IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/agrerw/v52y2023i2p189-200_1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How reliable – and (net) beneficial – is the green in green infrastructure

Author

Listed:
  • Groffman, Peter M.
  • Matsler, A. Marissa
  • Grabowski, Zbigniew J.

Abstract

The idea of green infrastructure (GI) has generated great interest and creativity in addressing a range of challenging and expensive environmental problems, from coastal resilience to control of combined sewer overflows (CSOs). The appeal of GI stems from its cost savings compared to traditional “gray” infrastructure and the multiple benefits it provides, including biodiversity, aesthetics, and carbon sequestration. For example, a “green” approach to controlling CSOs in New York City saved $1.5 billion compared to a “gray” approach. Despite these advantages, GI still does not have detailed design and reliability specifications as compared to engineered gray infrastructure, potentially hindering its adoption. In this paper, we review some of the potential applications of GI in modern environmental science and discuss how reliability and associated (un)certainty in net benefits need to be addressed to realize the potential of this new approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Groffman, Peter M. & Matsler, A. Marissa & Grabowski, Zbigniew J., 2023. "How reliable – and (net) beneficial – is the green in green infrastructure," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(2), pages 189-200, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:agrerw:v:52:y:2023:i:2:p:189-200_1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1068280523000060/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    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:cup:agrerw:v:52:y:2023:i:2:p:189-200_1. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/age .

    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.