The objective of this study was to evaluate Extremely Low Frequency Magnetic Fields (ELF-MFs) exposure level of housewives and the relation of residential environments with ELF-MFs exposure level in home. ELF-MFs measurements were performed for 58 housewives include 31 working women. Twenty-four hours personal MF exposure levels of housewives were slightly higher than working women as an arithmetic mean. However the median of 24 hours personal exposure levels for working women were significantly higher than housewives (p<0.05). The median of personal exposure levels due to the activity at home, working women were higher than housewives significantly (p<0.05). As a results of correlation of residential environments, such as their living environments, total income, type of water supply pipes, and distance from power line with ELF-MFs exposure level in home was different from the type of residence (p<0.05). This study could be informed as guidance for ELF-MFs exposure analysis in residential environment.

Living environments in rural area have become deteriorated rapidly. Increase of aging population, decline in agricultural income, polarization of wealth in rural community due to rural returners have caused severe decline and imbalance of living environments in rural area. Responding to this circumstances, governments currently develop projects for improving living environments focusing on individual housing which were excluded from governmental supports because those had been regarded as private property. Nevertheless, there are still some gaps and problems in evaluating the quality of living environment and suggesting effective solutions. It would be because standards and guidelines of the projects have been based on urban housing system. In order to support the implementation of the projects, this research has developed an index for evaluating and monitoring the quality of living environments in rural area. By applying Delphi method, the index has been created in four categories of ‘security’, ‘convenience’, ‘comfortability’, and ‘durability’ ‘Security’ consists of structural safety, crime, disaster, accident prevention. ‘Convenience’ includes three divisions of living, traffic, farm working. ‘Comfortability’ is divided into sanitation, indoor environments, and aesthetic appreciation. Lastly, ‘durability’ has four divisions of energy conservation, environmental friendliness, efficiency, and economics. Each sub-division also has different items from three to twelves. In the case of an index for performance evaluation, items have been derived from energy conservation(6-items), and environmental friendliness(7-items). Items developed as an index for evaluating rural living environments in this research might be good background information for remodeling project in rural housing development.

Recently, Environmentally friendliness and sustainability become the main concern of residential area planning. This paper deals with the estimation indicator system for environmentally friendliness of residential areas. An interview survey was carried out for resident groups by the type of housing. 'Environmentally friendly residential site' is defined as "A site of sustainable development with low undesirable impact on environment, friendliness to natural environments such as green areas and waters, and amenity, health & hygiene of residents". Totally, nineteen individual indicators, six categories and three principles(Low Impact, High Contact, Amenity & Health) were proposed as estimation indicator system. Residents showed high importance on principle of 'amenity & health'. Individual indicators such as 'garbage segregated collection', 'secure green areas' and 'cleanness of water and air' showed high weighting value by each principles. Satisfaction level of residents for individual indicators, such as 'garbage segregated collection', 'common gardens', and 'cleanness of residential areas', were comparatively high. By the result of factor analysis, the proposed model for indicator system was valid.

The waterfront(W․F) region can be one of the most significant resources as to the characteristics of Busan region. The research aims to find the essential factors to read the region fitted to the best residential environment, figuring out the estimation of being satisfied with the residential environment. On the basis of the survey it could be revealed that what kind of value the region can have and what kinds of factors have to be emphasized on the region development. As a result the Waterfront residential region has more satisfying like sight views and residential environmental than the non-waterfront residential region, showing high quality of perceiving the future moving plan. Some positive opinions could be found in insisting to develop the waterfront region, but it should be kept continually to prevent senseless developments, to develop the region fitting the demand to the provision, to manage the region continually since, and to observe some conservation criteria in developing the region.

The purpose of this study was to identify factors related to residential satisfaction, and to examine the rural housing and village environment which enable to derive what should be considered in the future rural housing improvement. Data were collected by questionnaire survey in 11 rural villages - suburban rural area, plain rural area, intermediate rural area, mountainous rural area. The major findings are as follows: 1) The rural residents rather dissatisfied with'management/maintenance','economic value','facade'in housing level, The overall housing satisfaction level was just medium(neither satisfied nordissatisfied). 2) They also dissatisfied with'playground for children','education condition','medical facilities', 'market'in village level. The overa'll village satisfaction level was just above average(slightly satisfied). 3) Vrom the result of ANOVA test, there are no significant differences in residents evaluation for tiousing and village attributes among 4 rural areas. 4) Factor analysis identified six rural housing environmental factors:'inside utilities','housing size' 'aesthetic aspects','safety','privacy','outside utilities'. 5) For the rural village environments six important factors were derived :'public services','commercial convenience facilities','social interaction','environmental pollution','amenity','agricultural service facilities'.