Economic evaluation of alternative urban park designs that conserve irrigation water

IF 2.6 3区 经济学 Q2 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics Pub Date : 2024-08-01 DOI:10.1111/1467-8489.12582
Claire A. Doll, David J. Pannell, Michael P. Burton
{"title":"Economic evaluation of alternative urban park designs that conserve irrigation water","authors":"Claire A. Doll,&nbsp;David J. Pannell,&nbsp;Michael P. Burton","doi":"10.1111/1467-8489.12582","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Increasing the area of drought-tolerant native vegetation in urban parks is a potential strategy to adapt to growing water scarcity under climate change. With a case study in Perth, Australia, we undertake benefit–cost analyses to understand the potential impacts of modifying urban park landscape designs away from conventions dominated by watered grass towards alternatives with more native vegetation. Considering the costs of establishing and maintaining alternative designs alone, we find that local governments can save money by reducing the extent of watered grass cover in parks. Incorporating nonmarket benefits into the analyses provides evidence of positive community net benefits from making changes to conventional park designs. We show that an alternative park design featuring a mix of 60% native vegetation and 40% watered grass delivers the highest net benefits for both new park development and retrofits to existing parks. These findings suggest it is time to rethink urban park design norms in Australia to better align landscaping choices with community preferences under a changing climate.</p>","PeriodicalId":55427,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics","volume":"68 4","pages":"713-730"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8489.12582","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8489.12582","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Increasing the area of drought-tolerant native vegetation in urban parks is a potential strategy to adapt to growing water scarcity under climate change. With a case study in Perth, Australia, we undertake benefit–cost analyses to understand the potential impacts of modifying urban park landscape designs away from conventions dominated by watered grass towards alternatives with more native vegetation. Considering the costs of establishing and maintaining alternative designs alone, we find that local governments can save money by reducing the extent of watered grass cover in parks. Incorporating nonmarket benefits into the analyses provides evidence of positive community net benefits from making changes to conventional park designs. We show that an alternative park design featuring a mix of 60% native vegetation and 40% watered grass delivers the highest net benefits for both new park development and retrofits to existing parks. These findings suggest it is time to rethink urban park design norms in Australia to better align landscaping choices with community preferences under a changing climate.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对节约灌溉用水的城市公园备选设计进行经济评估
增加城市公园中耐旱本地植被的面积是适应气候变化下日益严重的水资源短缺问题的一项潜在战略。通过对澳大利亚珀斯的案例研究,我们进行了收益-成本分析,以了解改变城市公园景观设计的潜在影响,从传统的以浇灌草坪为主的设计转向采用更多本地植被的替代设计。考虑到建立和维护替代设计的成本,我们发现地方政府可以通过减少公园中的水草覆盖来节省资金。将非市场效益纳入分析,可证明改变传统公园设计可带来积极的社区净效益。我们的研究表明,采用 60% 的本地植被和 40% 的水浇草混合的替代公园设计,可为新公园开发和现有公园改造带来最高的净收益。这些研究结果表明,现在是重新思考澳大利亚城市公园设计规范的时候了,以便在不断变化的气候条件下更好地根据社区偏好选择景观设计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
36
审稿时长
>24 weeks
期刊介绍: The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics (AJARE) provides a forum for innovative and scholarly work in agricultural and resource economics. First published in 1997, the Journal succeeds the Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics and the Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, upholding the tradition of these long-established journals. Accordingly, the editors are guided by the following objectives: -To maintain a high standard of analytical rigour offering sufficient variety of content so as to appeal to a broad spectrum of both academic and professional economists and policymakers. -In maintaining the tradition of its predecessor journals, to combine articles with policy reviews and surveys of key analytical issues in agricultural and resource economics.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Measuring quantity in ecosystem markets and ecosystem accounts Electricity contract design and wholesale market outcomes in Australia's National Electricity Market Beyond risk management: Crop insurance premium subsidies reduce cropland abandonment in China Effect of dependence on natural resources on employment quality: Insights from African countries
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1