IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i12p5089-d1415276.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public Benefits Valuation of Dynamic Green Roof Stormwater Retention

Author

Listed:
  • Jessica Cook

    (Rogers Behavioral Health, Oconomowoc, WI 53066, USA)

  • Yunsun Huh

    (Department of Economics, College of Business and Economics, University of Wisconsin-Whitewater, Whitewater, WI 53190, USA)

  • Matthew Winden

    (Department of Economics, College of Business and Economics, University of Wisconsin-Whitewater, Whitewater, WI 53190, USA)

Abstract

This study evaluates the public benefits associated with different green roof systems to manage stormwater runoff in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. An internet-based stated-preference conjoint choice experiment was administered to residents of Milwaukee to ascertain the public benefits value of different potential green roof infrastructure programs. This study contributes to the literature on the public benefits of green roofs in two ways. First, this study examined the perceived value of dynamic stormwater retention facilitated using “smart” green roofs with access to real-time weather data versus traditional extensive green roofs. Second, a wider range of public benefits associated with green roofs, including improved water quality, air quality, biodiversity, and urban heat island effects, were estimated. Estimation of these public benefits allows for determination of the optimal public policy for supporting green roofs as a component of decentralized stormwater management in municipalities.

Suggested Citation

  • Jessica Cook & Yunsun Huh & Matthew Winden, 2024. "Public Benefits Valuation of Dynamic Green Roof Stormwater Retention," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-15, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:12:p:5089-:d:1415276
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/12/5089/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/12/5089/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ando, Amy Whritenour & Netusil, Noelwah R., 2013. "A Tale of Many Cities: Using Low-Impact Development to Reduce Urban Water Pollution," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 28(3), pages 1-6.
    2. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, January.
    3. DeShazo, J. R. & Fermo, German, 2002. "Designing Choice Sets for Stated Preference Methods: The Effects of Complexity on Choice Consistency," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 123-143, July.
    4. Kondo, M.C. & Low, S.C. & Henning, J. & Branas, C.C., 2015. "The impact of green stormwater infrastructure installation on surrounding health and safety," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 105(3), pages 114-121.
    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. Yuming Wu & Katsunori Furuya & Bowen Xiao & Ruochen Ma, 2025. "Optimizing Urban Green Roofs: An Integrated Framework for Suitability, Economic Viability, and Microclimate Regulation," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-33, August.

    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. Jürgen Meyerhoff & Ulf Liebe, 2009. "Status Quo Effect in Choice Experiments: Empirical Evidence on Attitudes and Choice Task Complexity," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 85(3), pages 515-528.
    2. Nicolas Jacquemet & Stéphane Luchini & Jason F. Shogren & Verity Watson, 2019. "Discrete Choice under Oaths," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 19007, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    3. Moser, Riccarda & Raffaelli, Roberta, "undated". "Exploiting cut-off information to incorporate context effect: a discrete choice experiment on small fruits in a Alpine region," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114646, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Rogers, Abbie A. & Cleland, Jonelle, 2010. "Comparing Scientist and Public Preferences for Conserving Environmental Systems: A Case of the Kimberley’s Tropical Waterways and Wetlands," Research Reports 107579, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    5. Fraser, Iain & Balcombe, Kelvin & Williams, Louis & McSorley, Eugene, 2021. "Preference stability in discrete choice experiments. Some evidence using eye-tracking," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    6. De Valck, Jeremy & Vlaeminck, Pieter & Liekens, Inge & Aertsens, Joris & Chen, Wendy & Vranken, Liesbet, 2012. "The sources of preference heterogeneity for nature restoration scenarios," Working Papers 146522, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centre for Agricultural and Food Economics.
    7. Krucien, Nicolas & Ryan, Mandy & Hermens, Frouke, 2017. "Visual attention in multi-attributes choices: What can eye-tracking tell us?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 251-267.
    8. Lauren Chenarides & Carola Grebitus & Jayson L Lusk & Iryna Printezis, 2022. "A calibrated choice experiment method," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(5), pages 971-1004.
    9. Elizabeth Kinter & Thomas Prior & Christopher Carswell & John Bridges, 2012. "A Comparison of Two Experimental Design Approaches in Applying Conjoint Analysis in Patient-Centered Outcomes Research," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 5(4), pages 279-294, December.
    10. David A. Hensher, 2006. "How do respondents process stated choice experiments? Attribute consideration under varying information load," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(6), pages 861-878, September.
    11. Hoyos, David, 2010. "The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1595-1603, June.
    12. Campbell, Danny & Hutchinson, W. George & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2006. "Lexicographic Preferences in Discrete Choice Experiments: Consequences on Individual-Specific Willingness to Pay Estimates," Sustainability Indicators and Environmental Valuation Working Papers 12224, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    13. Rousseau, Sandra & Vranken, Liesbet, 2013. "Green market expansion by reducing information asymmetries: Evidence for labeled organic food products," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 31-43.
    14. Fredrik Carlsson & Mitesh Kataria & Elina Lampi, 2010. "Dealing with Ignored Attributes in Choice Experiments on Valuation of Sweden’s Environmental Quality Objectives," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(1), pages 65-89, September.
    15. Anastassiadis Friederike & Feil Jan-Henning & Musshoff Oliver & Schilling Philipp, 2014. "Analysing Farmers’ Use of Price Hedging Instruments: An Experimental Approach," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 181-192, January.
    16. Sergio Colombo & Nick Hanley & Jordan Louviere, 2009. "Modeling preference heterogeneity in stated choice data: an analysis for public goods generated by agriculture," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(3), pages 307-322, May.
    17. Hu, Wuyang, 2006. "Effects of Endogenous Task Complexity and the Endowed Bundle on Stated Choice," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21437, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    18. Mandy Ryan & Nicolas Krucien & Frouke Hermens, 2018. "The eyes have it: Using eye tracking to inform information processing strategies in multi‐attributes choices," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(4), pages 709-721, April.
    19. Oehlmann, Malte & Weller, Priska & Meyerhoff, Jürgen, 2014. "Complexity-induced Status Quo Effects in Discrete Choice Experiments for Environmental Valutation," VfS Annual Conference 2014 (Hamburg): Evidence-based Economic Policy 100616, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    20. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:12:p:5089-:d:1415276. 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.