YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Sustainable Water in the Built Environment
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Sustainable Water in the Built Environment
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Valuing the Multiple Benefits of Blue-Green Infrastructure for a Swedish Case Study: Contrasting the Economic Assessment Tools B£ST and TEEB

    Source: Journal of Sustainable Water in the Built Environment:;2020:;Volume ( 006 ):;issue: 004
    Author:
    Frieder Hamann
    ,
    Godecke-Tobias Blecken
    ,
    Richard M. Ashley
    ,
    Maria Viklander
    DOI: 10.1061/JSWBAY.0000919
    Publisher: ASCE
    Abstract: In addition to flooding and water quality management, blue-green infrastructure (BGI) provides multiple benefits to humans and ecosystems, including health and biodiversity. Various tools are available for assessing these benefits but few evaluate economic benefits. Two tools that monetize the benefits, the Benefits Estimation Tool (B£ST) (UK) and The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) (Netherlands), have been used to estimate value for a case study in Luleå, Sweden. Three options for a newly developed area were assessed in comparison with two different baselines. The main economic benefits of the newly developed area were related to amenities, home values, health, and social cohesion rather than to stormwater. However, as a result of the proposed development, negative economic benefits (i.e., costs) were attributed to carbon sequestration and biodiversity when considering the value of the existing area due to a loss of green spaces and trees. B£ST gave higher negative impacts than TEEB. Direct comparison of each category used in each tool was not possible since these categories and the way in which the monetized values are determined in each case differ. While the overall approach used in both tools is applicable in Sweden, calculations and data used need to be adapted to local circumstances and valuation.
    • Download: (336.1Kb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Valuing the Multiple Benefits of Blue-Green Infrastructure for a Swedish Case Study: Contrasting the Economic Assessment Tools B£ST and TEEB

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4268091
    Collections
    • Journal of Sustainable Water in the Built Environment

    Show full item record

    contributor authorFrieder Hamann
    contributor authorGodecke-Tobias Blecken
    contributor authorRichard M. Ashley
    contributor authorMaria Viklander
    date accessioned2022-01-30T21:22:42Z
    date available2022-01-30T21:22:42Z
    date issued11/1/2020 12:00:00 AM
    identifier otherJSWBAY.0000919.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4268091
    description abstractIn addition to flooding and water quality management, blue-green infrastructure (BGI) provides multiple benefits to humans and ecosystems, including health and biodiversity. Various tools are available for assessing these benefits but few evaluate economic benefits. Two tools that monetize the benefits, the Benefits Estimation Tool (B£ST) (UK) and The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) (Netherlands), have been used to estimate value for a case study in Luleå, Sweden. Three options for a newly developed area were assessed in comparison with two different baselines. The main economic benefits of the newly developed area were related to amenities, home values, health, and social cohesion rather than to stormwater. However, as a result of the proposed development, negative economic benefits (i.e., costs) were attributed to carbon sequestration and biodiversity when considering the value of the existing area due to a loss of green spaces and trees. B£ST gave higher negative impacts than TEEB. Direct comparison of each category used in each tool was not possible since these categories and the way in which the monetized values are determined in each case differ. While the overall approach used in both tools is applicable in Sweden, calculations and data used need to be adapted to local circumstances and valuation.
    publisherASCE
    titleValuing the Multiple Benefits of Blue-Green Infrastructure for a Swedish Case Study: Contrasting the Economic Assessment Tools B£ST and TEEB
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume6
    journal issue4
    journal titleJournal of Sustainable Water in the Built Environment
    identifier doi10.1061/JSWBAY.0000919
    page10
    treeJournal of Sustainable Water in the Built Environment:;2020:;Volume ( 006 ):;issue: 004
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian