Office of Wastewater
Management
August 2017
EPA 830-R-17-004
&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Estimat ing the Value
of Water Resources:
A L terature Rev iew
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Springfield Team
Erin Kemper, City of Springfield, MO
Carrie Lamb, City of Springfield, MO
Todd Brewer, City Utilities of Springfield
Daniel Hedrick, City Utilities of Springfield
EPA Team
Emily Halter, U.S. EPA Office of Wastewater Management
Kevin Weiss, U.S. EPA Office of Wastewater Management
Glenn Curtis, U.S. EPA Region 7
Tanya Nix, U.S. EPA Region 7
This report was developed under EPA Contracts EP-C-11-009 and EP-C-16-003.
Cover photo: City of Springfield, Department of Environmental Services (top right)
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review
-------
CONTENTS
1. Introduction 1
2. Using Ecosystem Services To Estimate The Value Of Water Resources 2
2.1 Evaluating Ecosystem Services For Springfield-Greene County's Water Resources 5
2.1.1 Recreational Opportunities 5
3. Property Value Impacts Of Water Resources 9
4. Added Value Through Green Infrastructure Projects .11
4.1 Green Jobs 13
4.2 Property Value Benefits Of Green Space 15
4.3 Reduced Infrastructure Costs 18
4.4 Reduced Energy Use And Heat Island Effects 18
4.5 Carbon Sequestration 20
4.6 Improved Air Quality 20
5. Summary 21
6. References 22
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • ii
-------
List Of Tables
Table 1. Tiered approach to valuation depending on available expertise 4
Table 2. Studies identified for estimating the value of recreational opportunities in
Springfield-Greene County 7
Table 3. Recreation activity access values in consumer surplus per Person per
activity day by U.S. Census region 7
Table 4. Studies identified for estimating property values in Springfield-Greene County 9
Table 5. Multiple benefits of green infrastructure 11
Table 6. Studies estimating percent increase in property value from tree planting, low impact
design with vegetation, or community gardens 16
List Of Figures
Figure 1. Ecosystem service benefits 2
Figure 2. Ecosystem services valuation methods 3
Figure 3. Example of the relationship between intermediate and final ecosystem services 4
Figure 4. Map of streamflow from Springfield-Greene County
to Stockton Reservoir and Table Rock Lake 5
Figure 5. Examples of potential green job creation 14
Figure 6. Example of how to estimate property value changes
based on proximity to green infrastructure 16
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • iii
-------
INTRODUCTION
The city of Springfield, Greene County., and the
City Utilities of Springfield (project partners)
in Missouri are developing a comprehensive
integrated plan to address the region's Clean
Water Act regulatory obligations and air quality
and land resource quality obligations. With the
integrated plan, the project partners seek to
prioritize investments in water, land, and air
resource improvements that address the most
pressing problems first and provide the greatest
value to the area's citizens. As part of this effort,
the partners evaluated proposed projects using a
sustainable return on investment (SROI) analysis
method, which measures each project's long-term
return on investment relative to environmental,
social, and economic impacts. To complete the
SROI analysis, the project partners first needed to
estimate the value of their water resources. EPA
supported this valuation process by conducting
a literature review of relevant studies that
examined how similar communities estimated
their water resource value. The project partners'
methodology and the EPA literature review results
are described beiow.
|
View of Valley Water Mill Lake from pedestrian bridge.
City of Springfield, Department of Environmental Services
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 1
-------
USING ECOSYSTEM SERVICES TO ESTIMATE
THE VALUE OF WATER RESOURCES
The project partners estimated the value of the
Springfield-Greene County region's water resources
by assessing the level and type of ecosystem
services in the community. Ecosystem services are
the benefits that ecosystems provide to people,
and they are often discussed in four categories:
supporting, provisioning, regulating, and cultural.
Supporting ecosystem services are necessary to
produce all other ecosystem services. Provisioning
services describe products obtained from
ecosystems. Regulating services include benefits
obtained from regulating ecosystem processes.
Lastly cultural services include nonmaterial benefits
people obtain from ecosystems (Millennium
Ecosystem Assessment 2005). Examples of each
service type are shown in Figure 1.
Various studies have been conducted to estimate
the monetary value of ecosystem services relative
to economic goods and services. These studies
have developed and refined several valuation
methods, including those summarized in Figure 2
below. EPA's Guidelines for Preparing Economic
Analyses1 (U.S. EPA 2010a) explains each of these
methods in more detail.
