Economic valuation of ecosystem services and natural infrastructure: A quantitative review of the literature

被引:0
作者
Stanford, Garrett O. [1 ,2 ]
Ferreira, Susana [1 ,2 ]
Landry, Craig E. [1 ,2 ]
Blachly, Ben [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Georgia, Dept Agr & Appl Econ, Athens, GA 30602 USA
[2] Univ Georgia, Inst Resilient Infrastruct Syst, Athens, GA USA
[3] Ind Econ Inc, Cambridge, MA USA
关键词
Natural infrastructure; Natural capital; Nature-based solutions; Ecosystem services; Economic valuation; Non-market valuation; Bibliometrics; Natural language processing; Environmental benefit; GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE; INVESTMENT; EVOLUTION; SCIENCE; DESIGN; TRENDS;
D O I
10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101754
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Natural infrastructure is increasingly being recognized as a viable alternative or complement to traditional 'grey' infrastructure in addressing global infrastructural needs. From a policy design perspective, selecting the optimal strategy among alternatives requires complete knowledge of the costs and benefits associated with each option. Unlike traditional infrastructure, natural infrastructure delivers a host of ecosystem services that may be difficult to quantify and monetize. Markets do not exist for many of the ecosystem services associated with natural infrastructure, so monetizing the suite of benefits requires specialized techniques from the field of nonmarket valuation. In this paper we use bibliometric techniques to systematically review the literature on economic valuation of ecosystem services, natural infrastructure and, at their intersection, ecosystem services provided by natural infrastructure. With a combination of machine learning and keyword matching, we extract 6,796 relevant articles published between 1990 and 2023 from the Web of Science database. They reveal a dramatic increase in economic valuation studies -especially in the last fifteen years, with a prominent focus on recreation and tourism ecosystem services, marine infrastructure and stated preference valuation methods. We also identify knowledge gaps in terms of geographical coverage, ecosystem services, natural infrastructure, and valuation methods considered, and we provide suggestions for filling these gaps.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 58 条
[1]   Application of BCA in Europe - Experiences and Challenges [J].
Andersson, Henrik .
JOURNAL OF BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS, 2018, 9 (01) :84-96
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2024, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, DOI DOI 10.5070/D330664703
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2005, Ecosystems and human well-being: Desertification synthesis
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2005, Ecosystems and human well-being, V5
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2021, A Catalogue of Nature-based Solutions for Urban Resilience, DOI DOI 10.1596/36507
[6]  
Brander L.M., 2024, Ecosystem Services Valuation Database (ESVD)
[7]  
Bridges TS., 2021, International guidelines on natural and nature-based features for flood risk management
[8]  
Brondizio Eduardo., 2019, Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, DOI [DOI 10.5281/ZENODO.3831673, 10.5281/zenodo.3831673]
[9]  
Browder Greg., 2019, Integrating Green and Gray: Creating Next Generation Infrastructure
[10]   Using satellite imagery to understand and promote sustainable development [J].
Burke, Marshall ;
Driscoll, Anne ;
Lobell, David B. ;
Ermon, Stefano .
SCIENCE, 2021, 371 (6535) :1219-+