No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 May 2025
This paper proposes the creation of a Northeast Asian Biodiversity Corridor (NEABC) that would connect in a consistent manner critical habitat in Russia, China, and the Korean Peninsula. Such a corridor may be considered now because of decades of scientific and policy work to establish a DMZ Peace Park, a mountain-watershed ecosystem network in the ROK, nature reserves in the DPRK, and cross-border mega-species migration corridors between the DPRK, China, and Russia. The paper reviews each of these stepping and foundation stones, and refers to proposed regional biodiversity corridors in other regions. It emphasizes parallels between the Northeast Asian context and that of the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor (MBC), an existing regional biodiversity corridor which involves eight Central American countries that, like the two Koreas, are trapped in inter-state conflicts. It suggests that the Korean traditional concept of “The Baekdudaegan” that integrates the cultural and ecological landscapes of the mountains and rivers of Korea may be an important cultural device that frames the ecological basis of a regional NEABC. The paper reflects on how indirect and incremental social and political engagement may be a necessary attribute of strategies that build ecological security in a conflict zone. It concludes by contrasting this approach to the characteristics of what the author terms “nuclear insecurity” and suggests that a Northeast Asian Nuclear Weapon Free Zone may be a form of nuclear insecurity that relies less on balances of terror, and thereby is more conducive to the creation of sustainable security in this region.
1 The author is Professor of International Relations at RMIT University in Melbourne; and Director of the Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainability in San Francisco, www.nautilus.org email: [email protected]
2 See P. Hayes and S. Bruce, “Nuclear Competition and Korean Nationalism,|| Nautilus Institute research workshop “Strong connections: Australia-Korea strategic relations – past, present and future, “Seoul, June 15-16 2010, link.
3 R. Lifton, Death in Life: Survivors of Hiroshima, Random House, New York, 1967, link.
4 Interview, Seoul, June 1988, cited in P. Hayes, Pacific Powderkeg, American Nuclear Dilemmas in Korea, Lexington Books, 1991, p. 245. This chapter contains extensive other interviews with Korean survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
5 See especially the studies by K.C. Kim and others, link.
6 Link.
7 Korea Maritime Institute, “Toward Establishing the Marine Peace Park in the Western Transboundary Coastal Area of the Korean Peninsula,” 2007, p. 37, link.
8 P. Hocknell, “Partitioned States, Divided Resources: North/South Korea and the Cases for Comparison,” in IBRU Boundary and Security Bulletin, Summer, 1996, p. 68, link.
9 See IUCN, Connectivity Conservation: International Experience in Planning, Establishment and Management of Biodiversity Corridors, November 2006, link.
10 See D. Zbicz, “Transfrontier Ecosystems and Internationally Adjoining Protected Areas,” Duke University Nicholas School of the Environment, 1999, link.
11 See A. Westing, “A transfrontier reserve for peace and nature on the Korean peninsula,” International Conference on Transboundary Protected Areas as a Vehicle for International Co-operation 16-18 September 1997, link.
12 Mandela's statement can be found here.
13 Link.
14 Ministry of the Environment (ROK) and Korea Environment Institute, “Policies on Conservation of the DMZ District Ecosystem,” Environmental Policy Bulletin, at: 2007, link.
15 See his latest overview of the concept, “Toward Environmental Sustainability and Reduced Tensions on the Korean Peninsula,” Environment, January-February 2010, link.
16 R. Lejano, “Theorizing Peace Parks: Two Models of Collective Action,” Journal of Peace Research, 43: 5, September 2006, p. 573, link.
17 See Ministry of the Environment (ROK) and Korea Environment Institute, “Policies on Conservation of the DMZ District Ecosystem,” Environmental Policy Bulletin, 2007, p. 14, link.
18 Hocknell, op cit; and See K.C. Kim, “Preserving Korea's Demilitarized Corridor for Conservation,” chapter 13, in S.H. Ali, ed, Peace Parks, Conservation and Conflict Resolution, MIT Press, 2007.
19 J. Ginsberg, “Protecting Military Land When the Army Leaves,” presented at Asia Society (NY City) meeting on DMZ and Transboundary issues, at: Ginsberg et al. 1999 Asia Society Meeting Report Multiple Topics
20 See, for example, Green Korea, A Report Of Investigation Into The Landslides Through The Northern Area Of The Civilian Control Line (CCL), August 12, 2008, link.
21 G. Bennett and Kalemani Jo Mulongoy, Review Of Experience With Ecological Networks, Corridors And Buffer Zones, CBD Technical Series No. 23, Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, March 2006, p. iii, link.
22 G. Bennett and Kalemani Jo Mulongoy, 2006, op cit, p. 5.
23 G. Bennett and Kalemani Jo Mulongoy, 2006, op cit, pp. 5-6.
24 Asian Development Bank, Biodiversity Conservation Corridors Initiative Pilot Site Implementation Status Report 2007, Manila, 2008, link.