Supporting
Soil formation
Nutrient cycling
Primary
Production
Provisioning
• Food supply
• Water supply
• Raw Materials
Regulating
• Flood
mitigation
• Disease control
• Carbon
sequestration
Cultural
• Recreational
opportunities
• Spiritual
benefits
• Education
Figure 1. Ecosystem service benefits.
1 Available online at https://www.epa.aov/environmental-economics/
auidelines-preparina-economic-analvses.
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 2
-------
• Estimating the impact on the economy from ecosystem services
Esimating the impact on property values
• Analyzing public survey data on willingness to pay for services
Analyzing collected data on expenditures related to enjoyment of
ecosystem services
• Estimating costs to replace an ecosystem service
• Estimating costs avoided due to an ecosystem service
Applying values from other studies to a different geographic location similar
to the study's demographic, morphologic, and geographic characteristics
Stated Preference Method
Economic Impact Analysis
Benefit Transfer Approach
Hedonic Analysis
Replacement Cost Approach
Revealed Preference (Travel Cost) Method
Avoided Cost Approach
Figure 2. Ecosystem services valuation methods.
When using the value of ecosystem services
to estimate the value of a water resource, it is
important to consider how the four ecosystem
services relate to each other. Supporting
services often represent intermediate processes
necessary for the other services; they are thus
included in valuations of these other services,
posing a risk for double counting. For instance,
nutrient cycling is a supporting service for the
provisioning of safe drinking water. Thus, the
value of nutrient cycling (the supporting service)
is already reflected in the value of safe drinking
water (the provisioning service). If both services
were valuated separately and the values were
then summed, that total value would likely
double count and overestimate the overall value
of both services. In this case, safe drinking water
is considered the final ecosystem service, and
nutrient cycling is considered an intermediate
ecosystem service (Fu et al. 2011). This example
is illustrated in Figure 3 below.
To avoid double counting, it is important to
identify the final ecosystem services that benefit
the target population. However, the value of final
services may also overlap depending on how
they are measured. For example, property value
increases attributed to improved water quality may
be related, in part, to recreational opportunities. If
a waterbody is valued for both scenic beauty and
recreation, one final ecosystem service value—or
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 3
-------
the range of values—can be used to avoid double
counting (Fu et al. 2011).
To ensure that information is reported accurately
to the public (a vital part of integrated planning),
a community's available expertise may dictate
its choice of valuation approach (Table 1).
For example, communities that do not have
direct access to a valuation expert (e.g., a
professional with an economics background
and direct experience with ecosystem
services valuation) may select only one
ecosystem service per waterbody and use
available literature to support the valuation.
If using the benefit transfer approach, a
community must evaluate how relevant the
literature values are to its own geographic,
morphologic, and demographic characteristics.
If a community does have access to a valuation
expert(s) for at least a limited review or
consultation, they could work together to develop
the most defensible approach, which might involve
summing multiple ecosystem service values if the
expert can clearly explain, address, and verify the
potential for double counting.
The Possible Relationship of
Different Ecosystem Services
Total Value
of Safe
Drinking Water
Value of
Nutrient
Cycling
Final
ecosystem
service
Intermediate
ecosystem
service
Note: To avoid "double counting,'
when the value of safe drinking
water is estimated, the value
of nutrient cycling towards the
provisioning of safe drinking
water is already reflected in the
value of safe drinking water
Figure 3. Example of the relationship between intermediate
and final ecosystem services.
The project partners' approach for Springfield-
Greene County will aggregate the ecosystem
service values of proposed project benefits and
couple them with strong available expertise.
Table 1. Tiered approach to valuation depending on available expertise
Available
Potential for
Expertise
Double Counting
Valuation Approach
Limited
High
Select one final ecosystem service per waterbody, or research a
range and use the most valuable ecosystem service to represent
the value achieved by all.
Moderate
Medium
Avoid summing values of ecosystem services unless valuation
experts can clearly explain, address, and verify the potential for
double counting.
Strong
Low
Work with valuation expert(s) to determine most defensible
approach. Values may be summed if the potential for double
counting is minimized.
