IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v158y2019icp194-205.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are Neighborhood-level SUDS Worth it? An Assessment of the Economic Value of Sustainable Urban Drainage System Scenarios Using Cost-Benefit Analyses

Author

Listed:
  • Johnson, Daniel
  • Geisendorf, Sylvie

Abstract

Sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS) offer solutions to water quality and quantity problems in stormwater management in urban areas in addition to numerous economic benefits in terms of urban ecosystem services. Cost-benefit analyses (CBA) of individual SUDS measures, such as green roofs and living walls, are investigated, but economic analyses of complete SUDS for neighborhood-level application are still missing. CBA of neighborhood-level SUDS applications can inform practitioners and decision makers for the proper assessment of planned stormwater management projects. This paper estimates the benefits and economic value of urban ecosystem services of SUDS for a neighborhood in Berlin, Germany, and compares these to typical cost estimates found in literature. Benefits quantified include both private and social benefits. Three separate SUDS scenarios with different combinations of measures for the same district are compared in terms of their net present values (NPV), benefit-cost ratio (BCR) and benefit and cost efficiencies. Parameters of the NPV analysis are also analyzed in a sensitivity analysis. Our results show positive NPVs and BCRs above 1 for one scenario in an analysis of private benefits. Inclusion of social benefits yields only slightly improved NPVs and BCRs. Overall, we demonstrate economic feasible SUDS for stormwater management.

