IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sed/wpaper/662016.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Ökonomische Effekte grüner Infrastruktur als Teil eines Grünflächenfaktors. Ein Leitfaden

Author

Listed:
  • Ulrich Morawetz

    (Institute for Sustainable Economic Development, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna)

  • Dieter Mayr

    (Institute for Sustainable Economic Development, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna)

  • Doris Damyanovic

    (Institute of Landscape Planning, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna)

Abstract

Urbane grüne Infrastruktur beschreibt natürliche und naturnahe Grünräume in der Stadt. Diese wirken sich auf das Ökosystem, das menschliche Wohlbefinden sowie auch auf (Immobilien)Märkte aus. Um diese Auswirkungen stadtplanerisch zu steuern, ist ein mögliches Instrument ein „Grünflächenfaktor“. Wir schlagen einen Grünflächenfaktor auf Bauplatzebene vor, der sich als gewichtete Summe gärtnerisch gestalteter Flächen berechnet. Die Gewichte entsprechen den ökologischen Funktionen und Auswirkungen auf die Lebensqualität des Menschen. Auch der Kapitalisierung dieser Grünräume in Immobilienpreisen wird in dem Index Rechnung getragen. Dieser Leitfaden beschreibt die Überlegungen, die hinter der Integration ökonomischer Einflüsse in den Grünflächenfaktor stehen. Auch werden im Text unterschiedliche Politikinstrumente diskutiert. Die Leitlinie richtet sich an jene, die ökonomische Aspekte in eine Regelung der Bereitstellung grüner urbaner Infrastruktur integrieren möchten. Sie soll als Ideengeber und Diskussionsgrundlage dienen. Die Leitlinie basiert auf den Erkenntnissen des in den Jahren 2014 und 2015 von MitarbeiterInnen der Universität für Bodenkultur durchgeführten Projektes „MehrWertGrün! – Nachhaltiges Management urbaner grüner Infrastruktur“. Beteiligt an dem Projekt waren Florian Reinwald, Doris Damyanovic, Christina Czachs, Christiane Brandenburg, Ulrich Morawetz und Dieter Mayr. Vielen Dank an Nicole Überreich für das Korrekturlesen. Finanziert wurde das Projekt vom Jubiläumsfonds der Stadt Wien für die Universität für Bodenkultur Wien.