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review
-------
2.1 Evaluating Ecosystem Services
For Springfield-Greene County's
Water Resources
While generalized categories can be used to
help estimate the value of a community's water
resources, every community has a unique
relationship with its resources that can impact the
actual value. The city of Springfield and Greene
County are no exception. The city is on a plateau
and many streams start within its boundaries and
flow through the city providing greenway corridors
for recreational trails and wildlife while conveying
stormwater from urban development. At several
locations inside and outside the city streams and
rivers are impounded for municipal water supply
and recreational benefits. Several lakes are used for
fishing, boating, and swimming. Treated sanitary
wastewater effluent enters receiving streams at
certain points. Several industries intake source
water for processing food and other products,
and many industries discharge wastewater or
stormwater to the city's publicly owned treatment
works, municipal separate stormwater system, or
directly to surface waters.
Access points along local streams allow paddlers
and other boaters to enjoy the community's water
resources within, upstream, and downstream of the
city. Several small streams surrounding Springfield
drain into rural agricultural areas that support
cattle and other livestock. These small streams also
drain into larger streams and rivers upstream and
downstream from the city. Much of the streamflow
from the Springfield-Greene County area drains
into either Stockton Reservoir or Table Rock Lake
(Figure 4).
With the project partners' unique qualities in mind,
EPA reviewed the valuation literature and identified
studies about water resources that report monetary
values for provisioning and cultural services, with a
focus on studies in Missouri or nearby states. The
final ecosystem services that were considered were
recreational opportunities and scenic beauty and
how these benefits contribute to a community's
overall quality of life. The literature review
Figure 4. Map of streamflow from Springfield-Greene
County to Stockton Reservoir and Table Rock Lake.
revealed several promising studies to help valuate
Springfield-Greene County's water resources.
2.1.1 Recreational Opportunities
The Springfield-Greene County region boasts
numerous water-related recreational opportunities.
Several lakes near the city of Springfield provide
boating and fishing opportunities, and state-
maintained stream access points allow for boating
access to major streams. Many greenways and
other trails follow or connect to streams or lakes
and provide scenic views. Farther downstream
of the Springfield-Greene County region, two
major reservoirs—Table Rock Lake and Stockton
Reservoir—are popular watersport destinations
where visitors enjoy boating, fishing, swimming,
water skiing, and scuba diving, among other
activities. Overall, these water resources contribute
Stockton Reservoir
Laclcdc
County
Dallas County
Greene County
Webster County
Springfield,
MO
Douglas County
Table Rock Lake
Carroll County
Laclcdc
County
Dallas County
General Flow Direction
. TETRA TECH
Legend
I I Lower Little Sac River Watershed
I I Upper Little Sac River Watershed
I I Upper Sac River Watershed
|__J Middle James River Watershed
Lower James River Watershed
I I Upper James River within Greene County
I I Primary Receiving Waterbodies
I I Springfield, MO City Limits
I I County Boundaries
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 5
-------
to the quality of life for the region's residents as well
as tourists and other visitors.
The region's water resources have not always been
as accessible for recreation as they are today.
Surface water quality problems in the James River
were documented as early as 1965. Historically
the major concern was low dissolved oxygen due
to sewage and urban stormwater runoff (Missouri
DNR 2004). Before wastewater treatment plant
improvements, waterbodies like Wilson's Creek
were too eutrophic for paddling. A 1969 study
found that fish could not live below Wilson's Creek's
wastewater treatment plant because it was severely
polluted (Kerr 1969). Later, in 1998 and 1999, two
large algal blooms occurred on Table Rock Lake
during peak tourist season.
In 1999, Missouri's Clean Water Commission
passed a regulation limiting the amount of
phosphorus that sewage treatment plants
can discharge in the Missouri portion of Table
Rock Lake's watershed. Springfield's Southwest
Treatment Plant started meeting the required
phosphorus reductions in 2001, which eventually
led to significant reductions in phosphorus levels
throughout the James River Basin (Obrecht
et al. 2005). Water quality improvements over
time have provided more freedom for residents
to enjoy the recreational value of their local
waterbodies with assurance that the water quality
is being maintained.
Two of the most common techniques for valuating
a waterbody's recreational opportunities are
stated preference and revealed preference studies.
Generally considered the most comprehensive
technique, stated preference studies use surveys
to estimate the public's willingness to pay for
recreational opportunities and often measure
values based on different lake conditions, including
water quality as it relates to fishing, boating,
and swimming (U.S. EPA 2010a, Loomis et al.
2000). Revealed preference studies collect data
on consumer spending during recreational trips
and derive the economic benefit of recreational
opportunities from these data, sometimes referred
to as the travel cost method.
While the value of recreational opportunities for
water resources in Springfield-Greene County
has not been estimated directly EPA estimated
this value using the benefit transfer approach.
