Table of Contents
Go Back
Environmental Carrying Capacity of Seoul Metropolitan Area -
Estimation, Implication and Limitations
Professor , Taehoon Moon
Department of Urban and Regional Planning , Chung Ang University
San 40-1 Daeduck Myun A hnsung City, Kyung Ki Province
Republic of Korea, 456-756
phone. 82-31-670-3054, fax. 82-31-675-1381
thmoon@ post.cau.ac.kr
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is estimating environmental carrying capacity of Seoul Metropolitan Area for
a sustainable city management using system dynamics model. A sustainable development requires a
society to define sustainability constraints or environmental limits, environmental carrying capacity.
Environmental carrying capacity can be defined as the level of human activity which a region can
sustain at an acceptable quality of life level. This concept of environmental carrying capacity has
several important applications to sustainable city planning and management. If the limitation of a
human activity can be supported by a scientific data on carrying capacity, the resulting decision and
actions could more easily win public support for a sustainable development. However, one of the key
issues is how to operationalize the carrying capacity. In this paper, the environmental carrying capacity
was operationalized as a maximum number of industry structure, population, and housing that can
sustain certain level of environmental quality of Seoul Metropolitan Area. The model developed in this
paper consisted of 5 sectors; population, housing, industry, land, and environmental sector. The model
limits its main focus on the NO» level of ambient air of Seoul. In this paper, Box Model was used to
improve the estimation of ambient air quality of Seoul compared with previous one. Box model was
translated into system dynamics model and combined to urban dynamics model to estimate the
maximum number of population, industry structure, housing at an equilibrium point that sustain a
desirable NO» level. Based on the model estimation, several policy implications for a sustainable city
management was discussed.
1. Introduction
The purpose of this paper is building an environmental carrying capacity model and applying the
model to estimate Seoul Metropolitan’s environmental carrying capacity.
A sustainable development require a society to define sustainability constraints or environmental limits,
environmental carrying capacity. Environmental carrying capacity can be defined as “the level of human
activity which a region can sustain at acceptable level of quality of life”. This concept of environmental
carrying capacity has several important applications to sustainable city planning and management. If the
limitation of a human activity can be supported by a scientific data on carrying capacity, the resulting
decision and actions could more easily win public support for a sustainable development.
For this purpose, this paper consists of three parts. First, the paper examined the evolving definition
of the sustainable development and environmental carrying capacity. Second, having examined the
concepts, a model of environmental carrying capacity focusing on a regional NO, emission based on
both urban dynamics model and box model was built. Third, using the environmental carrying capacity
model, this study attempt to estimate Seoul Metropolitan area’s environmental carrying capacity. Some
discussions on implication of the results were also presented.
2. Concept of Sustainability and Environmental Carrying Capacity
Since the term ‘sustainable development’ was defined by the Brundland Commission in 1984, the
definition has been further developed by UNEP and ICLEI, the Intemational Council for Local
Environmental Initiatives (Hams, et.al., 1994:2-3). One way of looking the term is to consider that there
are two versions of sustainable development, a weak version and a strong one. The weak version just
requires that environmental considerations are given greater weight in public decision making. The
strong version, however, require society to define sustainability constraints or environmental limits,
environmental carrying capacity.
Carrying capacity is formally defined as the maximum population that can be sustained by an
ecosystem over time (Miller, 1979 recited from Baldwin 1985:11). From a regional point of view,
carrying capacity can be defined as “the level of human activity which a region can sustain at an
acceptable quality of life level” (RSPB, 1993; Miller, 1979; Bishop et.al., 1974).
There has been three uses of the concept of environmental carrying capacity for environmental
planning and management. The first use of the concept of carrying capacity is in studies to determine
the threshold of human activities that will cause ecological damage to a natural environment. The
second is the development of impact thresholds such as air and water quality standards. The last use of
the concpet is to calculate the sustained yields of renewal resources that are possible without damaging
the resource base for the future (Baldwin, 1985:13).
