title: Valuing the benefits of creek rehabilitation: building a business case for public investments in urban green infrastructure.
abstract: In an effort to increase the livability of its cities, public agencies in Australia are investing in green infrastructure to improve public health, reduce heat island effects and transition toward water sensitive urban design. In this paper, we present a simple and replicable approach to building a business case for green infrastructure. This approach requires much less time and resources compared to other methods for estimating the social and economic returns to society from such investments. It is a pragmatic, reasonably comprehensive approach that includes socio-demographic profile of potential users and catchment analysis to assess the economic value of community benefits of the investment. The approach has been applied to a case study area in the City of Brimbank, a western suburb of Greater Melbourne. We find that subject to a set of assumptions, a reasonable business case can be made. We estimate potential public benefits of avoided health costs of about AU$75,049 per annum and potential private benefits of AU$3.9 million. The project area is one of the most poorly serviced areas in the municipality in terms of quality open spaces and the potential beneficiaries are from relatively low income households with less than average health status and education levels. The values of cultural (recreational benefits, avoided health costs, and increased property values) and regulating (reduction in heat island effect and carbon sequestration) ecosystem services were quantified that can potentially offset annual maintenance costs.
authors.affiliation: Victoria Institute of Strategic Economic Studies, Victoria University, PO Box 14428, Melbourne, VIC, 8001, Australia, Gayathri.Mekala@vu.edu.au.
authors.forename: Gayathri Devi
authors.initials: GD
authors.lastname: Mekala
authors.forename: Roger N
authors.initials: RN
authors.lastname: Jones
authors.forename: Darla Hatton
authors.initials: DH
authors.lastname: MacDonald
mesh_terms: D001315:Australia; D002947:Cities; D002958:City Planning / Q000191:economics / Q000379:methods*; D003247:Conservation of Natural Resources / Q000191:economics / Q000379:methods*; D017753:Ecosystem; D004779:Environment Design; D006304:Health Status; D007449:Investments; D011204:Poverty Areas; D014504:Urban Health; D014505:Urban Population; D014506:Urban Renewal / Q000191:economics / Q000379:methods*; D014881:Water Supply / Q000191:economics*
references.citation: J Nutr Educ Behav. 2008 Mar-Apr;40(2):94-101
references.pmid: 18314085
references.citation: Soc Sci Med. 2012 May;74(10):1570-7
references.pmid: 22464220
references.citation: J Environ Manage. 2011 Oct;92(10):2763-73
references.pmid: 21763064
references.citation: Environ Manage. 2009 Nov;44(5):921-37
references.pmid: 19777295
references.citation: J Epidemiol Community Health. 2006 Jul;60(7):587-92
references.pmid: 16790830
references.citation: J Sci Med Sport. 2006 Oct;9(5):357-66
references.pmid: 16931155
references.citation: J Public Health (Oxf). 2011 Jun;33(2):212-22
references.pmid: 20833671
references.citation: Prev Med. 2009 Apr;48(4):316-20
references.pmid: 19463491
references.citation: Glob Health Action. 2013 Jul 29;6:21364
references.pmid: 23899408
references.citation: Int J Biometeorol. 2008 May;52(5):375-84
references.pmid: 18058138
references.citation: Am J Prev Med. 2008 Apr;34(4):299-305
references.pmid: 18374243
references.citation: Ecol Appl. 2011 Oct;21(7):2637-51
references.pmid: 22073649
references.citation: CMAJ. 2006 Mar 14;174(6):801-9
references.pmid: 16534088