The benefit transfer approach identifies valuation
studies that are similar to the resource in question
in terms of environmental commodity baseline
and extent of environmental changes, and
characteristics of affected populations (U.S. EPA
2010a). For this report, EPA conducted a literature
review of similar studies in other Missouri counties
and states to identify relevant literature values
for the recreational benefits of lakes and streams.
Many of the identified studies were conducted
in distant states or for waterbodies different in
size and morphology when compared with the
Springfield-Greene County lakes and streams.
From this broader list of studies, EPA identified
several that provided more relevant literature
values due to similar demographics, geography,
morphology, or other factors (Table 2).
Before the East Locust Creek Watershed
community constructed a new reservoir, Cartwright
(2006) used a benefit transfer approach to estimate
the proposed reservoir's value of recreation.
Specifically Cartwright (2006) estimated the
number of user days for each recreational activity
based on an estimate of demand for these
activities, and then multiplied this number by the
values reported in Rosenberger and Loomis' (2001)
meta-analysis of 163 recreation valuation studies
conducted from 1967 to 1998. A similar approach
could be used to value Springfield-Greene County
lakes, with the assumption that lake conditions
in Springfield-Greene County are similar to lakes
studied in Rosenberger and Loomis (2001). When
using this approach, the more recent meta-analysis
by Rosenberger and Stanley (2007) should also be
considered (Table 3).
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 6
-------
Table 2. Studies identified for estimating the value of recreational opportunities in Springfield-Greene County
Study Reference
Study Title
Cartwright 2006
Recreation Evaluation of the Multiple Purpose Reservoir for the
East Locust Creek Watershed, Missouri
Rosenberger and Loomis 2001
Benefit Transfer of Outdoor Recreation Use Values: A Technical
Document Supporting the Forest Service Strategic Plan (2000 Revision)
Rosenberger and Stanley 2007
Publication Effects in the Recreation Use Value Literature:
A Preliminary Investigation
Keeler et al. 2015
Recreational Demand for Clean Water: Evidence from Geotagged
Photographs by Visitors to Lakes
Otto et al. 2012
Economic Value of Outdoor Recreation Activities in Iowa
Egan et al. 2004
Valuing Water Quality in Midwestern Lake Ecosystems
National
West
Table 3. Recreation activity access values (2006 dollars) in consumer surplus per
person per activity day by U.S. Census region (Rosenberger and Stanley 2007)
Midwest
Northeast
South
Activity
Boating, motorized
97.96 (2:6)
10.37 (2:24)
23.56 (4:13)
27.69 (7:19)
28.82 (1:1)
Boating, non-motorized
34.17 (2:5)
60.46 (3:12)
119.84 (6:27)
108.89 (15:46)
37.79 (1:3)
Fishing, freshwater
57.11 (22:125)
34.77 (21:187)
49.40 (24:126)
69.62 (50:279)
61.48 (4:14)
Hunting, waterfowl
36.30 (5:17)
29.22 (3:26)
56.07 (4:30)
53.46 (8:31)
120.71 (2:7)
Sightseeing
—
28.41 (2:2)
56.99 (4:6)
40.74 (4:12)
21.08 (1:2)
Swimming
27.75 (2:2)
18.48 (1:1)
12.65 (2:2)
7.18 (4:8)
26.17 (1:1)
Waterskiing
—
—
18.80 (1:1)
7.18 (1:1)
47.54 (1:1)
Wildlife viewing
49.79 (9:47)
35.94 (6:50)
50.84 (10:80)
58.87 (16:91)
35.23 (3:14)
As the Rosenberger and Stanley (2007) meta-
analysis shows, a much greater body of research
is available to support an estimate of general
recreational values. A recommended approach
would be to estimate the general recreation values
based on this meta-analysis because the lake
clarity and property value estimates are each only
supported by one study.
