IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i21p12115-d670914.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the Value of Urban Green Infrastructure Ecosystem Services for High-Density Urban Management and Development: Case from the Capital Core Area of Beijing, China

Author

Listed:
  • Haiyun Xu

    (Department of Landscape Architecture, College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Beijing University of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Beijing 102627, China)

  • Guohan Zhao

    (Department of the Built Environment, Aalborg University, Thomas Manns Vej 23, 9220 Aalborg Øst, Denmark)

Abstract

Urban green infrastructure (UGI) includes green and blue open spaces that provide multiple ecosystem services (ES) and the ecological and cultural benefits for people to hedge the urbanization challenges. In this paper, we assessed the total economic value of ES provided by UGI in the capital core area of Beijing by calculating the value of six types of ES related to high-density urban features: (1) climate regulation, (2) carbon sequestration and oxygen production, (3) water control and conservation, (4) air pollution reduction, (5) noise reduction (6) cultural services through the combination of replacement cost, carbon tax, shadow project, afforestation cost, and market price methods. The results showed that UGI generated economic benefits in the surveyed area of about CNY ¥1.56 billion (USD $240 million) per year or CNY ¥91.76 (USD $14) per capita. The largest share of ES came from carbon sequestration and oxygen production, amounting to about 46.32% of the total ES value. Our findings also revealed that the distribution of ES value patterns varied across communities. This study enhanced the understanding of local UGI and had significant policy implications for future urban sustainable management, both in the capital core area of Beijing and in other high-density urban areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Haiyun Xu & Guohan Zhao, 2021. "Assessing the Value of Urban Green Infrastructure Ecosystem Services for High-Density Urban Management and Development: Case from the Capital Core Area of Beijing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-19, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:21:p:12115-:d:670914
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/21/12115/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/21/12115/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Harrison, Paula A. & Dunford, Rob & Barton, David N. & Kelemen, Eszter & Martín-López, Berta & Norton, Lisa & Termansen, Mette & Saarikoski, Heli & Hendriks, Kees & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Czúcz, , 2018. "Selecting methods for ecosystem service assessment: A decision tree approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 481-498.
    2. Dunford, Rob & Harrison, Paula & Smith, Alison & Dick, Jan & Barton, David N. & Martin-Lopez, Berta & Kelemen, Ezsther & Jacobs, Sander & Saarikoski, Heli & Turkelboom, Francis & Verheyden, Wim & Hauc, 2018. "Integrating methods for ecosystem service assessment: Experiences from real world situations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 499-514.
    3. Dickinson, Dawn C. & Hobbs, Richard J., 2017. "Cultural ecosystem services: Characteristics, challenges and lessons for urban green space research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 179-194.
    4. Sinclair, Michael & Mayer, Marius & Woltering, Manuel & Ghermandi, Andrea, 2020. "Valuing nature-based recreation using a crowdsourced travel cost method: A comparison to onsite survey data and value transfer," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    5. Alessio Russo & Wing Tung Chan & Giuseppe T. Cirella, 2021. "Estimating Air Pollution Removal and Monetary Value for Urban Green Infrastructure Strategies Using Web-Based Applications," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-17, July.
    6. Sharma, Bikash & Rasul, Golam & Chettri, Nakul, 2015. "The economic value of wetland ecosystem services: Evidence from the Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, Nepal," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 84-93.
    7. Riechers, Maraja & Barkmann, Jan & Tscharntke, Teja, 2016. "Perceptions of cultural ecosystem services from urban green," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 33-39.
    8. Daowei Zhang & Anne Stenger, 2015. "Value and valuation of forest ecosystem services," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(2), pages 129-140, July.
    9. Chiara Cortinovis & Grazia Zulian & Davide Geneletti, 2018. "Assessing Nature-Based Recreation to Support Urban Green Infrastructure Planning in Trento (Italy)," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-20, September.
    10. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Barton, David N., 2013. "Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 235-245.
    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. Jinliu Chen & Paola Pellegrini & Zhuo Yang & Haoqi Wang, 2023. "Strategies for Sustainable Urban Renewal: Community-Scale GIS-Based Analysis for Densification Decision Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-19, May.
    2. Haixia Zhao & Binjie Gu & Jinding Fan & Junqi Wang & Liancong Luo, 2023. "Socioeconomic Factors Influence the Spatial and Temporal Distribution of Blue–Green Infrastructure Demand: A Case of Nanjing City," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-20, February.

