Valuing Multiple Benefits, and the Public Perception of SUDS Ponds

Clicks: 258
ID: 66353
2017
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #36 of 68 articles by views in water

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Understanding how the public perceive and value ponds is fundamental to appreciate the synergy between Sustainable urban Drainage (SUDS) ponds and the multiple benefits they provide. This paper investigates this, through the application of a structured postal and online survey, for a case study area of Edinburgh, in the UK. It compares man-made ponds (including SUDS), and ponds with natural origins. The results from Whole Life Cost show that the benefits (based on Contingent Valuation) exceed the CAPEX and OPEX costs for three of five artificial ponds studied. Benefits from natural (reference) ponds exceed the replacement costs for a pond with the same surface area/catchment. This paper highlights the importance of monetising the multiple benefits from ponds.
Reference Key
jarvie2017valuingwater Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Jarvie, Joy;Arthur, Scott;Beevers, Lindsay;
Journal water
Year 2017
DOI
DOI not found
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.