IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i2p336-d1047591.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Caring for Blue-Green Solutions (BGS) in Everyday Life: An Investigation of Recreational Use, Neighborhood Preferences and Willingness to Pay in Augustenborg, Malmö

Author

Listed:
  • Misagh Mottaghi

    (Department of Architecture and Built Environment, Lund University, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden
    Sweden Water Research AB, SE-223 70 Lund, Sweden)

  • Jonas Nordström

    (School of Economics and Management, Agrifood Economics Centre, Lund University, SE-220 07 Lund, Sweden
    Department of Economics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, SE-220 07 Lund, Sweden
    Department of Business, Economics and Law, Dalarna University, SE-791 88 Falun, Sweden)

  • Salar Haghighatafshar

    (Department of Chemical Engineering, Water and Environmental Engineering, Lund University, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden)

  • Karin Jönsson

    (Department of Chemical Engineering, Water and Environmental Engineering, Lund University, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden)

  • Mattias Kärrholm

    (Department of Architecture and Built Environment, Lund University, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden)

  • Catharina Sternudd

    (Department of Architecture and Built Environment, Lund University, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden)

Abstract

In this article, we explore the production of socio-cultural values around blue-green solutions (BGS) through the perspective of care. We explore how values and preferences are formed through the complexity of everyday life engagements in a BGS environment. The data come from a questionnaire answered by 328 households in the neighborhood of Augustenborg in Malmö, Sweden. The questionnaire collects detailed information about inhabitants’ possible recreational use (through Likert scale questions) and willingness to pay (WTP) (estimated through contingent valuation). The study evaluates if and how people care to use, care to live with, and care to pay for BGS. The result shows that people in Augustenborg relate in different and sometimes contradictory ways to BGS. A well-used BGS environment does not per se make the environment successful or result in people preferring a BGS environment in the future. In addition, recreational use and building awareness about BGS flood mitigation seem to increase the willingness to pay, whereas living longer in the area seems to decrease it. The study reveals a landscape of care that is constantly being formed and transformed. This suggests that both planning and research needs to focus more on the relation between BGS and social use over time.

Suggested Citation

  • Misagh Mottaghi & Jonas Nordström & Salar Haghighatafshar & Karin Jönsson & Mattias Kärrholm & Catharina Sternudd, 2023. "Caring for Blue-Green Solutions (BGS) in Everyday Life: An Investigation of Recreational Use, Neighborhood Preferences and Willingness to Pay in Augustenborg, Malmö," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-18, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:2:p:336-:d:1047591
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/2/336/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/2/336/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Junga Lee & Hyung-Sook Lee & Daeyoung Jeong & C. Scott Shafer & Jinhyung Chon, 2019. "The Relationship between User Perception and Preference of Greenway Trail Characteristics in Urban Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-16, August.
    2. Greene,William H. & Hensher,David A., 2010. "Modeling Ordered Choices," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521194204, September.
    3. Raymond, Christopher M. & Frantzeskaki, Niki & Kabisch, Nadja & Berry, Pam & Breil, Margaretha & Nita, Mihai Razvan & Geneletti, Davide & Calfapietra, Carlo, 2017. "A framework for assessing and implementing the co-benefits of nature-based solutions in urban areas," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 15-24.
    4. Cameron, Trudy Ann & Huppert, Daniel D., 1989. "OLS versus ML estimation of non-market resource values with payment card interval data," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 230-246, November.
    5. Ian J. Bateman & Richard T. Carson & Brett Day & Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Tannis Hett & Michael Jones-Lee & Graham Loomes, 2002. "Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2639.
    6. Anna Kovacs-Györi & Pablo Cabrera-Barona & Bernd Resch & Michael Mehaffy & Thomas Blaschke, 2019. "Assessing and Representing Livability through the Analysis of Residential Preference," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-23, September.
    7. Bos, J.J. & Brown, R.R., 2012. "Governance experimentation and factors of success in socio-technical transitions in the urban water sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(7), pages 1340-1353.
    8. Julia Campos & Neil R. Ericsson & David F. Hendry, 2005. "General-to-specific modeling: an overview and selected bibliography," International Finance Discussion Papers 838, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    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. Jishu Huang & Yun Wang, 2023. "Research on Social Service Effectiveness Evaluation for Urban Blue Spaces—A Case Study of the Huangpu River Core Section in Shanghai," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-26, July.

