KJCKorea
Journal Central

@article{ART002789247},
author={Seung-Hoon Chun and Chae，Soo-Kwon},
title={Review of Assessment Criteria for Sustainable Outdoor Space Responding to Climate Change},
journal={Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment},
issn={1225-7184},
year={2021},
volume={30},
number={6},
pages={393-412}

TY - JOUR
AU - Seung-Hoon Chun
AU - Chae，Soo-Kwon
TI - Review of Assessment Criteria for Sustainable Outdoor Space Responding to Climate Change
JO - Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment
PY - 2021
VL - 30
IS - 6
PB - Korean Society Of Environmental Impact Assessment
SP - 393
EP - 412
SN - 1225-7184
AB - This study examines the assessment systems of LEED v4.1, an eco-friendly building evaluation system in the United States, and SITE v2, an assessment system for sustainable outdoor spaces, and then compares and examines them from the perspective ofrelevant laws and institutional guidelines and standards in Korea. The conclusion is as follows. First, the US eco-friendly certification system basically not only establishes an independent evaluation system according to the field of expertise, but also provides a sustainable city and community through response to the climate crisis and the comfort of the external space environment. It can be evaluated that securing the quality of life of healthy and happy city dwellers is the top priority. Second, Korea’s Green Building Certification System (G-LEED) was basically based on the American LEED system, but it was judged that there was a fundamental difference. It was judged that there is a limitation in not being able to achieve an integrated approach through the participation of various expert groups and stakeholders, but also in the accumulation of more scientific and reliable data and information through the application of cutting-edge information and communication equipment. Third, in the case of external space in Korea, a sustainable assessment system has not been established, and not only is it dispersed in various legal and institutional guidelines, but also its effectiveness is judged to be very low. Therefore, it is judged that it is urgent to introduce and secure the applicability of SITES v2, a sustainable outdoor space assessment system in the United States. It was judged that the effectiveness should be secured through the upward adjustment of the minimum Ecological Area Ratio.
KW - Eco-Friendly Building;Outdoor Space;Sustainable Assessment System;Ecological Area Ratio
DO -
UR -
ER -

Seung-Hoon Chun and Chae，Soo-Kwon. (2021). Review of Assessment Criteria for Sustainable Outdoor Space Responding to Climate Change. Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment, 30(6), 393-412.

Seung-Hoon Chun and Chae，Soo-Kwon. 2021, "Review of Assessment Criteria for Sustainable Outdoor Space Responding to Climate Change", Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment, vol.30, no.6 pp.393-412.

Seung-Hoon Chun, Chae，Soo-Kwon "Review of Assessment Criteria for Sustainable Outdoor Space Responding to Climate Change" Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment 30.6 pp.393-412 (2021) : 393.

Seung-Hoon Chun, Chae，Soo-Kwon. Review of Assessment Criteria for Sustainable Outdoor Space Responding to Climate Change. 2021; 30(6), 393-412.

Seung-Hoon Chun and Chae，Soo-Kwon. "Review of Assessment Criteria for Sustainable Outdoor Space Responding to Climate Change" Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment 30, no.6 (2021) : 393-412.

Seung-Hoon Chun; Chae，Soo-Kwon. Review of Assessment Criteria for Sustainable Outdoor Space Responding to Climate Change. Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment, 30(6), 393-412.

Seung-Hoon Chun; Chae，Soo-Kwon. Review of Assessment Criteria for Sustainable Outdoor Space Responding to Climate Change. Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment. 2021; 30(6) 393-412.

Seung-Hoon Chun, Chae，Soo-Kwon. Review of Assessment Criteria for Sustainable Outdoor Space Responding to Climate Change. 2021; 30(6), 393-412.

Seung-Hoon Chun and Chae，Soo-Kwon. "Review of Assessment Criteria for Sustainable Outdoor Space Responding to Climate Change" Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment 30, no.6 (2021) : 393-412.