This paper belongs to the first line of research that seeks the use of the concept because the purpose of
this paper is to estimate the maximum threshold value of human activities that can sustain a desirable
NO2 level. Previous studies on this area includes studies on maximum number of tourists that can
sustain wildlife habitat(Shelby & Colvin, 1982; Tarrant & English, 1996), research on finding optimum
population density for a suscessful agriculture(Feamside, 1985), and on maximum number city
population that can sustain certain level of quality of life and environmental quality(Onishi, 1994;
Moon, 1999, 1998; Lee, 1999, 2000)
This concept of environmental carrying capacity has several important applications to environmental
planning and management. If the limitation of a human activity can be supported by scientific data on
carrying capacity, the resulting decisions and actions can be more easily win public support. However,
one of the key issues in the approach to defining a strong sustainable development is how to
operationalize the carrying capacity and how to model it. System dynamics approach can be a alternative
approach for this purpose.
3. Overview of the Model Structure
In this study, an environmental carrying capacity model was developed by adding environmental sector
to the simple urban dynamics model (Alfeld et.al., 1976). The model consists of six sectors; population,
housing, industry, car, land, and environmental sectors. Each secotors are dynamically related to other
sectors as shown in the <Fig1>. The model purpose is to figure out how the size of population, industry,
houses, number of cars, and green space is changing dynamically over time to reach equilibrium point to
sustain a certain desired level of NO, in the ambient air quality of region.
<Fig.1> Environmental Carrying Capacity Conceptual Model
Population Sector
Total Population,
Immigration, Outmigration|
[Job, House, Environmental
Condition
Housing Sector
Industry Sector #of Houses
#of industry, #of job Housing Land
industry land, Nox ng
emission
Pollution Sector Land Sector Car Sector
Amount of NO2 emission Available land area of Car,
Green space, NO2 sink in Land for industry, amount of No? emission
Green space, pollution index houses, and green space from Car
i)
Model starts from the assumption that available land area is limited. Industry activities occurs within
this limited land. Industry activities are affected by the availability of labor supplied. Labor availability
is in tum, affected by the number of population in the population sector which is affected by the urban
attractiveness; job availability, housing availability and environmental quality. When jobs are abundant,
housing availability and environmental quality is good, population will be increased by in-migration,
supplying enough labor force for active industry activities. However, if job availability, housing
availability and environmental quality in the urban area is becoming worse, in-migration will be
decrased and out-migration will outnumber in-migration rate, constraining industrial activities which
would further limit industrial growth. However, even if inflow of population from other region is high,
industry expansion can not be sustained indefinitely because available land for constructing industry
structure is limited. When fraction of land occupied by houses and green space is high and available
land for new industry construction is scarce, industry growth will be constrained. Model was constructed
to see how these five sectors affect each other and how behaviors of interests variables are changing over
time.
4. Prediction of nitrogen dioxide concentrations in Seoul using a box model
In the model, environmental sector is the most important part since this model is for estimating
environmental carrying capacity. Box model approach is related to CSTR (Continuous Stirred Tank
Reactor) concept that assumes air pollutants are uniformly dispersed in the atmosphere by active
advection. In this study, the amounts of annual influent and effluent nitrogen dioxide(NO2) including
dry deposition and chemical conversion amounts over Seoul were estimated using a simplified box
model.
<Fig2> Box Model
Cin Cout
dc
VE TIC “ACou +8 —KygCLW —K, CV
out
where, q = volumetric flow rate( /sec)
C;, = influent concentration of a pollutant
Cou = effluent concentration of a pollutant
Kaa = dry deposition velocity( /sec)
K,, = First order chemical reaction constant(1/sec)
qC;,, = influent mass flow rate of pollutants(g/sec)
Cou: = effluent mass flow rate of pollutants(g/sec)
S =source emission rate(g/sec)
KygCLW =the amount of pollutants removed by dry deposition(g/sec)
K,,CV =the amount of pollutants converted by chemical reaction(g/sec)
Wi = wind speed(m/sec)
Tn equation, V(=LxW xH) and q represent volume of Seoul( ) and volumetric mass of influent and
effluent air, respectively. Since air is incompressible, it was assumed that inflow air mass is equal to
outflow air mass. Seoul covers an area of 605 square kilometers approximately, so that length(L) and
width(W) of the box were assumed as 25 , respectively. H(m) presents mixing height by which air
pollutants can be mixed homogeneously. The first and second terms on the right hand side represent
total amount of influent and effluent NO2 for one year, respectively. Assuming steady state(
de
Vv a =0), volumetric flow rate can be calculated as follows; q=HxW xWixTime(1yr). The third term
shows the amount of NO2 emission(kg/yr), which was recalculated using NO2/NOx ratio(=0.456)
measured in Seoul('98) to take account of NO2 conversion into NO. The fourth term represents dry
deposition removal, and dry deposition velocity(K,a) was assumed as 0.5 /sec in the simulation. The
fifth term shows the amount of NO2 participating in chemical reaction.
Box model was then translated into system dynamics language and its conceptual causal loop diagram
is shown in the <Fig3>. Level of NO, concentration in Seoul Metropolitan Area can be affected by
several factors such as height of the box, inflowing NO, concentration, wind speed, and changes in dry
deposition rates. But for the simplicity of the model simulation, it was assumed 1 Km of box height, 30
ppb of inflowing NO, concentration, 1.5 m/sec of wind speed, 0.033 cm/sec and 0.098 cm/sec of dry
deposition rate in CBD and green space, respectively. Behavior of the box model is shown in the <Fig4>
and it indicates the NO, concentration in Seoul is stabilized around at 38 ppb when NO, emission from
Seoul is held constant.
<Fig3> Box Model and Causal Loop
chemical reaction dy deposition
NO? inflow from outside Seoul |§————*>NO2in Seoul ————» N02 outflow from Seoul
NO2 emission from Seoul NO2 level in Seoul
<Fig4> Box Model Behavior
® nor 2: outppb
1 537e4016
2 39.00 |, ‘i ‘ i
1 5.37e4016
2 3850
}—2 2 2 2
1 537e4016
2 32.00
0.00 75100 150.00 225.00 300.00
Xa eae Graph 1; Page 1 (Untitled Graph) Time 8:59PM 9/21/00
<Fig 5> shows causal loop diagram of environmental sector with above explained box model part.
The figure shows that the NO, concentration in Seoul Metropolitan A rea is determined by the amount of
NO), inflow from the outside of the Seoul, NO, emission from point and mobile sources of Seoul, and the
amount of NO, converted into other chemical due to chemical reaction and dry deposition. Bold lines in
the causal model do not represent causal relationship between variables. It was simply inserted as an
policy leverage which exerts an influence to move the system toward an equilibrium point that can
sustain desired level of air quality in Seoul.
When the gap between desired and actual NO, concentration become larger, two types of response is
possible. First, total amount of NO, emission from Seoul Metropolitan can be reduced either by
developing clean technology or by reducing total amount of NO, emission from industry and
transportation sector. Second, NO, concentration in Seoul can be improved by increasing sink source of
NO, which is the green space of Seoul Metropolitan Area. Green space in a city can act as both a source
of supplying fresh oxygen and sink source of NO, from point and mobil sources. However, green space
in Seoul cannot be increased without constraints because available land is limited. Increasing green
space in Seoul can constrain new development of industry structure and new housing construction.
Competition of land use among green space, industry land and housing land becomes evident.
Environmental quality in the diagram was calculated as a ratio of actual NO» concentration in Seoul to
target NO, concentration in the model ( actual NO, concentration )
desired NO, concentration
<Fig5> Causal Loop Diagram of Environmental Sector
dry deposition in
CBD
amount af chemical dry deposition in
reaction dry deposition green space
NO? inflow—_____.- NO? amount in nersuen
Seoul
green space
total NO2 emssion NO2 level in Seoul
in Seoul
point source a
mobil source
industry structure houses targe air quality
car
5. Combining Box Model and Urban Model
Environmental sector based on box model was then combined with urban dynamics model. <Fig6>
shows causal loop diagram of environmental carrying capacity model of Seoul Metropolitan Area. A
brief explanation of the diagram is in order.
The upper part of the diagram shows the urban dynamics model and the lower part shows the
environmental sector. Growth and decline of city in terms of its population size is affected by urban
attractiveness. This urban attractiveness is determined by the job availability, housing availability, and
environmental quality. City attracts population from surrounding regions when job availability, housing
availability, environmental quality is good. However, increasing number of city population decrease
urban attractiveness because jobs and houses become scarce and expensive while environmental quality
continues to be degraded. Since the model was constructed to move toward achieving a desired air
quality of Seoul, city population, industry structure, houses, green space in each sector is adjusted
against each other to reach at an equilibrium point where desired NO, conncetration is achieved. Then,
the size of city population, the number of industry structure, houses and the total area of green space at
an equilibrium point that sustain the desired NO, concentration can be regarded as the environmental
carrying capacity of Seoul Metropolitan Area.
