IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i4p1531-d494422.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Adjusted Unit Value Transfer as a Tool for Raising Awareness on Ecosystem Services Provided by Constructed Wetlands for Water Pollution Control: An Italian Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • Anacleto Rizzo

    (IRIDRA SRL, Via La Marmora 51, 50121 Florence, Italy)

  • Giulio Conte

    (Ambiente Italia SRL, Via Carlo Poerio 39, 20129 Milan, Italy)

  • Fabio Masi

    (IRIDRA SRL, Via La Marmora 51, 50121 Florence, Italy)

Abstract

Constructed wetlands (CWs) are nature-based solutions (NBS) for water pollution control that can also be designed to be multipurpose in terms of additional ecosystem services (ESs), such as biodiversity support and social benefits. Awareness about additional ESs of CWs can be raised with value transfer (VT) methods for ESs monetization, in particular, the simplified adjusted unit VT method. A multi-criteria analysis (MCA) was performed to compare grey and green infrastructure alternatives for the management of a combined sewer overflow in the Buccinasco town (Italy), in which the criteria related to ESs were monetized with an adjusted VT method (B£ST software). The results highlighted the potential interest in the implementation of the green infrastructure in a new urban park, due to the activation of additional ESs of interest, such as health and recreational aspects. The results were also confirmed by a sensitivity analysis, which simulated the variation of preferences among different stakeholder groups (e.g., citizens, environmentalists). In conclusion, this work provided a transparent methodology to support decisions regarding green and grey infrastructure, allowing to evaluate additional ESs from the beginning of the decision stage with low cost and efforts.

Suggested Citation

  • Anacleto Rizzo & Giulio Conte & Fabio Masi, 2021. "Adjusted Unit Value Transfer as a Tool for Raising Awareness on Ecosystem Services Provided by Constructed Wetlands for Water Pollution Control: An Italian Case Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-15, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:4:p:1531-:d:494422
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/1531/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/1531/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Avellán, Tamara & Gremillion, Paul, 2019. "Constructed wetlands for resource recovery in developing countries," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 42-57.
    2. Grizzetti, B. & Liquete, C. & Antunes, P. & Carvalho, L. & Geamănă, N. & Giucă, R. & Leone, M. & McConnell, S. & Preda, E. & Santos, R. & Turkelboom, F. & Vădineanu, A. & Woods, H., 2016. "Ecosystem services for water policy: Insights across Europe," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 179-190.
    3. Liquete, Camino & Udias, Angel & Conte, Giulio & Grizzetti, Bruna & Masi, Fabio, 2016. "Integrated valuation of a nature-based solution for water pollution control. Highlighting hidden benefits," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PB), pages 392-401.
    4. Woodward, Richard T. & Wui, Yong-Suhk, 2001. "The economic value of wetland services: a meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 257-270, May.
    5. 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.
    6. Raymond, Christopher M. & Frantzeskaki, Niki & Kabisch, Nadja & Berry, Pam & Breil, Margaretha & Nita, Mihai Razvan & Geneletti, Davide & Calfapietra, Carlo, 2017. "A framework for assessing and implementing the co-benefits of nature-based solutions in urban areas," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 15-24.
    7. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Barton, David N., 2013. "Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 235-245.
    8. Alexandros I. Stefanakis, 2019. "The Role of Constructed Wetlands as Green Infrastructure for Sustainable Urban Water Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-19, December.
    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. 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. Cousins, Joshua J., 2021. "Justice in nature-based solutions: Research and pathways," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    3. Nancy Andrea Ramírez-Agudelo & Roger Porcar Anento & Miriam Villares & Elisabet Roca, 2020. "Nature-Based Solutions for Water Management in Peri-Urban Areas: Barriers and Lessons Learned from Implementation Experiences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-36, November.
    4. Evans, Nicole M. & Carrozzino-Lyon, Amy L. & Galbraith, Betsy & Noordyk, Julia & Peroff, Deidre M. & Stoll, John & Thompson, Aaron & Winden, Matthew W. & Davis, Mark A., 2019. "Integrated ecosystem service assessment for landscape conservation design in the Green Bay watershed, Wisconsin," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    5. Maria Susana Orta Ortiz & Davide Geneletti, 2018. "Assessing Mismatches in the Provision of Urban Ecosystem Services to Support Spatial Planning: A Case Study on Recreation and Food Supply in Havana, Cuba," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-21, June.
    6. Chen, Haojie, 2020. "Complementing conventional environmental impact assessments of tourism with ecosystem service valuation: A case study of the Wulingyuan Scenic Area, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    7. Hérivaux, Cécile & Grémont, Marine, 2019. "Valuing a diversity of ecosystem services: The way forward to protect strategic groundwater resources for the future?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 184-193.
    8. Pham, Hung Vuong & Sperotto, Anna & Furlan, Elisa & Torresan, Silvia & Marcomini, Antonio & Critto, Andrea, 2021. "Integrating Bayesian Networks into ecosystem services assessment to support water management at the river basin scale," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    9. Renato Monteiro & José C. Ferreira & Paula Antunes, 2020. "Green Infrastructure Planning Principles: An Integrated Literature Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-19, December.
    10. Gómez Martín, Eulalia & Máñez Costa, María & Schwerdtner Máñez, Kathleen, 2020. "An operationalized classification of Nature Based Solutions for water-related hazards: From theory to practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    11. Eunjoung Lee & Gunwoo Kim, 2022. "Analysis of Domestic and International Green Infrastructure Research Trends from the ESG Perspective in South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(12), pages 1-18, June.
    12. Zulian, Grazia & Stange, Erik & Woods, Helen & Carvalho, Laurence & Dick, Jan & Andrews, Christopher & Baró, Francesc & Vizcaino, Pilar & Barton, David N. & Nowel, Megan & Rusch, Graciela M. & Autune, 2018. "Practical application of spatial ecosystem service models to aid decision support," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 465-480.
    13. Salm, J.A. Papineau & Bočkarjova, Marija & Botzen, W.J.W. & Runhaar, H.A.C., 2023. "Citizens' preferences and valuation of urban nature: Insights from two choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    14. Rita Mendonça & Peter Roebeling & Teresa Fidélis & Miguel Saraiva, 2021. "Policy Instruments to Encourage the Adoption of Nature-Based Solutions in Urban Landscapes," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-16, August.
    15. 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.
    16. Ian Mell & Sarah Clement & Fearghus O’Sullivan, 2023. "Mainstreaming Nature-Based Solutions in City Planning: Examining Scale, Focus, and Visibility as Drivers of Intervention Success in Liverpool, UK," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-23, July.
    17. Babí Almenar, Javier & Elliot, Thomas & Rugani, Benedetto & Philippe, Bodénan & Navarrete Gutierrez, Tomas & Sonnemann, Guido & Geneletti, Davide, 2021. "Nexus between nature-based solutions, ecosystem services and urban challenges," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    18. Léa Tardieu, 2017. "The need for integrated spatial assessments in ecosystem service mapping," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 98(3), pages 173-200, December.
    19. Tatiana Andrikopoulou & Ralph M. J. Schielen & Chris J. Spray & Cor A. Schipper & Astrid Blom, 2021. "A Framework to Evaluate the SDG Contribution of Fluvial Nature-Based Solutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-25, October.
    20. Lei Li & Ali Cheshmehzangi & Faith Ka Shun Chan & Christopher D. Ives, 2021. "Mapping the Research Landscape of Nature-Based Solutions in Urbanism," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-41, April.

    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:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:4:p:1531-:d:494422. 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.