Note: (# studies: # estimates)
Within Rosenberger and Stanley's (2007) meta-
analysis, it is important to note that literature values
are reported for individual recreational activities
(fishing, boating, swimming, etc.). A valuation
using these findings would need to consider the
potential for double counting when summing values
across the different activities. One consideration
is whether users who visit Springfield-Greene
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review
-------
County lakes participate in more than one activity
per visit, which would likely diminish the value
placed on a single activity. It is also important to
consider the frequency of each activity based on
local information on recreational users. Approaches
to valuation may include reporting the value for
each activity separately indicating that users may
participate in more than one per day. Another
approach would be to select the activity that
communicates the highest value for each water
resource and indicate that this value may be greater
if users participate in other activities separately
In a stated preference study on Minnesota and
Iowa lakes, Keeler et al. (2015) examined how lake
clarity affects the public's willingness to travel for
recreational trips. The study found that improved
water clarity is associated with increased numbers
of visits to lakes and that lake users were willing
to incur greater costs to visit clearer lakes. For
example, lake users were willing to travel 56 minutes
farther (equivalent to $22.00 in travel costs) for
every 1-meter increase in water clarity in Minnesota
and Iowa lakes, when controlling for other lake
attributes. People were also willing to incur greater
travel costs to visit larger lakes, lakes in wilderness
areas, and lakes with a boat ramp (Keeler et al.
2015). Clarity measurements in Springfield-Greene
County lakes could be used to estimate the travel
costs that users would be willing to pay to visit
the region's lakes. Then, using visitor counts, travel
costs per users could be translated into travel
spending per year to visit the region's lakes.
Additional data are available from several lake
studies in Iowa. The Iowa Lakes Valuation Project
involved multiyear surveys of Iowa households
and indicated that water quality was the most
important factor they consider when choosing a
lake for recreation, with proximity and park facilities
also being relatively important (Egan et al. 2004).
While this Iowa-based study did not estimate a
monetary value for recreation, the survey results
provide additional support for assigning value to the
water quality of recreational lakes. In another Iowa
lake study a survey of recreational user spending
generated estimates of daily per-party spending
for five Iowa lakes (Otto et al. 2012): Storm Lake
and Rock Creek Lake in 2002, and Clear Lake, Lake
Manawa, and Pleasant Creek Lake in 2009. Daily
per-party spending ranged from $67.95 to $163.37,
and the highest spending occurred at the lake with
the most amenities. The Iowa lake studies are more
similar to Stockton Reservoir and Table Rock Lake in
terms of amenities and size; however, the spending
measured at Rock Creek Lake may be similar to
the scale of spending by boaters along Springfield-
Greene County streams. Otto et al. (2012) used a
value of $34.75 per-person spending (2009 dollars),
based on Rock Creek Lake, to estimate spending
by Iowa river users. While this value reflects the
availability of tent camping as an amenity, it could be
used as an upper bound for a per-person spending
estimate along Springfield-Greene County streams.
Surveys of local recreational users—either directly
on their willingness to pay (stated preference) or
on their trip spending (revealed preference)—offer
the most reliable measurement of lake recreational
values. In the absence of local research, the studies
identified by EPA provide methods and literature
values for estimating the perceived value of the
region's lakes and streams by recreational users.
Midwest literature values from Rosenberger and
Stanley (2007) would offer an approximate estimate
of the potential perceived value per activity, and
Cartwright (2006) can be cited as an in-state
example of this benefit transfer approach. If
estimating the marginal value of lake water clarity
improvement is of interest, Keeler (2015) can be used
to estimate perceived user values based on differing
lake clarity measurements, supported by the findings
of Egan et al. (2004) that water quality was the
most important factor that respondents considered
when choosing a lake for recreation. When using
any literature values for benefit transfer to another
location, it is important to consider sources of bias
in the estimates and potential for double counting
and to note any related caveats when reporting the
value estimates. U.S. EPA (2010a) provides additional
guidance for the benefit transfer process in general,
and Rosenberger and Stanley (2007) discuss bias
specifically related to recreation value estimates.
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 8
-------
3 PROPERTY VALUE IMPACTS
OF WATER RESOURCES
Property values can be impacted by many
ecological and environmental factors related to
water resources. Waterfront property is especially
impacted by proximity to water and scenic views, as
well as water quality and recreational opportunities.
Factors such as polluted runoff and discharges,
sedimentation, and invasive species can negatively
impact water quality and aesthetics.
Economists use hedonic property models (the
impact on property values) to show that public
waterbodies provide external benefits that are
reflected in the value of nearby residential real estate.
The literature has used many approaches to quantify
these ecosystem services. Several studies have used
distance from the water to measure the ecosystem
services generated by public waterbodies. The
hedonic pricing method is often used to estimate
economic values for ecosystem or environmental
services that directly affect market prices. It is most
commonly applied to variations in housing prices that
are due to the value of local environmental attributes.
This method estimates the statistical relationship
of a residential property price with measurable
environmental qualities while controlling for other
housing, demographic, or land cover characteristics.
