IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v8y2016i5p424-d69215.html

Economic Benefits: Metrics and Methods for Landscape Performance Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Zhen Wang

    (School of Architecture and Urban Planning, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, 1037# Luoyu Road, Hongshan District, Wuhan 430074, China)

  • Bo Yang

    (Department of Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning, Utah State University, 4005 Old Main Hill, Logan, UT 84322-4005, USA)

  • Shujuan Li

    (Department of Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning, Utah State University, 4005 Old Main Hill, Logan, UT 84322-4005, USA)

  • Chris Binder

    (Department of Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning, Utah State University, 4005 Old Main Hill, Logan, UT 84322-4005, USA)

Abstract

This paper introduces an expanding research frontier in the landscape architecture discipline, landscape performance research, which embraces the scientific dimension of landscape architecture through evidence-based designs that are anchored in quantitative performance assessment. Specifically, this paper summarizes metrics and methods for determining landscape-derived economic benefits that have been utilized in the Landscape Performance Series (LPS) initiated by the Landscape Architecture Foundation. This paper identifies 24 metrics and 32 associated methods for the assessment of economic benefits found in 82 published case studies. Common issues arising through research in quantifying economic benefits for the LPS are discussed and the various approaches taken by researchers are clarified. The paper also provides an analysis of three case studies from the LPS that are representative of common research methods used to quantify economic benefits. The paper suggests that high(er) levels of sustainability in the built environment require the integration of economic benefits into landscape performance assessment portfolios in order to forecast project success and reduce uncertainties. Therefore, evidence-based design approaches increase the scientific rigor of landscape architecture education and research, and elevate the status of the profession.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhen Wang & Bo Yang & Shujuan Li & Chris Binder, 2016. "Economic Benefits: Metrics and Methods for Landscape Performance Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-12, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:5:p:424-:d:69215
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/5/424/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/5/424/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adri van den Brink & Diedrich Bruns, 2014. "Strategies for Enhancing Landscape Architecture Research," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 7-20, February.
    2. Bo Yang & Shujuan Li & Chris Binder, 2016. "A research frontier in landscape architecture: landscape performance and assessment of social benefits," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(3), pages 314-329, April.
    3. Faber, Malte, 2008. "How to be an ecological economist," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 1-7, May.
    4. Shafik, Nemat, 1994. "Economic Development and Environmental Quality: An Econometric Analysis," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(0), pages 757-773, Supplemen.
    5. Tyrvainen, Liisa & Miettinen, Antti, 2000. "Property Prices and Urban Forest Amenities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 205-223, March.
    6. Giuseppe Ioppolo & Stefano Cucurachi & Roberta Salomone & Giuseppe Saija & Lei Shi, 2016. "Sustainable Local Development and Environmental Governance: A Strategic Planning Experience," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-16, February.
    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. Cankun Li & Jiang Chang & Shanshan Feng & Shiyuan Zhou, 2025. "From a Coal Mining Area to a Wetland Park: How Is the Social Landscape Performance in Pan’an Lake National Wetland Park?," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-25, June.
    2. Guanyu Chen & Jacky Bowring & Shannon Davis, 2023. "Exploring the Terminology, Definitions, and Forms of Post-Occupancy Evaluation (POE) in Landscape Architecture," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-41, April.
    3. Tiezheng Zhao & Yang Zhao & Ming-Han Li, 2019. "Landscape Performance for Coordinated Development of Rural Communities & Small-Towns Based on “Ecological Priority and All-Area Integrated Development”: Six Case Studies in East China’s Zhejiang Province," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-23, 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. Chiu, Chien-Liang & Chang, Ting-Huan, 2009. "What proportion of renewable energy supplies is needed to initially mitigate CO2 emissions in OECD member countries?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(6-7), pages 1669-1674, August.