    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. 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).
    2. Dick, Jan & Andrews, Chris & Orenstein, Daniel E. & Teff-Seker, Yael & Zulian, Grazia, 2022. "A mixed-methods approach to analyse recreational values and implications for management of protected areas: A case study of Cairngorms National Park, UK," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    3. Barton, D.N. & Kelemen, E. & Dick, J. & Martin-Lopez, B. & Gómez-Baggethun, E. & Jacobs, S. & Hendriks, C.M.A. & Termansen, M. & García- Llorente, M. & Primmer, E. & Dunford, R. & Harrison, P.A. & T, 2018. "(Dis) integrated valuation – Assessing the information gaps in ecosystem service appraisals for governance support," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 529-541.
    4. Jax, Kurt & Furman, Eeva & Saarikoski, Heli & Barton, David N. & Delbaere, Ben & Dick, Jan & Duke, Guy & Görg, Christoph & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Harrison, Paula A. & Maes, Joachim & Pérez-Soba, M, 2018. "Handling a messy world: Lessons learned when trying to make the ecosystem services concept operational," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 415-427.
    5. László Miklós & Anna Špinerová & Ingrid Belčáková & Monika Offertálerová & Viktória Miklósová, 2020. "Ecosystem Services: The Landscape-Ecological Base and Examples," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-23, December.
    6. Eduardo Blanco & Maibritt Pedersen Zari & Kalina Raskin & Philippe Clergeau, 2021. "Urban Ecosystem-Level Biomimicry and Regenerative Design: Linking Ecosystem Functioning and Urban Built Environments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, January.
    7. Dick, Jan & Turkelboom, Francis & Woods, Helen & Iniesta-Arandia, Irene & Primmer, Eeva & Saarela, Sanna-Riikka & Bezák, Peter & Mederly, Peter & Leone, Michael & Verheyden, Wim & Kelemen, Eszter & H, 2018. "Stakeholders’ perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept: Results from 27 case studies," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 552-565.
    8. Oleksandr Karasov & Stien Heremans & Mart Külvik & Artem Domnich & Igor Chervanyov, 2020. "On How Crowdsourced Data and Landscape Organisation Metrics Can Facilitate the Mapping of Cultural Ecosystem Services: An Estonian Case Study," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-17, May.
    9. Harrison, Paula A. & Dunford, Rob & Barton, David N. & Kelemen, Eszter & Martín-López, Berta & Norton, Lisa & Termansen, Mette & Saarikoski, Heli & Hendriks, Kees & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Czúcz, , 2018. "Selecting methods for ecosystem service assessment: A decision tree approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 481-498.
    10. Kim, Ilkwon & Lee, Jae-hyuck & Kwon, Hyuksoo, 2021. "Participatory ecosystem service assessment to enhance environmental decision-making in a border city of South Korea," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    11. Saarikoski, Heli & Primmer, Eeva & Saarela, Sanna-Riikka & Antunes, Paula & Aszalós, Réka & Baró, Francesc & Berry, Pam & Blanko, Gemma Garcia & Goméz-Baggethun, Erik & Carvalho, Laurence & Dick, , 2018. "Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 579-598.
    12. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Tudor, Marian & Doroftei, Mihai & Covaliov, Silviu & Năstase, Aurel & Onără, Dalia-Florentina & Mierlă, Marian & Marinov, Mihai & Doroșencu, Alexandru-Cătălin & Lupu, G, 2019. "Changes in ecosystem services from wetland loss and restoration: An ecosystem assessment of the Danube Delta (1960–2010)," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    13. Gugulica, Madalina & Burghardt, Dirk, 2023. "Mapping indicators of cultural ecosystem services use in urban green spaces based on text classification of geosocial media data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    14. Daria Sikorska & Piotr Sikorski & Richard James Hopkins, 2017. "High Biodiversity of Green Infrastructure Does Not Contribute to Recreational Ecosystem Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-13, February.
    15. Smith, Ron I. & Barton, David N. & Dick, Jan & Haines-Young, Roy & Madsen, Anders L. & Rusch, Graciela M. & Termansen, Mette & Woods, Helen & Carvalho, Laurence & Giucă, Relu Constantin & Luque, Sand, 2018. "Operationalising ecosystem service assessment in Bayesian Belief Networks: Experiences within the OpenNESS project," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 452-464.
    16. Bolaños-Valencia, Ingrid & Villegas-Palacio, Clara & López-Gómez, Connie Paola & Berrouet, Lina & Ruiz, Aura, 2019. "Social perception of risk in socio-ecological systems. A qualitative and quantitative analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    17. Li-Pei Peng & Wei-Ming Wang, 2020. "Hybrid Decision-Making Evaluation for Future Scenarios of Cultural Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-20, August.
    18. Dennis, Matthew & James, Philip, 2017. "Ecosystem services of collectively managed urban gardens: Exploring factors affecting synergies and trade-offs at the site level," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 17-26.
    19. Donatella Valente & María Victoria Marinelli & Erica Maria Lovello & Cosimo Gaspare Giannuzzi & Irene Petrosillo, 2022. "Fostering the Resiliency of Urban Landscape through the Sustainable Spatial Planning of Green Spaces," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-13, March.
    20. Brzoska, P. & Grunewald, K. & Bastian, O., 2021. "A multi-criteria analytical method to assess ecosystem services at urban site level, exemplified by two German city districts," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).

    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:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:21:p:12115-:d:670914. 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.