Studies have found that waterfront properties,
particularly at lakes, tend to have higher property
values than similar, non-waterfront properties
(Feather et al. 1992, Lansford et al. 1995). The
public's perceptions about water quality and clarity
also tend to affect property values, especially
for waterfront properties or properties near a
waterbody (Feather et al. 1992, Boyle et al. 1999,
d'Arge and Shogren 1989, Kashian et al. 2006,
Krysel et al. 2003, Leggett et al. 2000). Related to
water quality the presence and density of invasive
species can also negatively affect property values
(Horsch and Lewis 2009, Zhang and Boyle 2010,
Johnson and Meder 2013). These studies support
the general conclusion that access to scenic water
resources as well as water quality and clarity
are valuable to residents across many different
geographic, morphologic, and demographic
characteristics.
To better inform a valuation of Springfield-
Greene County water resources, EPA conducted
a literature review of property value studies and
identified those that provided literature values
relevant to Springfield-Greene County lakes and
streams (Table 4).
Table 4. Studies identified for estimating property values in Springfield-Greene County
Study Reference
Study Title
Schultz and Schmitz 2008
How Water Resources Limit and/or Promote Residential Housing
Developments in Douglas County
d'Arge and Shogren 1989
Non-Market Asset Prices: A Comparison of Three Valuation Approaches
Kashian et al. 2006
Lake Rehabilitation and the Value of Shoreline Real Estate:
Evidence from Delavan, Wisconsin
Krysel et al. 2003
Lakeshore Property Values and Water Quality: Evidence from
Property Sales in the Mississippi Headwaters Region
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 9
-------
In Omaha, Nebraska, Schultz and Schmitz (2008)
examined values of man-made lake views from
nearby single-family homes. Hedonic modeling
determined that lake views increased home values
by between 7.5 and 8.3 percent, which is substantial
considering that the lakes were designed primarily
for flood control and stormwater management
rather than recreational use (Schultz and Schmitz
2008). The lakes in this study ranged from 35 to
255 acres in surface area; the study results could
thus be used to estimate the property value
benefits provided by Springfield-Greene County
lakes, which are of similar size. A geographic
information system (GIS) viewshed analysis could
identify single-family properties with views of local
lakes similar in size to those studied in Schultz
and Schmitz (2008). The property value of these
homes could be estimated through tax values or a
comparative market analysis of recent sales. Then,
the range of 7.5 to 8.3 percent could be applied
to the property values to estimate the benefit of
scenic lake views realized by residents.
Several studies on water quality effects on lake
property values have been conducted in nearby
states, including Iowa and Wisconsin. These studies
have focused on lakes with much greater surface
areas than local Springfield-Greene County lakes
and may be more relevant when estimating the
property value effects of Stockton Reservoir
or Table Rock Lake. However, these studies
reinforce that water quality is an important factor
in the perceived value of a water resource. For
example, d'Arge and Shogren (1989) found that
13 to 23 percent of the residential property value
along the Lake Okoboji shoreline is due to water
quality increasing from a boating/fishing use to a
swimming/drinking use. Kashian et al. (2006) and
Krysel et al. (2003) also found that water quality
was an important variable affecting lakeshore
property values in Wisconsin and Minnesota,
respectively.
Schultz and Schmitz (2008) is the only study in
EPA's literature review that can be used for benefit
transfer to local Springfield-Greene County lakes.
As noted above, the literature values from this study
could be used in conjunction with GIS and real
estate market analysis to estimate a value for scenic
views. Other literature in nearby states can be used
to support the concept that scenic views, water
quality, and water clarity are valuable.
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 10
-------
4 ADDED VALUE THROUGH GREEN
INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
Projects and programs implemented through the
integrated planning process may bring some added
benefits to the table. Beyond simply improving water
quality improving the quality of a community's water
resources may indirectly lead to improvements in
other areas, such as renewing run-down or neglected
parts of the community or creating jobs. This makes
improving and restoring water resources even
more valuable, and should be a key consideration in
integrated planning decision-making.
Green infrastructure projects and practices have
created added value for many communities by
establishing green jobs and increasing property
values. As part of this report, EPA reviewed several
recent case studies that highlight successes and
the potential for added value through green
infrastructure.
The city of Springfield and Greene County are
familiar with green infrastructure and have been
developing several projects that include these
practices. At a broader scale, the state of Missouri
has developed the Missouri Guide to Green
Infrastructure (MODNR 2012), which describes the
overall processes and tools available to Missouri
communities for incorporating green infrastructure
into site designs and development plans, land use
plans, stormwater management programs, land
use ordinances, and technical design manuals. The
guide also describes the many benefits of green
infrastructure, which are summarized in Table 5.
