Urban green infrastructure: A review on valuation toolkits from an urban planning perspective
- PMID: 32349950
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110603
Urban green infrastructure: A review on valuation toolkits from an urban planning perspective
Abstract
As a response to increasing urbanization and changing weather and climatic patterns, urban green infrastructure (UGI) emerged as a concept to increase resilience within the urban boundaries. Given that implementing these (semi-) natural solutions in practice requires a clear overview of the costs and benefits, valuation becomes ever important. A range of decision-support tools for green infrastructure and ecosystem services exist, developed for various purposes. This paper reviews the potential of 10 shortlisted and existing valuation tools to support investment decisions of urban green infrastructure. In the assessment, the functionality is regarded specifically from the urban planning and decision-making viewpoint. The toolkits were evaluated on 12 different criteria. After analyzing the toolkits on these criteria, the findings are evaluated on the (mis)match with specific requirements in the urban planning and management context. Secondly, recommendations and guidelines are formulated to support the design of simple valuation tools, tailored to support the development of green infrastructure in urban areas. Approaching the valuation toolkits biophysically and (socio-)economically provides an integral overview of the challenges and opportunities of the capacities of each framework. It was found that most tools are not designed for the peculiarities of the urban context. Several elements contribute to the hampering uptake of GI valuation tools. Firstly, the limited effort in the economic case for green infrastructure remains a burden to use toolkits to compare grey and green alternatives. Secondly, tools are currently seldom designed for the peculiarities of cities: urban ecosystem (dis)services, multi-scalability, life-span assessments of co-benefits and the importance of social benefits. Thirdly, toolkits should be the result of co-development between the scientific community and local authorities in order to create toolkits that are tailor made to the specific needs in the urban planning process. It can be concluded that current tools, are not readily applicable to support decision making as such. However, if applied cautiously, they can have an indicative role to pinpoint further targeted and in-depth analyses.
Keywords: Ecosystem services; Green infrastructure; Green infrastructure valuation; Urban green space; Urban planning; Valuation toolkit.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Similar articles
-
Green Infrastructure Designed through Nature-Based Solutions for Sustainable Urban Development.Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023 Jan 8;20(2):1102. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20021102. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023. PMID: 36673859 Free PMC article.
-
Mitigating and adapting to climate change: multi-functional and multi-scale assessment of green urban infrastructure.J Environ Manage. 2014 Dec 15;146:107-115. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.07.025. Epub 2014 Aug 24. J Environ Manage. 2014. PMID: 25163601
-
Creating urban green infrastructure where it is needed - A spatial ecosystem service-based decision analysis of green roofs in Barcelona.Sci Total Environ. 2020 Mar 10;707:135487. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135487. Epub 2019 Nov 14. Sci Total Environ. 2020. PMID: 31759703
-
From multifunctionality to multiple ecosystem services? A conceptual framework for multifunctionality in green infrastructure planning for urban areas.Ambio. 2014 May;43(4):516-29. doi: 10.1007/s13280-014-0510-2. Ambio. 2014. PMID: 24740622 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Ecosystem services in urban ecological infrastructure of Latin America and the Caribbean: How do they contribute to urban planning?Sci Total Environ. 2020 Aug 1;728:138780. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138780. Epub 2020 Apr 19. Sci Total Environ. 2020. PMID: 32344225 Review.
Cited by
-
Assessment of street-level greenness and its association with housing prices in a metropolitan area.Sci Rep. 2023 Dec 19;13(1):22577. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-49845-0. Sci Rep. 2023. PMID: 38114670 Free PMC article.
-
Green infrastructure inequality in the context of COVID-19: Taking parks and trails as examples.Urban For Urban Green. 2023 Aug;86:128027. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2023.128027. Epub 2023 Jul 17. Urban For Urban Green. 2023. PMID: 37614701
-
Research on innovative mechanisms of financial agglomeration enabling green coordinated development in the Yangtze River Delta of China.Heliyon. 2023 Mar 1;9(3):e14172. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14172. eCollection 2023 Mar. Heliyon. 2023. PMID: 36923880 Free PMC article.
-
Green Infrastructure Designed through Nature-Based Solutions for Sustainable Urban Development.Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023 Jan 8;20(2):1102. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20021102. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023. PMID: 36673859 Free PMC article.
-
Impacts of Urban Blue-Green Space on Residents' Health: A Bibliometric Review.Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Dec 3;19(23):16192. doi: 10.3390/ijerph192316192. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022. PMID: 36498264 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Research Materials