<Fig6> Causal Loop Diagram of Environmental Carrying Capacity of Seoul
— —* urban atractivenes
sp-job availabilty i
| mm St \ Se
ear industiystructure_o industry land
bor ob 2) ei housing avalaii \
= | % ‘household-house ratio.
— »
and fraction ‘occupied ~s { /
~ eo |
point source
housing land,
i
/ _ care population PA
| sae avionmenta ai
| ‘mobil pollution source a
Noz ens Sent — a
ap
‘NO2 level in Seouk——~ a
/ satay
noun o N02 ino
total aN in Seoul a
my Lane
Louathecee ~~ Smount of NO? outfor
seni tion anon postion
6. Model Behavior and Environmental Carrying Capacity
Causal loop diagram of environmental carrying capacity model was converted into system dynamics
model and simulations were conducted. Followings are the results of the simulations.
1) Base Run
Base run simulation start from the assumption that desired level of NO, concentration in Seoul
Metropolitan is 50 ppb which is equilivant to the national standard. It was also assumed that there are
no technology change. Only green space was allowed to be changed so that the system can achieve an
desired NO, concentration. Simulation results are shown in the <Fig7>, <Fig8>, <Fig9> and <Tablel>.
Figures show behaviors of interest variables over time. Approximate values at the equilibrium point
represent maximum number of houses, industry structures, population and green space area that sustains
a desired level of NO, concentration in Seoul Metropolitan. Thus, the number of houses, population,
industry structures at this equilibrium point can be regarded as an environmental carrying capacity that
can sustain a target level of NO, concentration.
<Fig7> Changes in the number of population, industry structure, houses, cars in Seoul
&® 2: copulation 2: industry stucture 3: houses 4: carin seoul
1 1.102407
2: 1150000.00 SS
3: 2099000.00 | ~2:
2250000.00 |
1: 9000000.00
2 900000.00
3: 1600000.00
4 1900000.00 ae
~~ \.
a
3,
2 al
1: — 7000000.00 fi, | ——~ 3,
2 _650000.00 ——__|
3: 1200000.00 ‘ar
4: 1550000.00 +
0.00 250.00 500.00 750.00 1000.00
XN ae2F BaseRun: Page 2 (Base Run) Years 12:20PM 2000-09-24
<Fig8> Changes in Green Space, Housing Land, Industrial Land,
Land Fraction Occupied
ED 1 green space 2: house land 3: industry land 4: land fraction occupied
L 605.004
2
3
4 101
L
2
3
4
2. ‘i
3 3
¥ 3
250.00 500.00 750.00 1000.00
BaseRun: Page 7 (Untied Graph) Years 12:20PM 2000-09-24
<fig9> Changes in NO, concentration and Environmental Indicator
2.00
1: 1.04e#017
2 30.00
1.00
1: 1.04e4017
2 0.00
3 0.00
2:C out ppb 3: pol index
1
Le 2 2
-— P= .
La
250.00 500.00 750.00 1000.00
BaseRun: Page 9 (Untitled Graph) Years 1:02 PM 2000-09-24
<Table 1> Population, Industry Structure, Houses, Car and
Land Use at an Equilibrium Point
Initial Value Base Run Unit
(current Seoul) Equilibrium
Value*
Population 10,321,496 8,060,481 Person
Industry 663,293 1,203,878 Unit
Structure
House 1,968,054 1,155,908 Unit
Car 2,196,062 1,714,996
Industry land 52.24 94.82 km2
Housing land 300.43 176.45 km2
Green Space 253.28 311.79 km2
NO, 56.79 50 ppb
Enviroomen- 114 1.00) NO, concentration in Seoul
tal Index
Taeget NO, level
Households to 1.27 1.82 Household
House Ratio # of Houses
Labor to Job 1.07 0.64 # of labor
Ratio
# of job
Base Run : when green space changes according to air quality while there are no changes in technology
(Green Space test=1, Technology factor=1)
<Tablel> shows initial values used in the model and several equilibrium values resulted from the
base run. Initial values used in the model are current statistics of Seoul Metropolitan. Equilibrium values
in ‘base’ run column shows maximum number of houses, industries, population and cars the Seoul City
can sustain in order to achieve NO, concentration of 50 ppb.