Table 5. Multiple benefits of green infrastructure (MODNR 2012)
Environmental Benefits
Annual runoff volume
reductions
Green infrastructure focuses on decreasing the rate and volume of runoff to the
collection system, which better simulates pre-construction runoff conditions.
Improved capacity to
piped collection systems
Green infrastructure can reduce the rate of runoff to existing collection systems,
resulting in increased capacity for downstream inlets. It may also reduce peak
rates used in sizing collection systems.
Enhanced groundwater
recharge
Green infrastructure can help infiltrate runoff, which can improve groundwater
recharge rates. Enhanced groundwater recharge also boosts the supply of
drinking water for private and public uses.
Improved air quality
Green infrastructure can facilitate the use of trees and vegetation in urban
landscapes, which can contribute to improved air quality.
Increased carbon
sequestration
The plants and soils that are part of the green infrastructure approach serve as
sources of carbon sequestration.
Additional wildlife
habitat and recreational
space
Greenways, parks, urban forests, wetlands, and vegetated swales are all forms
of green infrastructure that provide increased access to recreational space and
wildlife habitat.
Improved human health
An increasing number of studies suggest that vegetation and green space can
have a positive impact on human health.
Urban heat island
and energy demand
reduction
Green infrastructure provides increased amounts of urban green space and
vegetation, helping to mitigate the effects of urban heat islands and to reduce
energy demands from air conditioning.
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 11
-------
Social Benefits
Aesthetics and sense of
community
Green infrastructure encourages community outdoor recreation, such as walking
and biking, and provides functional and aesthetic gardens and landscapes.
Multi-use amenities
Communities can benefit from recreational amenities skillfully designed into
utility services as multipurpose capital projects.
Greater choice of
lifestyles
Sustainable communities provide a greater choice for buyers who are
increasingly aware of development impacts to the environment, tax base, and
neighborhood amenities.
Flexibility
Onsite infrastructure can give communities more flexibility to effectively use
their land base, thereby minimizing the challenges of locating gray infrastructure
within right-of-ways and long-term costly maintenance and repair.
Conflict avoidance and
resolution
Communities will likely be more receptive to green infrastructure if it is
integrated into development project recommendations, thereby minimizing
delays commonly associated with public protest.
Reduced flash flooding
Green infrastructure helps prevent flash floods, thereby reducing the threat they
pose to public safety.
Public education
Green infrastructure can increase public awareness of environmental issues and
the community's role in stormwater management.
Economic Benefits
Lower costs and
delayed capital outlays
Depending on the type of development, green infrastructure can result in lower
capital costs and lower operation and maintenance costs.
User pay
Integrating green infrastructure into the development project—on site and within
buildings—results in lower public expenditure due to demand-side management.
Improved stakeholder
investments
Monthly management fees can be reduced for homeowners and their
associations, as well as commercial and industrial owners. Such reductions
increase the marketability of development.
Local green job creation
and procurement
Choosing green infrastructure requires green design and landscaping services
that can be procured locally so that less money is spent on constructing and
operating systems in remote locations.
Increased land values
Several case studies suggest green infrastructure can increase surrounding
property values.
Utility savings
Installing rain water harvesting systems such as storage tanks or cisterns can
lower a facility's water costs significantly.
Green infrastructure can provide many additional
benefits; however, the list above includes those
benefits that have the most potential to directly
or indirectly impact economic drivers. For more
information on the benefits of green infrastructure
in Missouri, the State Department of Natural
Resources maintains a website with links to
the Missouri Guide to Green Infrastructure and
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 12
additional resources: http://dnr.mo.gov/env/wpp/
stormwater/mo-gi-guide.htm
Many information resources discuss the design,
implementation, and benefits of green infrastructure.
EPA maintains a website with green infrastructure
tools and examples from throughout the United
States (http:Awater.epa.gov/infrastructure/
greeninfrastructure/), and U.S. EPA (2013) describes
-------
case studies quantifying green infrastructure
benefits. In a 2011 case study, the city of Lancaster
Pennsylvania, prepared a comprehensive green
infrastructure plan outlining goals, opportunities,
and recommendations for implementing green
infrastructure in Lancaster. Through this case study,
EPA demonstrated how accounting for the multiple
benefits of green infrastructure can provide a
more complete assessment of infrastructure and
community investments (U.S. EPA 2014).
