 55.0 32.5 100.0
Table 18. Replies to the River Utilization Activities Connected with Nearby Regions
Section Not at all Not necessary Moderate Necessary Very much Total River management
authorities 3.9 5.9 5.9 51.0 33.3 100.0
River management
agencies 0.0 5.5 16.4 43.6 34.5 100.0
River users 1.9 5.6 13.0 63.0 16.7 100.0
Total 1.9 5.6 11.9 52.5 28.1 100.0
Table 19. Replies to the Necessity for Creating a Cluster or District
41
A Paradigm Shift and Policies for River Management in KOREA
(29.4%), ‘culture’ (10.6%), and ‘flood control’ (10.0%). On the question, river management agencies replied that the 2ndone to focus on was flood control (16.4%) and river management authorities replied that the 2ndone to focus on was water-friendly function (25.5%). River users replied that the second one to focus on was culture (16.7%), following environment.
Comparing the responses to those of the 2ndquestion asking the river function to focus on currently, the following conclusions are obtained: The present river management focuses on flood control. It is predicted that flood control function will be equipped in some level in the future. Therefore, various functions should be more focused on conservation/restoration of river environment in the future such as water-friendly function and culture on the assumption of safety by flood control. Also, there are changes to subconscious recognition.
Lastly, as for the 11th question in regards to the idealistic future river model, environmental river/ ecological river (38.2%) and water-friendly function/ recreational (31.8%) were responded to at a similar level.
Section Not at all Not necessary Moderate Necessary Very much Total River management
authorities 2.0 0.0 7.8 64.7 25.5 100.0
River management
agencies 0.0 7.3 21.8 40.0 30.9 100.0
River users 0.0 1.9 3.7 59.3 35.2 100.0
Total 0.6 3.1 11.3 54.4 30.6 100.0
Table 20. Replies to the Necessity for Regional Governance
Section Flood control Water utilization
Water-friendly
function Environment Culture Regional development Total River management
authorities 5.9 5.9 25.5 54.9 3.9 3.9 100.0
River management
agencies 16.4 9.1 32.7 27.3 10.9 3.6 100.0
River users 7.4 3.7 29.6 38.9 16.7 3.7 100.0
Total 10.0 6.3 29.4 40.0 10.6 3.8 100.0
Table 21. Replies to the Future River Function
42 SPECIAL REPORT
2013
Considering the replies to the questions in regards to river function to be focused on in the future (Item No. 10) and on the ideal river model (Item No. 11) comprehensively, following inferences can be obtained: It is desirable to provide water-friendly functions considering an environment equipped with flood control for the future rivers and emphasize cultural functions. The future river function (environment) can be clearly identified in an ideal river model from the responses of environment/ecological river (38.2%) and water-friendly function/recreational rivers (31.8%).
Section Flood control Water utilization
Water-friendly
function Environment Culture Regional development Total
Present function 72.5 12.5 4.4 8.8 1.9 0.0 100.0
Future function 10.0 6.3 29.4 40.0 10.6 3.8 100.0
Table 22. Replies to the Present and Future River Function
Section Regional theme-type
Heath/
leisure type
Culture/art type
Total park type
Environment/
ecology-type
Water-friendly/
recreational type Total River management
authorities 7.8 2.0 3.9 3.9 45.1 37.3 100.0
River management
agencies 7.3 9.1 9.1 12.7 29.1 32.7 100.0
River users 9.3 1.9 13.0 7.4 38.9 29.6 100.0
Total 8.3 4.5 8.9 8.3 38.2 31.8 100.0
Function Flood control
Water utilization
Water-friendly
function Environment Culture Regional
development Total Composition
Ratio (%) 10.0 6.3 29.4 40.0 10.6 3.8 100.0
Type Regional theme-type
Heath/ leisure type
Culture/art type
Total park type
Environment/
ecology-type
Water-friendly/
recreational type Total Composition
Ratio (%) 8.3 4.5 8.9 8.3 38.2 31.8 100.0
Table 24. Opinions on Future River Functions and Ideal Models Table 23. Replies to the Idealistic Future River Model