    2. Sebri, Maamar, 2009. "La Zone Méditerranéenne Face à la Pollution de L’air : Une Investigation Econométrique [The Mediterranean Zone in front of Air pollution: an Econometric Investigation]," MPRA Paper 32382, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Sinha, Avik & Shahbaz, Muhammad, 2018. "Estimation of Environmental Kuznets Curve for CO2 emission: Role of renewable energy generation in India," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 703-711.
    4. Alina Kulczyk-Dynowska & Agnieszka Stacherzak, 2022. "The Impact of a City on Its Environment: The Prism of Demography and Selected Environmental and Technical Aspects Based on the Case of Major Lower Silesian Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-18, May.
    5. Mazzanti, Massimiliano & Montini, Anna & Zoboli, Roberto, 2006. "Municipal Waste Production, Economic Drivers, and 'New' Waste Policies: EKC Evidence from Italian Regional and Provincial Panel Data," Climate Change Modelling and Policy Working Papers 12053, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    6. Anastasios Xepapadeas & Esma Amri, 1998. "Some Empirical Indications of the Relationship Between Environmental Quality and Economic Development," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(1), pages 93-106, January.
    7. Arınç Boz & Gökhan Ünalan & Eren Çaşkurlu, 2025. "The Effectiveness of Redistribution in Carbon Inequality: What About the Top 1%?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-26, May.
    8. Muhammad Uzair Ali & Zhimin Gong & Muhammad Ubaid Ali & Fahad Asmi & Rizwanullah Muhammad, 2022. "CO2 emission, economic development, fossil fuel consumption and population density in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh: A panel investigation," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(1), pages 18-31, January.
    9. Kanjilal, Kakali & Ghosh, Sajal, 2013. "Environmental Kuznet’s curve for India: Evidence from tests for cointegration with unknown structuralbreaks," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 509-515.
    10. Rothman, Dale S., 1998. "Environmental Kuznets curves--real progress or passing the buck?: A case for consumption-based approaches," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 177-194, May.
    11. Pei-Ing Wu & Je-Liang Liou & Hung-Yi Chang, 2015. "Alternative exploration of EKC for $$\hbox {CO}_{2}$$ CO 2 emissions: inclusion of meta-technical ratio in quantile regression model," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 57-73, January.
    12. Maurizio Lisciandra & Carlo Migliardo, 2017. "An Empirical Study of the Impact of Corruption on Environmental Performance: Evidence from Panel Data," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(2), pages 297-318, October.
    13. Tan Yigitcanlar & Ingi Runar Edvardsson & Hjalti Johannesson & Md Kamruzzaman & Giuseppe Ioppolo & Surabhi Pancholi, 2017. "Knowledge-based development dynamics in less favoured regions: insights from Australian and Icelandic university towns," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(12), pages 2272-2292, December.
    14. Shahbaz, Muhammad & Nasreen, Samia & Ahmed, Khalid & Hammoudeh, Shawkat, 2017. "Trade openness–carbon emissions nexus: The importance of turning points of trade openness for country panels," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 221-232.
    15. Tamazian, Artur & Bhaskara Rao, B., 2010. "Do economic, financial and institutional developments matter for environmental degradation? Evidence from transitional economies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 137-145, January.
    16. Costantini, Valeria & Monni, Salvatore, 2008. "Environment, human development and economic growth," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 867-880, February.
    17. Ahmet Tolunay & Çağlar Başsüllü, 2015. "Willingness to Pay for Carbon Sequestration and Co-Benefits of Forests in Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-27, March.
    18. Raghavan, Roopali & Shrimali, Gireesh, 2015. "Forest cover increase in India: The role of policy and markets," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 70-76.
    19. Hardie, Ian W. & Nickerson, Cynthia J., 2003. "The Effect Of A Forest Conservation Regulation On The Value Of Subdivisions In Maryland," Working Papers 28575, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    20. Chien, Fengsheng & Anwar, Ahsan & Hsu, Ching-Chi & Sharif, Arshian & Razzaq, Asif & Sinha, Avik, 2021. "The role of information and communication technology in encountering environmental degradation: Proposing an SDG framework for the BRICS countries," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(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:8:y:2016:i:5:p:424-:d:69215. 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 The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (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.