    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. Giles Atkinson & Sian Morse-Jones & Susana Mourato & Allan Provins, 2012. "‘When to Take “No” for an Answer’? Using Entreaties to Reduce Protests in Contingent Valuation Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 497-523, April.
    2. Tanya O’Garra & Susana Mourato, 2007. "Public Preferences for Hydrogen Buses: Comparing Interval Data, OLS and Quantile Regression Approaches," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 36(4), pages 389-411, April.
    3. Voltaire, Louinord & Donfouet, Hermann Pythagore Pierre & Pirrone, Claudio & Larzillière, Agathe, 2017. "Respondent Uncertainty and Ordering Effect on Willingness to Pay for Salt Marsh Conservation in the Brest Roadstead (France)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 47-55.
    4. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    5. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2008. "Internet CV surveys – a cheap, fast way to get large samples of biased values?," MPRA Paper 11471, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Lankia, Tuija & Neuvonen, Marjo & Pouta, Eija & Sievänen, Tuija, 2014. "Willingness to contribute to the management of recreational quality on private lands in Finland," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 141-160.
    7. Macea, Luis F. & Cantillo, Victor & Arellana, Julian, 2018. "Influence of attitudes and perceptions on deprivation cost functions," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 125-141.
    8. Man-, ZuyiKeunZuyi Wang & Takagi, Chifumi & Kim, Man-Keun & Chung, Anh, 2022. "Uncover Drivers Influencing Consumers' WTP Using Machine Learning: Case of Organic Coffee in Taiwan," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322150, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Ricky N. Lawton & Daniel Fujiwara & Ulrike Hotopp, 2022. "The value of digital archive film history: willingness to pay for film online heritage archival access," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 46(1), pages 165-197, March.
    10. Henrik Lindhjem & Ståle Navrud, 2009. "Asking for Individual or Household Willingness to Pay for Environmental Goods?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(1), pages 11-29, May.
    11. Vennemo, Haakon & Rosnes, Orvika & Skulstad, Andreas, 2022. "The cost to households of a large electricity outage," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    12. Tienhaara, Annika & Ahtiainen, Heini & Pouta, Eija, 2015. "Consumer and citizen roles and motives in the valuation of agricultural genetic resources in Finland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 1-10.
    13. Glenk, Klaus & Fischer, Anke, 2010. "Insurance, prevention or just wait and see? Public preferences for water management strategies in the context of climate change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2279-2291, September.
    14. Natalie Stoeckl & Alastair Birtles & Marina Farr & Arnold Mangott & Matthew Curnock & Peter Valentine, 2010. "Live-Aboard Dive Boats in the Great Barrier Reef: Regional Economic Impact and the Relative Values of Their Target Marine Species," Tourism Economics, , vol. 16(4), pages 995-1018, December.
    15. Giles Atkinson & Susana Mourato & Stefan Szymanski & Ece Ozdemiroglu, 2008. "Are We Willing to Pay Enough to `Back the Bid'?: Valuing the Intangible Impacts of London's Bid to Host the 2012 Summer Olympic Games," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 45(2), pages 419-444, February.
    16. Divinski, Itai & Becker, Nir & Bar (Kutiel), Pua, 2018. "Opportunity costs of alternative management options in a protected nature park: The case of Ramat Hanadiv, Israel," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 494-504.
    17. Voltaire, Louinord & Pirrone, Claudio & Bailly, Denis, 2013. "Dealing with preference uncertainty in contingent willingness to pay for a nature protection program: A new approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 76-85.
    18. Dranco, Daniel & Luiselli, Luca, 2014. "How much do the common goods of rural and semi-natural landscape cost? A case study," MPRA Paper 66309, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2015.
    19. Becker, Nir & Kimhi, Ayal & Argaman, Eli, 2020. "Costs and benefits of waste soils removal," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    20. Damigos, D. & Tourkolias, C. & Diakoulaki, D., 2009. "Households' willingness to pay for safeguarding security of natural gas supply in electricity generation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 2008-2017, May.

    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:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:2:p:336-:d:1047591. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.