25 Personal communication from A. Westing, July 29, 2010.
26 See A. Lopez, A. Jimenez, Latin America Assessment, Environmental Conflict And the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor As A Mechanism For Transborder Environmental Cooperation, Report of the Regional Consultation, 4-5 July 2006, Mexico City, Mexico Environment and Conflict Prevention Initiative of the UNEP's Division of Early Warning and Assessment, December 2007, link.
27 Lopez and Jimenez, op cit, 2006, pp. 10-12.
28 “Sino-Russian cooperation in Amur biodiversity conservation” WWF-Russia press release, 4 June 2007, link. See also E. Simonov, T. Dahmer, ed, Heilong River Basin Reader, February 2008, link and “Ecological Network Development : The Amur-Heilong Green Belt”, link.
29 B. Marcot, Report on Tigers and Leopards, of the Russian Far East and Northeast China, Report from Visits to Far East Russia (Khabarovsky Krai and Primorsky Krai) and Northeast China (Heilongjiang Province), 30 April - 22 June 1994, July 21, 1994, link. and B. Marcot Tiger Habitat Corridors in Far East Russia, Northeast China, and Northern North Korea: Need for a Conservation Strategy, 2 September 1995 (prepared for Web presentation on 18 April 1996), link.
30 D. Miquelle et al, “A habitat protection plan for the Amur Tiger: developing political and ecological criteria for a viable land use plan,” undated, link.
31 Korean People's Democratic Republic Academy of Science, Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Science Far Eastern Branch Institute of Geography, A Survey Of Tigers And Prey Resources In The Paektusan Area, Lyangan Province, North Korea, In Winter, 1998, link.
32 Some of the reports from these studies are available and especially Activity Report-Feasibility Study on the Establishment of the Lower Tumen River Area Transboundary Biosphere Reserve (ROK 02 004), link. National Coordinating Committee for Environment, DPR Korea, Third National Report (DPR Of Korea), 2005, pp. 8-10, link.
34 National Coordinating Committee for Environment, DPR Korea, op cit, 2005, p. 25.
35 P. Hayes, “Unbearable legacies: The Politics of Environmental Degradation in North Korea,” 2009, op cit.
36 N. Sthankiya, “Korean ‘Tigerman’ Prowls the DMZ, Lim Sun Nam believes that the Korean spirit lives in the demilitarized zone – as an elusive tiger,” December 2, 2004, link.
37 A.Y. Chung, “2010 The Year of the Tiger,” Korea Times, December 31, 2009, link.
38 J.Y. An, “21 icons of Korea,” The Korea Herald, January 18, 2010, link.
39 Y.K. Choi, “Baekdudaegan, The Central Axis Of The Korean Peninsular: The Path Toward Management Strategies Regarding To Its Concepts.” in S.G. Hong et al, ed, Ecological Issues in a Changing World Status, Response and Strategy, Springer Netherlands, 2004, p. 359, link.
40 Korea Protected Areas Forum, “Backdudaegan Mountains Reserve,” link.
41 Y.K. Choi, “Baekdudaegan, The Central Axis,” op cit, 2004, p. 360.
42 MAB National Committee of the DPRK, “Country Report of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea,” 22nd Session of MAB-ICC, April 2010, link.
43 W.B. Kim, “Design of Infrastructure Development in North Korea: A Practical Approach,' presented at DPRK Energy Experts Working Group, Nautilus Institute, Beijing, March 8, 2008, link.
44 For example, in relation to regional grids, see D. von Hippel and J. Williams, “Environmental Issues for Regional Power Systems in Northeast Asia,” Third Workshop on Northeast Asia Power Grid Interconnections, The Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainability, The WWF Far Eastern Branch, and The Economic Research Institute, September 30 - October 3, 2003, Vladivostok, Russian Federation, link.
45 For a detailed exposition of this concept and the many issues that must be addressed to implement such a Zone, see Nautilus Institute, “Korea-Japan Nuclear Weapon Free Zone (KJNWFZ) Concept Paper,” May 6, 2010, link; M. Hamel-Green, “Implementing a Japanese-Korean Nuclear Weapon Free Zone: precedents, legal forms, governance, scope and domain, verification and compliance, and regional benefits,” Nautilus Institute research workshop “Strong connections: Australia-Korea strategic relations – past, present and future,” Seoul, June 15-16 2010, link; J. Lewis, “Rethinking Extended Deterrence in Northeast Asia,” Nautilus Institute research workshop “Strong connections: Australia-Korea strategic relations – past, present and future,” Seoul, June 15-16 2010, link.
46 R. Lejano, “Theorizing Peace Parks,” op cit, 2006, p. 573.
You have
Access
Open access