2) Simulations with different assumptions
Simulations with different assumptions were conducted with different level of target NO,
concentration; 50 ppb, 40 ppb, and 30 ppb. Also some combination of different type of policy response
were assumed in each simulation. The results are shown in the <Table 2>. At each level of NO,
concentration, three types of policy response were simulated and simulation results that achieve target
NO, concentration were listed in the <Table 2>.
<Table 2> Changing Environmental Carrying Capacity of Seoul Metropolitan
with different NO2 concentration level
Taeget | Policy response Pop Industry | Hous | Industry Housing Green
NO, (mil) (mil) (mil) land land space
level (km?) (km?) (km?)
Increasing 8 1.20 115. 94 176 311
green space
Reducing NO, 9.8 1.45 1.40 114 215 253
emission
50 ppb
Increasing 9.8 1.45 1.40 114 215 253
green space &
emission
reduction
Increasing 5.15 0.77 0.73 61 112 409
40 ppb
green space
11
Increasing 6.4 0.96 0.92 76 141 367
green space &
emission
reduction
Increasing 2.04 0.34 0.28 27 43 514
green space
Increasing 2.80 0.44 0.39 35 60 489
green space &
30 ppb
emission
reduction
Simulation results shown in the above table can be summarized as follows.
First, when desired NO2 concentration level is 50 ppb and there is no technology change that can
reduce NO2 emission amount, maximum carrying capacity of Seoul is estimated as 8 million of
population, 1.2 million of industry structure, and 1.15 million unit of houses. Population size of Seoul
need to be reduced from current 10.3 million to 8 million because increased green space constrains
additional land use for industry and housing. However, if NO2 emission reduction through technology
development is possible up to 20%, environmental carrying capacity of Seoul increases substantially.
Seoul can accommodate as much as 9.8 million people without increasing green space. This population
size is close to the current population of Seoul, 10.3 million.
Second, if desired NO2 level is strengthed to 40 ppb, environmental carrying capacity of Seoul is
reduced equivalently. If Seoul achieve this target by relying only on increasing green space, population
size need to be reduced to 5.15 million. When Seoul responds by both increasing green space and
developing technology that can reduce emission amount together, environmental carrying capacity of
Seoul is increased to 6.4 million of population size with commensurate increases in other sectors.
Third, when target NO2 level is further strenghened to 30 ppb, Seoul Metropolitan’s carrying capacity
decreases substantially. Maximum population size ranges from 2.04 to 2.8 million with green space
change and technology development.
7. Conclusion - Implications of the Simulation results
Simulation results explained so far indicate that Seoul metropolitan has exceeded environmental
carrying capacity at all level of desired NO2 level. The results also suggest that in order to achieve NO2
level higher than 50 ppb, 20% of emission reduction through technology development alone is not
enough. Either higher percentage of emission reduction or combining green space increase and emission
reduction together is necessary to achieve higer than 50 ppb of NO2 concentration level. Because of
inherent limitation of box model and limited analysis on the types of pollutants which was limited to the
NO2 concentration, numbers from the simulation results cannot be readily applied to guideline of
environmental management.
However, the simulation results suggest severl policy implications as follows.
First of all, Seoul needs to put more effort on increasing green space and on decreasing the amount of
pollutant emission. Curbing pollutant emission is not only necessary for improving air quality in Seoul,
but it is also necessary to increase environmetal carrying capacity of Seoul. Three types of altematives
are available to keep air quality at a desirable level. It can be achieved by decreasing the level of human
activities, increasing green space, and by improving inflowing air quality from outside of Seoul.
Reducing the amount of pollutant emission is a key factor to increase environmental carrying capacity
because it does not needs additional green space which can be used for additional industrial and housing
purpose. But as explained earlier, without increasing green space and without constraining human
activities within Seoul Metropolitan, pollutant emission reduction alone is not enough to achieve higher
level of air quality. Increasing green space has also limitation. Even if Seoul can achieve desired air
quality by expanding green space, this can cost job and housing shortage because available land for
industry and housing use become scarce. This result is contradictory to the aim of sustainable
development which pursue economic, social, and environmental development at the same time. One
viable solution in this case may be developing green space with higher forest stock per unit area.
Second, government need to put more efforts to decentralize population of Seoul Metropolitan. In fact,
government has been implementing population decentralization policies since 1970s but in vain. It was
because the decentralization policies relied heavily on regulating and controlling population
concentration rather than increasing urban attractiveness of other areas. It is hard to find capital city in
the world that has 23 percentage of total population in a area less than 0.6% of total national land.