Suggested Citation

  • Ulrich Morawetz & Dieter Mayr & Doris Damyanovic, 2016. "Ökonomische Effekte grüner Infrastruktur als Teil eines Grünflächenfaktors. Ein Leitfaden," Working Papers 662016, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Institute for Sustainable Economic Development.
  • Handle: RePEc:sed:wpaper:662016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://drive.boku.ac.at/f/a972c0a1da4a4904b057/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Palmquist, Raymond B., 1992. "Valuing localized externalities," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 59-68, January.
    2. Diaz-Balteiro, Luis & Romero, Carlos, 2004. "In search of a natural systems sustainability index," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 401-405, July.
    3. Ostrom, Vincent & Tiebout, Charles M. & Warren, Robert, 1961. "The Organization of Government in Metropolitan Areas: A Theoretical Inquiry," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(4), pages 831-842, December.
    4. Charles Towe, 2009. "A Valuation of Subdivision Open Space by Type," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1319-1325.
    5. Joschka Gerigk & Ian MacKenzie & Markus Ohndorf, 2015. "A Model of Benchmarking Regulation: Revisiting the Efficiency of Environmental Standards," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(1), pages 59-82, September.
    6. Leonardo Becchetti & Pierluigi Conzo & Giuseppina Gianfreda, 2012. "Market access, organic farming and productivity: the effects of Fair Trade affiliation on Thai farmer producer groups," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 56(1), pages 117-140, January.
    7. Timothy J. Bartik, 2008. "Measuring the Benefits of Amenity Improvements in Hedonic Price Models," Book chapters authored by Upjohn Institute researchers, in: Richard E. Just & Darrell L. Hueth & Andrew Schmitz (ed.),Applied Welfare Economics, pages 643-654, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    8. Besley, Timothy & Coate, Stephen, 1991. "Public Provision of Private Goods and the Redistribution of Income," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(4), pages 979-984, September.
    9. Turner, R. Kerry & Paavola, Jouni & Cooper, Philip & Farber, Stephen & Jessamy, Valma & Georgiou, Stavros, 2003. "Valuing nature: lessons learned and future research directions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 493-510, October.
    10. Wolfgang Brunauer & Stefan Lang & Peter Wechselberger & Sven Bienert, 2008. "Additive Hedonic Regression Models with Spatial Scaling Factors: An Application for Rents in Vienna," Working Papers 2008-17, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, University of Innsbruck.
    11. Blackorby, Charles & Donaldson, David, 1988. "Cash versus Kind, Self-selection, and Efficient Transfers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(4), pages 691-700, September.
    12. 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.
    13. Melissa Keeley, 2011. "The Green Area Ratio: an urban site sustainability metric," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(7), pages 937-958, November.
    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. H. Allen Klaiber & Joshua K. Abbott & V. Kerry Smith, 2017. "Some Like It (Less) Hot: Extracting Trade-Off Measures for Physically Coupled Amenities," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(4), pages 1053-1079.
    2. Abbott, Joshua K. & Klaiber, H. Allen, 2010. "Is all space created equal? Uncovering the relationship between competing land uses in subdivisions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 296-307, December.
    3. Hanming Fang & Peter Norman, 2014. "Toward an efficiency rationale for the public provision of private goods," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 56(2), pages 375-408, June.
    4. Panos Pashardes & Nicoletta Pashourtidou, 2011. "Consumer welfare from publicly supplemented private goods: age and income effects on demand for health care," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 865-885, December.
    5. Blomquist, Soren & Christiansen, Vidar, 1998. "Topping Up or Opting Out? The Optimal Design of Public Provision Schemes," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 39(2), pages 399-411, May.
    6. Toke Panduro & Bo Thorsen, 2014. "Evaluating two model reduction approaches for large scale hedonic models sensitive to omitted variables and multicollinearity," Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 85-102, July.
    7. König, Tobias & Lausen, Tobias, 2016. "Relative consumption preferences and public provision of private goods," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Market Behavior SP II 2016-213, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    8. John Leach, 2010. "Ex Post Welfare under Alternative Health Care Systems," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 12(6), pages 1027-1057, December.
    9. Sören Blomquist & Vidar Christiansen, 2003. "Is there a Case for Public Provision of Private Goods if Preferences are Heterogeneous? An Example with Day Care," CESifo Working Paper Series 938, CESifo.
    10. Nuscheler, Robert & Roeder, Kerstin, 2013. "The political economy of long-term care," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 154-173.
    11. Richard Zeckhauser & Steve Coate & Stephen Johnson, 1992. "Robin-Hooding Rents: Exploiting the Pecuniary Effects of In-Kind Programs," NBER Working Papers 4125, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Sören Blömquist & Vidar Christiansen, 1998. "Price Subsidies Versus Public Provision," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 5(3), pages 283-306, July.
    13. Gjestland, Arnstein & McArthur, David Philip & Osland, Liv & Thorsen, Inge, 2014. "The suitability of hedonic models for cost-benefit analysis: Evidence from commuting flows," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 136-151.
    14. Epple, Dennis & Romano, Richard E, 1996. "Public Provision of Private Goods," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(1), pages 57-84, February.
    15. Bearse, P. & Glomm, G. & Janeba, E., 2000. "Why poor countries rely mostly on redistribution in-kind," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(3), pages 463-481, March.
    16. Blomquist, Soren & Christiansen, Vidar, 1999. "The political economy of publicly provided private goods," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 31-54, July.
    17. Zohal Hessami & Silke Uebelmesser, 2016. "A political-economy perspective on social expenditures: corruption and in-kind versus cash transfers," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 71-100, February.
    18. Kuhn, Michael & Nuscheler, Robert, 2011. "Optimal public provision of nursing homes and the role of information," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 795-810, July.
    19. John Leach, 2009. "Income Disparity, Inequity Aversion and the Design of the Healthcare System," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 111(2), pages 277-297, June.
    20. Smith, V. Kerry & Banzhaf, H. Spencer & Walsh, Randy, 2002. "General Equilibrium Benefit Transfers for Spatial Externalities: Revisiting EPA's Prospective Analysis," Discussion Papers dp-02-44, Resources For the Future.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Urbane Grüne Infrastruktur; Grün- und Freiflächenindex; Ökonomie;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R29 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Household Analysis - - - Other

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:sed:wpaper:662016. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wbokuat.html .

    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: Irene Konrad (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wbokuat.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.