Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Richard Revesz, Michael Greenstone, M. Hanemann, Michael Livermore, Thomas Sterner, Denise Grab, Peter Howard, Jason Schwartz (2017)
Best cost estimate of greenhouse gasesScience, 357
M. Kiss, A. Takács, Réka Pogácsás, Á. Gulyás (2015)
The role of ecosystem services in climate and air quality in urban areas: Evaluating carbon sequestration and air pollution removal by street and park trees in Szeged (Hungary)Moravian Geographical Reports, 23
N. Yaghoobian, J. Kleissl, E. Krayenhoff (2010)
Modeling the Thermal Effects of Artificial Turf on the Urban EnvironmentJournal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology, 49
Ram Pandit, D. Laband (2010)
Energy savings from tree shade.Ecological Economics, 69
Geoffrey Donovana, David Butryb (2010)
Landscape and Urban Planning
D. Nowak, D. Crane, J. Stevens (2006)
Air pollution removal by urban trees and shrubs in the United StatesUrban Forestry & Urban Greening, 4
D. MacDonald, N. Crossman, P. Mahmoudi, Laura Taylor, D. Summers, P. Boxall (2010)
The value of public and private green spaces under water restrictions.Landscape and Urban Planning, 95
A. Townsend‐Small, C. Czimczik (2010)
Carbon sequestration and greenhouse gas emissions in urban turfGeophysical Research Letters, 37
D. Nowak, N. Appleton, Alexis Ellis, E. Greenfield (2017)
Residential building energy conservation and avoided power plant emissions by urban and community trees in the United StatesUrban Forestry & Urban Greening, 21
A. Villamagna, P. Angermeier, E. Bennett (2013)
Capacity, pressure, demand, and flow: A conceptual framework for analyzing ecosystem service provision and deliveryEcological Complexity, 15
D. Nowak, D. Crane, J. Dwyer (2002)
Compensatory Value of Urban Trees in the United StatesArboriculture & Urban Forestry
Zhi-hua Wang, Xiaoxi Zhao, Jiachuan Yang, Jiyun Song (2016)
Cooling and energy saving potentials of shade trees and urban lawns in a desert cityApplied Energy, 161
R. Ulrich, R. Simons, B. Losito, E. Fiorito, M. Miles, M. Zelson (1991)
Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environmentsJournal of Environmental Psychology, 11
T. Mexia, Joana Vieira, Adriana Príncipe, A. Anjos, Patrícia Silva, N. Lopes, Catarina Freitas, M. Santos‐Reis, O. Correia, C. Branquinho, P. Pinho (2018)
Ecosystem services: Urban parks under a magnifying glassEnvironmental Research, 160
Chao Xu, D. Haase, S. Pauleit (2018)
The impact of different urban dynamics on green space availability: A multiple scenario modeling approach for the region of Munich, GermanyEcological Indicators
M. Polyakov, James Fogarty, Fan Zhang, Ram Pandit, D. Pannell (2017)
The value of restoring urban drains to living streamsWater Resources and Economics, 17
M. Kirwan, G. Guntenspergen, A. D’Alpaos, J. Morris, S. Mudd, S. Temmerman (2010)
Limits on the adaptability of coastal marshes to rising sea levelGeophysical Research Letters, 37
Y. Qian, R. Follett, J. Kimble (2010)
Soil Organic Carbon Input from Urban TurfgrassesSoil Science Society of America Journal, 74
A. Soares, F. Rego, E. McPherson, J. Simpson, P. Peper, Q. Xiao (2011)
Benefits and costs of street trees in Lisbon, PortugalUrban Forestry & Urban Greening, 10
D. Nowak, D. Crane, J. Stevens, R. Hoehn, Jeffrey Walton, J. Bond (2008)
A Ground-Based Method of Assessing Urban Forest Structure and Ecosystem Services, 34
M. Lockwood, K. Tracy (1995)
Nonmarket economic valuation of an urban recreation park.Journal of Leisure Research, 27
J. Englin, J. Shonkwiler (1995)
Estimating Social Welfare Using Count Data Models: An Application to Long-Run Recreation Demand under Conditions of Endogenous Stratification and TruncationThe Review of Economics and Statistics, 77
D. Hondula, A. Barnett (2014)
Heat-Related Morbidity in Brisbane, Australia: Spatial Variation and Area-Level PredictorsEnvironmental Health Perspectives, 122
H. Serna-Chavez, C. Schulp, P. Bodegom, W. Bouten, P. Verburg, M. Davidson (2014)
A quantitative framework for assessing spatial flows of ecosystem servicesEcological Indicators, 39
D. Nowak, E. Greenfield, R. Hoehn, E. Lapoint (2013)
Carbon storage and sequestration by trees in urban and community areas of the United States.Environmental pollution, 178
R. Helliwell (2008)
AMENITY VALUATION OF TREES AND WOODLANDSArboricultural Journal, 31
Adam Berland, M. Hopton (2014)
Comparing street tree assemblages and associated stormwater benefits among communities in metropolitan Cincinnati, Ohio, USAUrban Forestry & Urban Greening, 13
Ram Pandit, M. Polyakov, S. Tapsuwan, Timothy Moran (2013)
The effect of street trees on property value in Perth, Western AustraliaLandscape and Urban Planning, 110
H. Schandl, R. Marcos-Martinez, T. Baynes, Zefan Yu, A. Miatto, H. Tanikawa (2020)
A spatiotemporal urban metabolism model for the Canberra suburb of Braddon in AustraliaJournal of Cleaner Production, 265
Biao Zhang, G. Xie, Canqiang Zhang, Jing Zhang (2012)
The economic benefits of rainwater-runoff reduction by urban green spaces: a case study in Beijing, China.Journal of environmental management, 100
Around two‐thirds of the global population will live in cities by 2050 requiring large urban infrastructure development. Decision‐makers and planners usually rely on standard economic accounting methods for urban planning and investments on infrastructure assets. However, standard methods fail to account for the ecosystem services benefits that living infrastructure (e.g. urban forests, open spaces) provides to city dwellers. This could generate socially inefficient configurations of urban spaces and compromise the achievement of long‐term urban sustainability targets. In this analysis, we applied a stochastic whole‐of‐life benefit–cost analysis following the System of Environmental‐Economic Accounting (SEEA) framework to compare alternative long‐term management strategies for living infrastructure in Canberra, Australia. Spatially explicit data, i‐Tree Eco and benefit transfer methods were used to estimate the stocks and flows ecosystem services benefits of urban forests and irrigated open spaces from 2018 to 2070. Our analysis suggests that a ’30 per cent canopy cover expansion’ scenario has the highest benefit–cost ratio, while the business as usual scenario, where a net loss of 400 trees is expected per year, offers the lowest benefit–cost ratio. Scenarios of expanding versus not expanding irrigated open spaces in the future both result in a benefit–cost ratio of approximately two.
The Australian Journal of Agricultural Resource Economics – Wiley
Published: Jan 1, 2021
Keywords: ; ; ; ;
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.