IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v65y2024ics2212041623000694.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Co-creating urban ecosystem accounting: Physical and monetary accounts of runoff retention service provided by urban green spaces

Author

Listed:
  • Costadone, Laura
  • Lai, Tin-Yu
  • Hurskainen, Pekka
  • Kopperoinen, Leena

Abstract

Urban ecosystem accounting can provide the structure for systematically integrating the value of urban green spaces into management and decision making to support urban resilience and sustainability. However, there are very few instructive examples of urban ecosystem accounting, particularly those created collaboratively with a municipality. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop co-created urban ecosystem accounts using Tampere, Finland, as a case study. By discussing concrete political and planning-related needs, priorities, and data availability, this study identified urban flooding and the role of green spaces in alleviating this challenge as critical issues. An ecosystem extent account was compiled for accounting years 2012 and 2018 to quantify changes in the extent of ecosystem types. Additionally, an ecosystem service account (physical and monetary), for runoff retention, was compiled for the same years. The runoff retention service was quantified using the InVEST Urban Flood Risk Mitigation model, considering two precipitation events representative of rainstorms that trigger urban flooding. The runoff retention service was translated into service providing areas, which were used in conjunction with service demanding areas to estimate the physical terms of actual flows of retention service for accounting. The monetary value of the service was estimated using the avoided damage cost method. Between 2012 and 2018, the value of runoff mitigation service provided by green spaces increased by 7 % under the 24 mm scenario and by more than 40 % under the 50 mm scenario. The accounts showed concretely how important urban green spaces are in the City of Tampere, and provide an argument to preserve and even increase them in the urban structure. Our experiential ecosystem accounts for urban runoff retention service by green spaces also offer insights to other municipalities, encouraging them to take steps forward in ecosystem accounting.