Suggested Citation

  • Johnson, Daniel & Geisendorf, Sylvie, 2019. "Are Neighborhood-level SUDS Worth it? An Assessment of the Economic Value of Sustainable Urban Drainage System Scenarios Using Cost-Benefit Analyses," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 194-205.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:158:y:2019:i:c:p:194-205
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.12.024
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800918309753
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.12.024?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Krekel, Christian & Kolbe, Jens & Wüstemann, Henry, 2016. "The greener, the happier? The effect of urban land use on residential well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 117-127.
    2. Rode, Julian & Le Menestrel, Marc & Cornelissen, Gert, 2017. "Ecosystem Service Arguments Enhance Public Support for Environmental Protection - But Beware of the Numbers!," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 213-221.
    3. Irwin, Nicholas B. & Klaiber, H. Allen & Irwin, Elena G., 2017. "Do Stormwater Basins Generate co-Benefits? Evidence from Baltimore County, Maryland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 202-212.
    4. Larondelle, Neele & Lauf, Steffen, 2016. "Balancing demand and supply of multiple urban ecosystem services on different spatial scales," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 18-31.
    5. Mareike Schad & Jürgen John, 2012. "Towards a social discount rate for the economic evaluation of health technologies in Germany: an exploratory analysis," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 13(2), pages 127-144, April.
    6. Hansen, Rieke & Frantzeskaki, Niki & McPhearson, Timon & Rall, Emily & Kabisch, Nadja & Kaczorowska, Anna & Kain, Jaan-Henrik & Artmann, Martina & Pauleit, Stephan, 2015. "The uptake of the ecosystem services concept in planning discourses of European and American cities," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 228-246.
    7. Gerner, Nadine V. & Nafo, Issa & Winking, Caroline & Wencki, Kristina & Strehl, Clemens & Wortberg, Timo & Niemann, André & Anzaldua, Gerardo & Lago, Manuel & Birk, Sebastian, 2018. "Large-scale river restoration pays off: A case study of ecosystem service valuation for the Emscher restoration generation project," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PB), pages 327-338.
    8. Alexandra Dehnhardt, 2013. "Decision-makers' attitudes towards economic valuation - a case study of German water management authorities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(2), pages 201-221, July.
    9. Kiku Ichihara & Jeffrey Cohen, 2011. "New York City property values: what is the impact of green roofs on rental pricing?," Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 21-30, March.
    10. Liu, Wen & Chen, Weiping & Peng, Chi, 2014. "Assessing the effectiveness of green infrastructures on urban flooding reduction: A community scale study," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 291(C), pages 6-14.
    11. Nurmi, Väinö & Votsis, Athanasios & Perrels, Adriaan & Lehvävirta, Susanna, 2016. "Green Roof Cost-Benefit Analysis: Special Emphasis on Scenic Benefits," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(3), pages 488-522, October.
    12. François Des Rosiers & Marius Thériault & Yan Kestens & Paul Villeneuve, 2002. "Landscaping and House Values: An Empirical Investigation," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 23(1/2), pages 139-162.
    13. Richardson, Leslie & Loomis, John & Kroeger, Timm & Casey, Frank, 2015. "The role of benefit transfer in ecosystem service valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 51-58.
    14. Bolund, Per & Hunhammar, Sven, 1999. "Ecosystem services in urban areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 293-301, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cutter, W. & Pusch, Alexander, 2020. "The Role of Cost, Scale, and Property Attributes in Landowner Choice of Stormwater Management Option," Economics Department, Working Paper Series 1015, Economics Department, Pomona College, revised 12 Aug 2020.
    2. Z. Jia & C. Xu & W. Luo, 2020. "Optimizing Green Infrastructure Implementation with a Land Parcel-Based Credit Trading Approach on Different Spatial Scales," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(5), pages 1709-1723, March.
    3. Andrea Sulis & Martina Altana & Gianfranco Sanna, 2024. "Assessing Reliability, Resilience and Vulnerability of Water Supply from SuDS," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-17, June.
    4. Gert-Jan Wilbers & Karianne de Bruin & Isabel Seifert-Dähnn & Wiebe Lekkerkerk & Hong Li & Monserrat Budding-Polo Ballinas, 2022. "Investing in Urban Blue–Green Infrastructure—Assessing the Costs and Benefits of Stormwater Management in a Peri-Urban Catchment in Oslo, Norway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-17, February.
    5. Daniel Johnson & Judith Exl & Sylvie Geisendorf, 2021. "The Potential of Stormwater Management in Addressing the Urban Heat Island Effect: An Economic Valuation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-19, August.
    6. Tate, Christopher & Tran, Ngan & Longo, Alberto & Barry, John & Taylor, Tim & O'Neill, Ciaran & Hunter, Ruth, 2024. "Economic evaluations of urban green and blue space interventions: A scoping review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Martina Artmann & Olaf Bastian & Karsten Grunewald, 2017. "Using the Concepts of Green Infrastructure and Ecosystem Services to Specify Leitbilder for Compact and Green Cities—The Example of the Landscape Plan of Dresden (Germany)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-26, February.
    2. Karsten Grunewald & Benjamin Richter & Martin Behnisch, 2019. "Multi-Indicator Approach for Characterising Urban Green Space Provision at City and City-District Level in Germany," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-20, June.
    3. Francesca Vignoli & Claudia de Luca & Simona Tondelli, 2021. "A Spatial Ecosystem Services Assessment to Support Decision and Policy Making: The Case of the City of Bologna," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-19, March.
    4. Giulia Capotorti & Eva Del Vico & Ilaria Anzellotti & Laura Celesti-Grapow, 2016. "Combining the Conservation of Biodiversity with the Provision of Ecosystem Services in Urban Green Infrastructure Planning: Critical Features Arising from a Case Study in the Metropolitan Area of Rome," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-17, December.
    5. Veerkamp, Clara J. & Schipper, Aafke M. & Hedlund, Katarina & Lazarova, Tanya & Nordin, Amanda & Hanson, Helena I., 2021. "A review of studies assessing ecosystem services provided by urban green and blue infrastructure," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    6. De Valck, Jeremy & Beames, Alistair & Liekens, Inge & Bettens, Maarten & Seuntjens, Piet & Broekx, Steven, 2019. "Valuing urban ecosystem services in sustainable brownfield redevelopment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 139-149.
    7. Natalia Levashova & Alla Sidorova & Anna Semina & Mingkang Ni, 2019. "A Spatio-Temporal Autowave Model of Shanghai Territory Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-13, July.
    8. Schetke, Sophie & Lee, Heera & Graf, Wanda & Lautenbach, Sven, 2018. "Application of the ecosystem service concept for climate protection in Germany," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 294-305.
    9. Patrycia Brzoska & Aiga Spāģe, 2020. "From City- to Site-Dimension: Assessing the Urban Ecosystem Services of Different Types of Green Infrastructure," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-18, May.
    10. Kieslich, Marcus & Salles, Jean-Michel, 2021. "Implementation context and science-policy interfaces: Implications for the economic valuation of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    11. Daniel Johnson & Judith Exl & Sylvie Geisendorf, 2021. "The Potential of Stormwater Management in Addressing the Urban Heat Island Effect: An Economic Valuation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-19, August.
    12. Henry Lippert & Ingo Kowarik & Tanja M. Straka, 2022. "People’s Attitudes and Emotions towards Different Urban Forest Types in the Berlin Region, Germany," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-21, May.
    13. Vasilis C. Kapsalis & Grigorios L. Kyriakopoulos & Konstantinos G. Aravossis, 2019. "Investigation of Ecosystem Services and Circular Economy Interactions under an Inter-organizational Framework," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-29, May.
    14. Lam, Sharon T. & Conway, Tenley M., 2018. "Ecosystem services in urban land use planning policies: A case study of Ontario municipalities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 641-651.
    15. de Vries, S.P. & Garcia Alvarez, G. & Botzen, W.J.W. & Bockarjova, M., 2023. "Valuing urban nature through life satisfaction: The consistency of GIS and survey indicators of nature," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    16. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    17. Yi-Ya Hsu & Scott Hawken & Samad Sepasgozar & Zih-Hong Lin, 2022. "Beyond the Backyard: GIS Analysis of Public Green Space Accessibility in Australian Metropolitan Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-25, April.
    18. Renata Giedych & Gabriela Maksymiuk, 2017. "Specific Features of Parks and Their Impact on Regulation and Cultural Ecosystem Services Provision in Warsaw, Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-18, May.
    19. Mojca Nastran & Marina Pintar & Špela Železnikar & Rozalija Cvejić, 2022. "Stakeholders’ Perceptions on the Role of Urban Green Infrastructure in Providing Ecosystem Services for Human Well-Being," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-14, February.
    20. Cortinovis, Chiara & Geneletti, Davide, 2019. "A framework to explore the effects of urban planning decisions on regulating ecosystem services in cities," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:158:y:2019:i:c:p:194-205. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.