Recently, population concentration control policy in Seoul city has weakened ‘to improve’ Metropolitan
region’s competitiveness. Population decentralization polices need to be more closely related to policies
for improving urban attractiveness of small and medium cities instead of relying heavily on regulatory
control system.
Thirdly, land use pattern or zoning policy of Seoul Metropolitan need to be changed dramatically to
improve environmental carrying capacity of Seoul. Following table compares current land use pattern in
Seoul to the land use pattern resulted from the simulation test. Proportion of residential area need to be
reduced and that of green space needs to be increased dramatically.
13
<Table 3> Changes in Land Use Pattern
green space and
emission
reduction
Industry land | Housing | Green space
(%) land (%) (%)
Current land use pattern 8.4 49.9 41.7
Increasing 15.5 29.1 514
green space
50 ppb Increasing 18.8 3555: 41.8
green space and
emission
reduction
Increasing 10.1 18.5 67.6
green space
40 ppb Increasing 12.6 23.3 60.7
green space and
emission
reduction
Increasing 45 71 84.9
green space
30 ppb Increasing 5.8 9.9 80.8
Fourth, green belt area surrounding Seoul Metropolitan need to be preserved. The government is now
planning to deregulate greenbelt area which has been preserved since 1971 to keep pledge made during
the presidential election campaign. However, it is contradictory to deregulate greenbelt area and
reducing green space when the importance of green space is gaining its weight more than ever not only
for quality of life but also for a city’s sustainability.
Finally, as noted earlier, since the model used in this paper has some limitations, results from the
simulation may not readily applied to detailed policy guideline. This may be the limiation of this study
and remaining task for further study. However, limitations of this study may be easily overcomed by
incorporating more pollutants and by conducting wide range of sensitivity analysis which was not done
in this study.
References
Alfeld, Louis Edward, Alan K. Graham(1976). Introduction to Urban Dynamics. MA:Wright-Allen
Press, Inc.
Arrow, Kenneth, Bert Bolin, Robert Costanza, Partha Dasgupta et.al. (1995). "Economic Growth,
Carrying Capacity, and the Environment". Science. Vol.268. April.
Baldwin, John H. (1985). Environmental Planning and Management. Westview Press.
Bishop, A.B. et.al (1974). Carrying Capacity in Regional Environmental Management. EPA.
Daily, Gretchen C. and Paul R. Ehrlich. 1992. "Population, Sustainability, and Earth's Carrying
Capacity: A framework for estimating population sizes and lifestyles that could be sustained
without undermining future generations" BioScience, November, 1992.
Darling, Thomas A. and George P. Richardson. 1990. "A Behavioral Simulation Model of Single and
Iterative Negotiations." Prodeedings of the 1990 Intemational System Dynamics Conference.
Feamside, Philip M. 1985. "A Stochastic Model for Estimating Human Carrying Capacity in Brazil's
Trasnamazon Highway Colonization Area" Human Ecology. Vol.13.No.3.
Forrester, Jay W. 1969. Urban Dynamics. Cambrdige, The MIT Press.
Forrester, Jay W. 1971. World Dynamics. Cambridge, Wright-Allen Press.
Forrester, Jay W. 1980. "System Dynamics - Future Opportunities." TIMS Studies in the Management
Science 14. North-Holland Publishing Company.
Forrester, Jay W. 1961. Industrial Dynamics. Cambridge, The MIT Press.
Forrester, Jay W. 1987. "Lessons from System Dynamics Modeling." System Dynamics Review. Vol.3.
No.2. Summer.
Forrester, Jay W. and Peter M. Senge. 1980. "Test for Building Confidence in System Dynamics
Models." TIMS Studies in the Management Science 14. North-Holland Publishing Company.
Hamilton, H. R. et.al. 1969. System Simulation for Regional Analysis. Cambridge, The MIT Press.
Hams, Tony, Michael Jacob et.al., (1994). Greening Your Local Authority. England:Longman Group
Ltd.
Hardin, Garrett. 1975. arying Capacity as an Ethical Concept_ http://www.esva.net/~leo/
High Performance. 1994. Stella, An Introduction to System Thinking. High Performance Systems
Inc.:NH, USA.
Johnson, Curtis B. "Some Effects of Data Errors on Econometric Models." TIMS Studies in the
Management Science 14. North-Holland Publishing Company.
Kim, Doa Hun, Moon, Taehoon, Kim, Dong Hwan. 1999. 2. System Dynamics. Seoul, Daeyoung
Publisher. 261 pages. (Korean)
Legasto, Jr. Augusto A. and Joseph Maciariello. 1980. "System Dynamics: A Critical Review." TIMS
Studies in the Management Science 14. North-Holland Publishing Company.
15
Mackellar, F. Landis. 1996. "On Human Carrying Capacity: A Review Essay on Joel Cohen's How many
people can the earth support?". Population and Development Review. 22(1). March.
Mass, Nathaniel J. and Peter M. Senge. 1980. "Alternative Tests for Selecting Model Variables" In
Jorgen Randers. (ed.) 1980. Elements of the System Dynamics Method. Massachusetts, The MIT
Press.
Mass, Nathaniel(ed). 1974. Readings in Urban Dynamics I. MA, Wright-Allen Press Inc.
Meadows, Donella H. 1980. "The Unavoidable A Priori." In Jorgen Randers. (ed.) 1980. Elements of the
System Dynamics Method. Massachusetts, The MIT Press.
Moon, Taehoon. 1998.3. Developing Environmental Carrying Capacity Model and Its Application for
Building Environmental Indicator” Korean Policy Studies Review. Vol. 7. No.1.
Moon, Taehoon. 1999. 7. "A System Dynamics Analysis of Environmental Carrying Capacity of Seoul
Metropolitan Area for a Sustainable Development" System Thinking for the Next Millennium.
Proceedings of the 17th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society. Wellington,
New Zealand.
Moon, Taehoon. 1999. Environmental Policy. Hyungseol Pub.
Onishi, Takashi. 1994. "A Capacity Approach for Sustainable Urban Development: An Empirical
Study" Regional Studies. Vol.28.1. pp.39-51.
Peterson, David W. 1980. "Statistical Tools for System Dynamics." In Jorgen Randers. (ed.) 1980.
Elements of the System Dynamics Method. Massachusetts, The MIT Press.
Richardson, George P. & A.L. Pugh. 1981. Introduction to System Dynamics Modeling with DYNAMO.
Cambridge, MA:The MIT Press.
Richardson, George P. 1991. Feedback Thought in Social Science and System Theory. Philadelphia,
University of Pennsylvania Press.
Richardson, George P. 1999. Feflections for the future of system dynamics" Journal of the Operational
Research Society. Vol.50. pp.440-449.
Shelby, Bo and Rick Colvin. 1982. "Encounter Measures in Carrying Capacity Research: Acutual,
Reported, and Diary Contacts" Journal of Leisure Research. Vol.14. No.4.
Sterman, John D. 1987. "Testing Behavioral Simulation Models by Direct Experiment." Management
Science. Vol.33. No.12. December.
Tank-Nielsen, Carsten. 1980. "Sensitivity Analysis in System Dynamics." In Jorgen Randers. (ed.) 1980.
Elements of the System Dynamics Method.
Tarrant, Michael A., Donald B. K. English. 1996. "A Crowding-based Model of Social Carrying
Capacity: Applications for Whitewater Boating Use" Journal of Leisure Research. Vol.28. No.3.
pp.155-168.
[Seouts Environmental Camrying Capacity Model ECC4-211 with box mode]
46
op
a
‘aber force oe al
‘
e)
Jndusty constuction normal
as
pb pecindusty Stuctr
industy demeltion norma
| ae Va a 8)
U
suction mul |
hong aval
3g avaibiy may
0
housing onstucton normal
af fouses
Ne AY
household se
4 = ‘death normal jousehoh nouses rat
ca an) oe hoses ato
industry constuction i ~ / \ —
oO polation : = CES) tend 48/ [og trate ET}
= _ aC
fw O —() =O [ Pome ay “0
wea NG) desired ei needed Ss oo A. person per car
yea » et arin eo
—< of \
peo
eposibee in green
Z
—) ‘green space test dD green face ads
A,
Cout pp
Nox emission —~
|
ts green on
sr rg Ome
-{) xeea
Ah
j
technology factor
ws
‘
Le
)
cs
OS
a
house stl
Industry structure
atvact of pol mut
U
(CO) desied naz ppb
“Mobile No2 emission
Back to the Top
atic anptiveres mutter Ys
rani
Qn
carrunning speed
}
read)
“Toad increase
17