Suggested Citation

  • Costadone, Laura & Lai, Tin-Yu & Hurskainen, Pekka & Kopperoinen, Leena, 2024. "Co-creating urban ecosystem accounting: Physical and monetary accounts of runoff retention service provided by urban green spaces," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:65:y:2024:i:c:s2212041623000694
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2023.101576
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041623000694
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2023.101576?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. P. Hamel & A. Guerry & S. Polasky & B. Han & J. Douglass & M. Hamann & B. Janke & J. Kuiper & H. Levrel & H. Liu & E. Lonsdorf & R. Mcdonald & C. Nootenboom & Z. Ouyang & R. Remme & R. Sharp & Léa Tar, 2021. "Mapping the benefits of nature in cities with the InVEST software," Post-Print hal-03318222, HAL.
    2. Schröter, Matthias & Remme, Roy P. & Sumarga, Elham & Barton, David N. & Hein, Lars, 2015. "Lessons learned for spatial modelling of ecosystem services in support of ecosystem accounting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 64-69.
    3. Heris, Mehdi & Bagstad, Kenneth J. & Rhodes, Charles & Troy, Austin & Middel, Ariane & Hopkins, Krissy G. & Matuszak, John, 2021. "Piloting urban ecosystem accounting for the United States," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    4. Nedkov, Stoyan & Campagne, Sylvie & Borisova, Bilyana & Krpec, Petr & Prodanova, Hristina & Kokkoris, Ioannis P. & Hristova, Desislava & Le Clec'h, Solen & Santos-Martin, Fernando & Burkhard, Benjamin, 2022. "Modeling water regulation ecosystem services: A review in the context of ecosystem accounting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    5. Emma Puerari & Jotte I. J. C. De Koning & Timo Von Wirth & Philip M. Karré & Ingrid J. Mulder & Derk A. Loorbach, 2018. "Co-Creation Dynamics in Urban Living Labs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-18, June.
    6. Vallecillo, Sara & Kakoulaki, Georgia & La Notte, Alessandra & Feyen, Luc & Dottori, Francesco & Maes, Joachim, 2020. "Accounting for changes in flood control delivered by ecosystems at the EU level," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    7. Lange, Sabine & Campagne, Carole Sylvie & Comte, Adrien & Bank, Emily & Santos-Martín, Fernando & Maes, Joachim & Burkhard, Benjamin, 2022. "Progress on ecosystem accounting in Europe," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    8. Anna Lüke & Jochen Hack, 2018. "Comparing the Applicability of Commonly Used Hydrological Ecosystem Services Models for Integrated Decision-Support," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-22, January.
    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. Nedkov, Stoyan & Campagne, Sylvie & Borisova, Bilyana & Krpec, Petr & Prodanova, Hristina & Kokkoris, Ioannis P. & Hristova, Desislava & Le Clec'h, Solen & Santos-Martin, Fernando & Burkhard, Benjamin, 2022. "Modeling water regulation ecosystem services: A review in the context of ecosystem accounting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    2. Lindsay P. Galway & Charles Z. Levkoe & Rachel L. W. Portinga & Kathryn Milun, 2021. "A Scoping Review Examining Governance, Co-Creation, and Social and Ecological Justice in Living Labs Literature," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-16, December.
    3. Agudelo, César Augusto Ruiz & Bustos, Sandra Liliana Hurtado & Moreno, Carmen Alicia Parrado, 2020. "Modeling interactions among multiple ecosystem services. A critical review," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 429(C).
    4. Darren Sierhuis & Luca Bertolini & Willem Van Winden, 2024. "“Recovering†the political: Unpacking the implications of (de)politicization for the transformative capacities of urban experiments," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 42(2), pages 303-321, March.
    5. Jamroon Srichaichana & Yongyut Trisurat & Suwit Ongsomwang, 2019. "Land Use and Land Cover Scenarios for Optimum Water Yield and Sediment Retention Ecosystem Services in Klong U-Tapao Watershed, Songkhla, Thailand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-22, May.
    6. Darren Sharp & Rob Raven, 2021. "Urban Planning by Experiment at Precinct Scale: Embracing Complexity, Ambiguity, and Multiplicity," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 195-207.
    7. Schröter, Matthias & Kraemer, Roland & Mantel, Martin & Kabisch, Nadja & Hecker, Susanne & Richter, Anett & Neumeier, Veronika & Bonn, Aletta, 2017. "Citizen science for assessing ecosystem services: Status, challenges and opportunities," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 80-94.
    8. Buijs, Arjen & Kamphorst, Dana & Mattijssen, Thomas & van Dam, Rosalie & Kuindersma, Wiebren & Bouwma, Irene, 2022. "Policy discourses for reconnecting nature with society: The search for societal engagement in Dutch nature conservation policies," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    9. Pereira, Guillermo Ivan & Specht, Jan Martin & Silva, Patrícia Pereira & Madlener, Reinhard, 2018. "Technology, business model, and market design adaptation toward smart electricity distribution: Insights for policy making," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 426-440.
    10. Batara Surya & Haeruddin Saleh & Seri Suriani & Harry Hardian Sakti & Hadijah Hadijah & Muhammad Idris, 2020. "Environmental Pollution Control and Sustainability Management of Slum Settlements in Makassar City, South Sulawesi, Indonesia," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-34, August.
    11. Sujeetha Selvakkumaran & Erik O. Ahlgren, 2018. "Model-Based Exploration of Co-Creation Efforts: The Case of Solar Photovoltaics (PV) in Skåne, Sweden," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-23, October.
    12. Bagstad, Kenneth J. & Ingram, Jane Carter & Shapiro, Carl D. & La Notte, Alessandra & Maes, Joachim & Vallecillo, Sara & Casey, C. Frank & Glynn, Pierre D. & Heris, Mehdi P. & Johnson, Justin A. & Lau, 2021. "Lessons learned from development of natural capital accounts in the United States and European Union," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    13. Sabine van Rooij & Wim Timmermans & Onno Roosenschoon & Saskia Keesstra & Marjolein Sterk & Bas Pedroli, 2020. "Landscape-Based Visions as Powerful Boundary Objects in Spatial Planning: Lessons from Three Dutch Projects," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-14, December.
    14. Annuska Rantanen & Juho Rajaniemi, 2020. "Urban planning in the post-zoning era: From hierarchy to self-organisation in the reform of the Finnish Land Use and Building Act," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 47(2), pages 321-335, February.
    15. Peter Brokking & Ulla Mörtberg & Berit Balfors, 2021. "Municipal Practices for Integrated Planning of Nature-Based Solutions in Urban Development in the Stockholm Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-20, September.
    16. Havinga, Ilan & Bogaart, Patrick W. & Hein, Lars & Tuia, Devis, 2020. "Defining and spatially modelling cultural ecosystem services using crowdsourced data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    17. Lummina G. Horlings & Christian Lamker & Emma Puerari & Ward Rauws & Gwenda van der Vaart, 2021. "Citizen Engagement in Spatial Planning, Shaping Places Together," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-15, October.
    18. Venter, Zander S. & Czúcz, Bálint & Stange, Erik & Nowell, Megan S. & Simensen, Trond & Immerzeel, Bart & Barton, David N., 2024. "‘Uncertainty audit’ for ecosystem accounting: Satellite-based ecosystem extent is biased without design-based area estimation and accuracy assessment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    19. Dimitrios Kalfas & Fotios Chatzitheodoridis & Efstratios Loizou & Katerina Melfou, 2022. "Willingness to Pay for Urban and Suburban Green," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-21, February.
    20. Zabel, Astrid & Bokusheva, Raushan & Bozzola, Martina, 2024. "Dealing with negative monetary ecosystem services values in environmental and economic accounting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 66(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:eee:ecoser:v:65:y:2024:i:c:s2212041623000694. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

    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.