Change of Soil Organic Carbon in Upland Soil with Different Tillage Operation and Green Manures

Ju Mi Lim(임주미),Chang Oh Hong(홍창오) 한국토양비료학회 2020 한국토양비료학회 학술발표회 초록집 Vol.2020 No.10

Effect of Tillage and Green Manuring on Long- and Short-term Carbon Stability in Arable Soil

Ju-Mi Lim(임주미),Chang Oh Hong(홍창오) 한국토양비료학회 2021 한국토양비료학회 학술발표회 초록집 Vol.2021 No.11

Green manuring (GM) and no-till (NT) are known as the practical soil managements to increase soil carbon sequestration. Stable soil organic carbon (SOC) content could be an important factor affecting long- and short-term carbon sequestration. However, the effect of GM and tillage practice on long- and short-term SOC stability in arable soil has not been clearly determined, so far. The objectives of this study was to determine the effect of tillage practice and GM on long- and short-term carbon stability in arable soil by evaluating net eco-system carbon budget (NECB) and aggregate size distribution. This study was conducted in upland soil supporting for maize with GM including fallow (F) and hairy vetch (HV) under different tillage practices including NT and conventional till (CT) for 3 years from 2018 through 2020. Hairy vetch (HV) was cultivated and maize were cultivated as green manure and subsequent crop during winter season (November- April) and summer season (May-October) for 3 years, respectively. Green manuring significantly affected NECB, but tillage practice did not. The value of NECB was highest with HV under CT, because the amount of carbon input to the soil was greatest. Tillage practice significantly affected aggregate size distribution, but GM did not. Small macro-aggregate (SM) increased with CT and decreased with NT whereas, large macro-aggregate (LM) and micro-aggregate (MI) decreased with CT and increased with NT. The ratio of fine intra particulate carbon (IPC) to coarse IPC in SM was higher with NT than CT. The SOC concentrations in all aggregate size were higher with HV than F. However, there was no significant difference of SOC concentrati on in all aggregate size between CT and NT. Even if the SOC concentration in all aggregate size was greater with HV than F, the high SOC concentrations in MI and s+c sizes benefits for long-term carbon sequestration. Therefore, we suggest that HV under CT may be optimum agricultural practice for short-term carbon sequestration in upland soil, whereas HV under NT for long-term carbon sequestration.

상추재배를 위한 시설하우스 배액의 비효평가 - 무기태 질소를 중심으로 -

윤성욱 ( Yun Sung-wook ),임주미 ( Lim Ju-Mi ),문종필 ( Moon Jongpil ),장재경 ( Jang Jaekyoung ),박민정 ( Park Minjung ),손진관 ( Son Jinkwan ),이현호 ( Lee Hyun-ho ),서효민 ( Seo Hyomin ),최덕규 ( Choi Duk-Kyu ) 한국농공학회 2021 한국농공학회논문집 Vol.63 No.4

The feasibility of HWS for agricultural use was analyzed through a crop cultivation test to utilize the hydroponic waste solution (HWS) generated from the nutriculture greenhouse. The fertilizing effect of HWS was assessed on the basis of the inorganic nitrogen (N) mostly existed in HWSs, and nitrogen (urea) fertilizer. Lettuce was selected as the target crop influenced by the soil treatment and also for the crop cultivation test. Thus, the change in growth characteristics of lettuce and that in chemical characteristics of the soil were investigated. In terms of the growth of lettuce, the C control group with 70% nitrogen (urea) fertilizer and 30% HWS and the D control group with 50% nitrogen (urea) fertilizer and 50% HWS were more effective than the practice control group (B) with 100% nitrogen (urea) fertilizer. The results of this study confirmed the combined applicability of the chemical fertilizer and HWS for crop cultivation. Because NO3-N present in HWS has a high possibility of leaching into the soil, its applicability as a fertilizer has been considered to be relatively low in Korea. However, if an appropriate mixing ratio of urea fertilizer and HWS could be applied, the problems associated with leaching of nitrate nitrogen could be reduced with beneficial effects on crop cultivation. Thus, future studies are required on the treatment effect of HWS with repeated cultivation, impact assessment on the surrounding environment, and appropriate fertilization methods using nitrogen (urea) fertilizer and HWS. These studies would facilitate the sustainable recycling of HWS.

라오스에서 한국 채소의 현지 적응성 시험 결과 소개

조명철(Myeong Cheoul Cho),송미혜(Mi Hye Song),김나영(NA Young Gim),최현정(Hyeonjeong Choi),윤나래(Na Rae Yun),이예솔(Ye Sol Lee),김현아(Hyeon Ah Kim),임주미(Ju Mi Lim) 한국원예학회 2018 한국원예학회 학술발표요지 Vol.2018 No.5

N+1 판매촉진 행사에 대한 공정 비용부담에 대한 소고

안승호 ( Ahn Seung Ho ),최영홍 ( Choi Young Hong ),임주미 ( Lim Ju Mi ),김회준 ( Kim Hoi Jun ) 한국유통법학회 2018 유통법연구 Vol.5 No.2

『대규모유통업에서의 거래 공정화에 관한 법률』에서는 판매촉진비용의 부당한 전가를 금지하며 그 비용부담에 관한 규정을 두고 있다. 동법 제11조 제3항에 의하면 판매촉진 비용은 소매업체와 납품업체가 판매촉진으로 얻게 될 경제적 이익의 비율(예상이익)에 따라 정하되 그 비율은 산정할 수 없는 경우에는 양자의 이익이 동일한 것으로 추정한다. 이 규정은 경영 환경의 급격한 변화에 대응하기 위한 소매업자의 합리적이고 효율적인 경영상 결정을 심각하게 저해할 수 있다. 판매촉진 수단의 다양성 등을 고려하지 않고 모든 유형의 활동에 대하여 일률적인 법을 적용하는 것은 예상치 못한 부정적 결과를 초래할 수 있다. 납품업체가 주도하는 판매촉진 행사에 소매업체가 일부 협조하거나 개입하게 되면 소매업체에게 부당한 부담을 지울 수 있기 때문이다. N+1 판매촉진은 동일한 가격에 더 많은 상품을 제공하는 일종의 수량 판매촉진으로 “한 개를 사면 하나는 덤”이라는 판매촉진 행사가 대표적인 예이다. N+1 판매촉진은 다음과 같은 이유로 소매업체보다 납품업체에게 훨씬 더 큰 혜택이 돌아간다. 첫째, N+1은 특정 브랜드의 판매를 촉진하므로 납품업체에게 주는 혜택이 매우 명확하다. 반면에 소매업체가 받는 혜택은 다른 보완 제품을 판매하거나 그 행사를 통해 새로이 유치하는 고객의 규모에 따라 달라진다는 점에서 혜택이 명확하지 않다. 둘째, 납품업체는 계절 등 일시적 이유로 판매가 저조한 경우 촉진을 통해 생산 프로세스를 원활하게 하고, 제품 가치의 하락을 방지하며, 신제품 출시의 효율적인 방안으로 활용하며, 다른 판매촉진 수단과 비교할 때 한계 비용이 낮은 방안이고, 가격 할인과 동일한 효과를 창출하면서도 심각한 가격 경쟁을 방지할 수 있는 등 N+1을 통해 다양한 비용 절감기회를 확보할 수 있다. 셋째, 이에 반하여 소매업체는, N+1 판매촉진 행사는 취급해야 하는 제품의 수량을 증가시켜 추가적 공급 체인에 따른 비용과 매장 비용의 발생 및 경쟁제품의 판매기회 상실 등 다양한 추가적 비용을 부담하게 된다. 결론적으로, N+1 판매촉진 행사는 소매업체보다는 납품업체에게 훨씬 더 직접적이고 많은 혜택을 제공한다는 점에서 비록 수익 추정이 불명확한 경우에도 같은 이익을 염두에 둔 1:1의 비용부담은 합당하다고 보기 어렵다. 이 법조항은 판매촉진 비용의 공정한 분배가 소매업체와 납품업체 간의 협상의 주요 쟁점이 되는 경우만 적용될 필요가 있으며 N+1 판매촉진 행사는 그런 판매촉진이 아니라 할 것이다. The “Act on Fair Transaction in Large Retail Business” provides the rules concerning the sharing of sales promotional expenses between a retailer and its suppliers. According to the Articles 11 ③, the ratio of sharing sales promotional expenses shall be determined according to the ratio of economic profits a retailer and its supplier are expected to earn from the sale promotion. although when the expenses can not be clearly estimated, the ratio is presumed to be 1:1. This regulation may seriously impede the reasonable and efficient business decisions of retailers to respond to the dramatic changes in business environments. The author argues considering that the great diversity of sales promotional tools, the indifferent applications of the act to any type of sales promotion may generate unexpected and undesirable consequences. Any involvement of retailers in promotions even initiated and led by its suppliers may put an unjustifiable burden on the retailers. The N+1 sales promotion is a bundling promotion which is a combination of products on sale for the same price and “buy one get one free” promotion is well known example of N+1 sales promotion. The problem arises when the return or benefit from the promotion is not clearly estimated. The N+1 promotion returns much larger benefits to suppliers than retailers because of following reasons. First, the N+1 facilitates the sales of a specific brand whose benefits to a supplier is very clear while to retailer depends on the sales of other complementary products and the size of newly attracted customers. Second, there are a lot of opportunities which allow suppliers to reduce costs by smoothing production process, efficient introduction of products, incur very low marginal costs compared with other sales promotion tools, and prevent serious price war when generating the same effect as price discounts. Third, because the N+1 promotion increases the volume of products a retailer carries, the increase in supply chain expenses, store costs, the loss of future sales at full price, cannibalization among similar products and advertising should be counted in estimating the costs incurred to retailers. In conclusion the unclear estimation of the returns from N+1 promotion can not be a justifiable reason for the presumption of 1:1 ratio regarding the N+1 promotion. The Act should be applied only to the case where the fair share of sale promotional expenses become the focal issue of the negotiation between retailers and their suppliers to arrange the sales promotion and the N+1 promotion is not the case.

KOPIA 라오스센터의 활동 결과 소개

조명철(Myeong Cheoul Cho),김나영(Na Young Gim),송미혜(Mi Hye Song),최현정(Hyeonjeong Choi),윤나래(Na Rae Yun),이예솔(Ye Sol Lee),김현아(Hyeon ah Kim),임주미(Ju Mi Lim) 한국원예학회 2018 한국원예학회 학술발표요지 Vol.2018 No.5