IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/jsd123/v15y2022i3p157.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-Benefit Analysis of Green Space Investment in Residential Areas of Dar es Salaam City, Tanzania

Author

Listed:
  • Nicholaus Mwageni
  • Gabriel Kassenga

Abstract

Urban green spaces are increasingly recognized as alternative ameliorative methods to technical solutions abating cities' environmental problems like poor air quality, climate change impacts, and heat stress. However, the costs of development and maintenance of green spaces in terms of materials, labor, and time are not known. The main objective of the study was to assess the costs and benefits associated with green space investment in residential plots of Dar es Salaam City. The study employed in-depth interviews using structured questionnaires and document review. Results indicated that households incur an average cost of TZS 136,579 (USD 59) and a maximum of TZS 6,629,019 (USD 2,882) for establishing more than one home greenery type. The total net monetary benefit per household after all costs due to disservices have been accounted for was TZS 3,148,827 (USD 1,369) annually. Based on a cost-benefit analysis of home greenery, it was found that the benefit was 2.6 times as much as the investment cost thus suggesting that maintaining home greeneries is cost-effective and a worthwhile investment. The results may help in evaluating trades off between courses of action as well as a decision tool for the households when investing in green spaces. The study recommends that residents and City managers should invest in allotments, shade trees, and/or fruit trees, as they were found to have the highest benefits, monetary savings, and benefit-cost ratio. Moreover, to maximize monetary benefit from home greenery, residents should select the right type of green space followed by choosing the right plant species, identification of the right location within the residential plot for establishing green space, and adopting building designs that optimally support green space functioning.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicholaus Mwageni & Gabriel Kassenga, 2022. "Cost-Benefit Analysis of Green Space Investment in Residential Areas of Dar es Salaam City, Tanzania," Journal of Sustainable Development, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 15(3), pages 157-157, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:jsd123:v:15:y:2022:i:3:p:157
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jsd/article/download/0/0/47154/50482
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jsd/article/view/0/47154
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Costanza, Robert & de Groot, Rudolf & Braat, Leon & Kubiszewski, Ida & Fioramonti, Lorenzo & Sutton, Paul & Farber, Steve & Grasso, Monica, 2017. "Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 1-16.
    2. Bolund, Per & Hunhammar, Sven, 1999. "Ecosystem services in urban areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 293-301, May.
    3. Vaz, Ana S. & Kueffer, Christoph & Kull, Christian A. & Richardson, David M. & Vicente, Joana R. & Kühn, Ingolf & Schröter, Matthias & Hauck, Jennifer & Bonn, Aletta & Honrado, João P., 2017. "Integrating ecosystem services and disservices: insights from plant invasions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 94-107.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Karen T. Lourdes & Chris N. Gibbins & Perrine Hamel & Ruzana Sanusi & Badrul Azhar & Alex M. Lechner, 2021. "A Review of Urban Ecosystem Services Research in Southeast Asia," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21, January.
    2. Xinyu Ouyang & Xiangyu Luo, 2022. "Models for Assessing Urban Ecosystem Services: Status and Outlooks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-20, April.
    3. 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).
    4. Yiting Chen & Zhanbin Li & Peng Li & Yixin Zhang & Hailiang Liu & Jinjin Pan, 2022. "Impacts and Projections of Land Use and Demographic Changes on Ecosystem Services: A Case Study in the Guanzhong Region, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-20, March.
    5. Nápoles-Vértiz, Sonia & Caro-Borrero, Angela, 2024. "Conceptual diversity and application of ecosystem services and disservices: A systematic review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    6. Pistón, Nuria & Silva Filho, Dario S.E. & Dias, André T.C., 2022. "Social inequality deeply affects people’s perception of ecosystem services and disservices provided by street trees," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    7. Wells, Jasmine J. & Stringer, Lindsay C. & Woodhead, Anna J. & Wandrag, Elizabeth M., 2023. "Towards a holistic understanding of non-native tree impacts on ecosystem services: A review of Acacia, Eucalyptus and Pinus in Africa," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    8. Tebboth, M.G.L. & Few, R. & Assen, M. & Degefu, M.A., 2020. "Valuing local perspectives on invasive species management: Moving beyond the ecosystem service-disservice dichotomy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    9. Huang, Qingxu & Yin, Dan & He, Chunyang & Yan, Jubo & Liu, Ziwen & Meng, Shiting & Ren, Qiang & Zhao, Rui & Inostroza, Luis, 2020. "Linking ecosystem services and subjective well-being in rapidly urbanizing watersheds: Insights from a multilevel linear model," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    10. von Döhren, Peer & Haase, Dagmar, 2019. "Risk assessment concerning urban ecosystem disservices: The example of street trees in Berlin, Germany," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    11. Jiaxing Wei & Jing Qian & Yu Tao & Feng Hu & Weixin Ou, 2018. "Evaluating Spatial Priority of Urban Green Infrastructure for Urban Sustainability in Areas of Rapid Urbanization: A Case Study of Pukou in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-14, January.
    12. Yuan Gong & Mengmeng Cai & Lei Yao & Linsong Cheng & Chunxu Hao & Zheng Zhao, 2022. "Assessing Changes in the Ecosystem Services Value in Response to Land-Use/Land-Cover Dynamics in Shanghai from 2000 to 2020," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-19, September.
    13. 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.
    14. Anna Maria Colavitti & Alessio Floris & Sergio Serra, 2020. "Urban Standards and Ecosystem Services: The Evolution of the Services Planning in Italy from Theory to Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-20, March.
    15. Zuzana Drillet & Tze Kwan Fung & Rachel Ai Ting Leong & Uma Sachidhanandam & Peter Edwards & Daniel Richards, 2020. "Urban Vegetation Types are Not Perceived Equally in Providing Ecosystem Services and Disservices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-14, March.
    16. Goran Krsnik & Sonia Reyes-Paecke & Keith M. Reynolds & Jordi Garcia-Gonzalo & José Ramón González Olabarria, 2023. "Assessing Relativeness in the Provision of Urban Ecosystem Services: Better Comparison Methods for Improved Well-Being," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, May.
    17. Aryal, Kishor & Maraseni, Tek & Apan, Armando, 2023. "Examining policy−institution−program (PIP) responses against the drivers of ecosystem dynamics. A chronological review (1960–2020) from Nepal," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    18. Liu, Duan & Tang, Runcheng & Xie, Jun & Tian, Jingjing & Shi, Rui & Zhang, Kai, 2020. "Valuation of ecosystem services of rice–fish coculture systems in Ruyuan County, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    19. Gaodi Xie & Wenhui Chen & Shuyan Cao & Chunxia Lu & Yu Xiao & Changshun Zhang & Na Li & Shuo Wang, 2014. "The Outward Extension of an Ecological Footprint in City Expansion: The Case of Beijing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-16, December.
    20. Yajing Shao & Xuefeng Yuan & Chaoqun Ma & Ruifang Ma & Zhaoxia Ren, 2020. "Quantifying the Spatial Association between Land Use Change and Ecosystem Services Value: A Case Study in Xi’an, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-20, May.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ibn:jsd123:v:15:y:2022:i:3:p:157. 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: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    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.