IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/jsd123/v14y2024i4p78.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Value of Ecosystem Disservices of Green Spaces found in Residential Plots of Dar es Salaam City

Author

Listed:
  • Nicholaus Mwageni
  • Gabriel Kassenga

Abstract

Most studies have reported benefits of green spaces to households but few studies have been reported on negative effects (disservices) as well as their economic cost. Understanding ecosystem disservices from home greenery is important for health, safety and security of urban environment. The current paper reports on a study on economic value of green spaces including aesthetics, health, safety and security, physical, social and economic disservices. The study employed focus group discussion and in-depth interviews using structured questionnaire. Results indicate that, 65% of the respondents face the aforementioned disservices. Disservices which are aesthetic in nature were found to be faced by majority followed by health and physical disservices. The study has shown that households spend an average of TZS 60,691 (USD 26) per year on prevention and control of aesthetic and health disservices. In totality, valuation of ecosystem disservices from home greeneries has revealed that a household can incur an average total cost of TZS 116,817 (USD 50) per year. At City level, the total disservice cost is estimated to be TZS 106 billion (USD 45,415,595) per year. Disservices affect 5% of the annual household income on preventing and controlling their impacts. The study recommends that departments responsible for handling environmental management issues should recognize the value of green space and integrate aesthetic factors into their planning and budgeting.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicholaus Mwageni & Gabriel Kassenga, 2024. "Economic Value of Ecosystem Disservices of Green Spaces found in Residential Plots of Dar es Salaam City," Journal of Sustainable Development, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 14(4), pages 1-78, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:ibn:jsd123:v:14:y:2024:i:4:p:78
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jsd/article/download/0/0/45584/48457
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jsd/article/view/0/45584
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ninan, K.N. & Kontoleon, Andreas, 2016. "Valuing forest ecosystem services and disservices – Case study of a protected area in India," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 1-14.
    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. Yang Bai & Jian Yang & Thomas O. Ochuodho & Bobby Thapa, 2024. "Impacts of Land Ownership and Forest Fragmentation on Water-Related Ecosystem Services Provision, Dynamics and Their Economic Valuation in Kentucky," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, July.
    2. Shrestha, Kripa & Shakya, Bandana & Adhikari, Biraj & Nepal, Mani & Shaoliang, Yi, 2023. "Ecosystem services valuation for conservation and development decisions: A review of valuation studies and tools in the Far Eastern Himalaya," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    3. Raviv, Orna & Shiri, Zemah-Shamir & Ido, Izhaki & Alon, Lotan, 2021. "The effect of wildfire and land-cover changes on the economic value of ecosystem services in Mount Carmel Biosphere Reserve, Israel," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    4. Tadesse, Tewodros & Berhane, Tsegay & Mulatu, Dawit W. & Rannestad, Meley Mekonen, 2021. "Willingness to accept compensation for afromontane forest ecosystems conservation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    5. Domenico Pisani & Pasquale Pazienza & Enrico Vito Perrino & Diana Caporale & Caterina De Lucia, 2021. "The Economic Valuation of Ecosystem Services of Biodiversity Components in Protected Areas: A Review for a Framework of Analysis for the Gargano National Park," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-19, October.
    6. Lei Yang & Fenglian Liu, 2022. "Spatio-Temporal Evolution and Driving Factors of Ecosystem Service Value of Urban Agglomeration in Central Yunnan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-20, August.
    7. Juyi Xia & Ming Cao & Wen Xiao & Yanpeng Li & Gang Fu & Wei Wang & Junsheng Li, 2020. "Integrating Spatial Valuation of Ecosystem Services into Protected Area Management: A Case Study of the Cangshan Nature Reserve in Dali, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-18, November.
    8. Sarah Benabou & Arne Harms, 2021. "Revisiting Green Neoliberalism in India through the Lens of Market-Based Restoration and Reforestation Projects," Journal of South Asian Development, , vol. 16(3), pages 327-341, December.
    9. Bui Thi Hoang Lan & Tran Thi Lan Phuong & Tran Tho Dat & Dinh Duc Truong, 2023. "Payment for Urban Mangrove Forest Conservation in Vietnam: A Community Case Study of Can Gio Biosphere Reserve, Ho Chi Minh City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-15, June.
    10. Shuyao Wu & Jiao Huang & Shuangcheng Li, 2020. "Classifying ecosystem disservices and comparing their effects with ecosystem services in Beijing, China," Papers 2001.01605, arXiv.org.
    11. Acharya, Ram Prasad & Maraseni, Tek & Cockfield, Geoff, 2020. "Assessing the financial contribution and carbon emission pattern of provisioning ecosystem services in Siwalik forests in Nepal: Valuation from the perspectives of disaggregated users," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    12. Adam Jadhav & Sharolyn Anderson & Michael J. B. Dyer & Paul C. Sutton, 2017. "Revisiting Ecosystem Services: Assessment and Valuation as Starting Points for Environmental Politics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-20, September.
    13. Zanchi, Giuliana & Brady, Mark V., 2019. "Evaluating the contribution of forest ecosystem services to societal welfare through linking dynamic ecosystem modelling with economic valuation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    14. Acharya, Ram Prasad & Maraseni, Tek & Cockfield, Geoff, 2019. "Global trend of forest ecosystem services valuation – An analysis of publications," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    15. Chen Chen & ChaoFeng Shao & YanMin Shi, 2020. "Dynamic Evaluation of Ecological Service Function Value of Qilihai Wetland in Tianjin," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-20, September.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    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:ibn:jsd123:v:14:y:2024:i:4:p:78. 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: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    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.