IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v8y2016i4p296-d66348.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Value of Green Infrastructure on Vacant and Residential Land in Roanoke, Virginia

Author

Listed:
  • Gunwoo Kim

    (Landscape Architecture Program, Arizona State University, PO Box 871605, Tempe, AZ 85287-1605, USA)

  • Patrick Miller

    (Landscape Architecture Program, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 120 F Burruss Hall (0190), Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA)

  • David Nowak

    (USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, 5 Moon Library, SUNY-ESF, Syracuse, NY 13215, USA)

Abstract

Using the City of Roanoke, Virginia as a study site, this paper quantifies the forest structure, ecosystem services and values of vacant and residential land. Single family residential land had more trees (1,683,000) than vacant land (210,000) due largely to the differences in land area (32.44 km 2 of vacant land vs. 57.94 km 2 residential). While the percentage of tree coverage was almost identical across land uses (30.6% in vacant to 32.3% in residential), the number of trees per ha is greater on residential land (290.3) than on vacant land (63.4). The average healthy leaf surface area on individual trees growing on vacant land was greater than that of individual trees on residential land. The fact that trees in vacant land were found to provide more ecosystem services per tree than residential trees was attributed to this leaf area difference. Trees on vacant land are growing in more natural conditions and there are more large trees per ha. Assessing the forest structure and ecosystem services of Roanoke’s vacant and residential land provides a picture of the current extent and condition of the vacant and residential land. Understanding these characteristics provides the information needed for improved management and utilization of urban vacant land and estimating green infrastructure value.

Suggested Citation

  • Gunwoo Kim & Patrick Miller & David Nowak, 2016. "The Value of Green Infrastructure on Vacant and Residential Land in Roanoke, Virginia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-15, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:4:p:296-:d:66348
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/4/296/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/4/296/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sean Burkholder, 2012. "The New Ecology of Vacancy: Rethinking Land Use in Shrinking Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(6), pages 1-19, June.
    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. Shanshan Feng & Jiake Shen & Shuo Sheng & Zengqing Hu & Yuncai Wang, 2023. "Spatial Prioritizing Brownfields Catering for Green Infrastructure by Integrating Urban Demands and Site Attributes in a Metropolitan Area," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-29, April.
    2. 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).
    3. Christine C. Rega-Brodsky & Charles H. Nilon & Paige S. Warren, 2018. "Balancing Urban Biodiversity Needs and Resident Preferences for Vacant Lot Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-21, May.
    4. Gunwoo Kim, 2016. "The Public Value of Urban Vacant Land: Social Responses and Ecological Value," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-19, May.
    5. Gunwoo Kim, 2016. "Assessing Urban Forest Structure, Ecosystem Services, and Economic Benefits on Vacant Land," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-18, July.

    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. David Bogataj & Marija Bogataj & Samo Drobne, 2020. "Sustainability of an Activity Node in Global Supply Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-23, October.
    2. Gunwoo Kim, 2016. "The Public Value of Urban Vacant Land: Social Responses and Ecological Value," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-19, May.
    3. Min Wang & Shuqi Yang & Huajie Gao & Kahaer Abudu, 2021. "The Characteristics, Influencing Factors, and Push-Pull Mechanism of Shrinking Counties: A Case Study of Shandong Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-22, February.
    4. Gu, Donghwan & Newman, Galen & Kim, Jun-Hyun & Park, Yunmi & Lee, Jaekyung, 2019. "Neighborhood decline and mixed land uses: Mitigating housing abandonment in shrinking cities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 505-511.
    5. Gałecka-Drozda Anna & Raszeja Elżbieta, 2018. "Useful wasteland - the potential of undeveloped land in modification of urban green infrastructure based on the city of Poznań," Miscellanea Geographica. Regional Studies on Development, Sciendo, vol. 22(4), pages 225-230, December.
    6. Sandra L. Albro & Sean Burkholder & Joseph Koonce, 2017. "Mind the gap: tools for a parcel-based storm water management approach," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(7), pages 747-760, October.
    7. Yihao Jiang & Zhaojin Chen & Pingjun Sun, 2022. "Urban Shrinkage and Urban Vitality Correlation Research in the Three Northeastern Provinces of China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-22, August.
    8. Jin-Wook Lee, 2021. "Evaluating Ways to Form a Sense of Community in a Shrinking City: The Case of the Media Culture Center, Seocheon, South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-14, March.
    9. Jiashun Huang & Weiping Li & Xijie Huang & Lijia Guo, 2017. "Analysis of the Relative Sustainability of Land Devoted to Bioenergy: Comparing Land-Use Alternatives in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-13, May.
    10. Alexandra Gulachenski & Bruno M. Ghersi & Amy E. Lesen & Michael J. Blum, 2016. "Abandonment, Ecological Assembly and Public Health Risks in Counter-Urbanizing Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-26, May.
    11. Christine C. Rega-Brodsky & Charles H. Nilon & Paige S. Warren, 2018. "Balancing Urban Biodiversity Needs and Resident Preferences for Vacant Lot Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-21, May.
    12. Vera De Wit & K. Wayne Forsythe, 2023. "Urban Structure Changes in Three Areas of Detroit, Michigan (2014–2018) Utilizing Geographic Object-Based Classification," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-24, March.
    13. Alexandru Bănică & Marinela Istrate & Ionel Muntele, 2017. "Challenges for the Resilience Capacity of Romanian Shrinking Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-20, December.
    14. Jeehyun Nam & Jiae Han & Changho Lee, 2016. "Factors Contributing to Residential Vacancy and Some Approaches to Management in Gyeonggi Province, Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-22, April.
    15. Jisoo Sim & Cermetrius Lynell Bohannon & Patrick Miller, 2019. "What Park Visitors Survey Tells Us: Comparing Three Elevated Parks—The High Line, 606, and High Bridge," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-16, December.
    16. Pan Zhang & Sohyun Park, 2023. "VLAS: Vacant Land Assessment System for Urban Renewal and Greenspace Planning in Legacy Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-23, June.
    17. Gunwoo Kim, 2016. "Assessing Urban Forest Structure, Ecosystem Services, and Economic Benefits on Vacant Land," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-18, July.

    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:8:y:2016:i:4:p:296-:d:66348. 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.