Many studies reviewed for this report use methods
such as the triple bottom line analysis to account
for multiple social, environmental, and economic
benefits. Several methods, including cost analyses
and modeling tools, can be used to estimate the
economic value of each of these.
Several online tools facilitate the valuation of
various green infrastructure practices, including
the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA's)
i-Tree tools ( ttps:Awww.itreetools.orc ) and the
Green Values National Stormwater Management
Calculator (ittp:Agreenvalues.cnt.org/national/
calculator-php). The following sections highlight
information gathered through EPA's literature
review, including valuation methods for additional
green infrastructure benefits beyond just improving
water quality.
4.1 Green Jobs
Green infrastructure development can stimulate
local economies by creating jobs for local
residents, which can provide direct, indirect,
and induced economic benefits. While the
design of green infrastructure requires training
in certain professional disciplines, such as
landscape architecture, design, and engineering,
its implementation yields "green collar" jobs
in construction, operation, maintenance, and
installation. In the United States, between July 2007
and January 2009, there was a 31 percent increase
in people hired specifically for green jobs, and some
predictions estimate 6.9 million green jobs in the
United States by 2020 (Dunn 2010).
The major employment benefit of green infrastructure
is that required maintenance creates a permanent
opportunity for local employment and offers low
barriers to workforce entry since the majority of
work involves landscaping and other activities that
require minimal training. Overall, jobs created through
green infrastructure give local communities an added
economic value beyond the jobs themselves.
Many management efforts throughout the United
States are taking advantage of the job creation
benefits of green infrastructure. These efforts
include urban greening initiatives in Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania; Lawrence, Massachusetts; and
Stamford, Connecticut (Schilling and Logan
2008, Dunn 2010), as well as funding for green
collar jobs in several California cities (Rangwala
2008). The urban greening efforts in Lawrence
and Philadelphia have led to the creation of
more resilient neighborhood environments and
established innovative programs that provide
jobs, skills training, and local fresh food for
residents by reclaiming vacant properties and
introducing community gardens (Green For
All 2011). Some additional examples of green
infrastructure's potential job impacts are listed
below and in Figure 5.
• Philadelphia's $1.6 billion investment in
stormwater infrastructure has the potential to
generate 8,600 green collar direct jobs (GSP
Consulting and Ecolibrium Group 2010).
• PlaNYC anticipates the creation of 266 total
jobs from investing $23 million in green roofs
and 1,446 direct jobs from a $346 million
investment in watershed protection programs
(The Louis Berger Group 2008).
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 13
-------
In Northeast Ohio,
31,000 direct jobs could
be created betweeen
2012-2016 from a $3
billion investment
in stormwater
infrastructure (Green for
All 2011),
Installing green roofs in
5% of Chicago's buildings
would create 7,934 jobs
from an investment of
$403 million (American
Rivers and Alliance for
Water Efficiency 2008).
Montgomery County,
Maryland expects to
employ 3,300 workers
over the next 3 years
buildings its new network
of green stormwater
controls (Chesapeake Bay
Foundation 2011).
Figure 5. Examples of potential green job creation.
Investments of $166
million in stormwater
projects between 2009-
2011 in Los Angeles
produced an estimated
2,075 total jobs (Burns
and Flaming 2011).
Opportunities for Individuals with Barriers to Employment
Many green jobs are created through green infrastructure work programs for prisoners, parolees, and at-
risk youth. These jobs offer training, education, and work experience to these individuals while providing
community services through green infrastructure development and neighborhood beautification projects.
Green Streets, part of the New Jersey Tree Foundation, is a program that allows ex-offenders to learn
a trade they can use after they leave prison and to raise money for the NJ Tree Foundation's inner-city
free tree programs. NJ Tree Foundation staff train Green Streets crew members in tree planting and
maintenance, before giving them seasonal jobs to help them transition back into society. Cities and
towns can hire Green Streets crew members to plant trees, provide tree maintenance, and perform other
green infrastructure work such as creating rain gardens (BKwart 2015).
Greencorps Chicago is the city of Chicago's green industry job training program for individuals with
barriers to employment. Greencorps Chicago trainees receive practical experience and professional
development in a variety of environmentally related jobs with skills that can be easily transferred to other
industries. Participants receive training in horticulture, urban agriculture, tree care, landscaping, carpentry,
ecological restoration, integrated pest management, and many other topics (City of Chicago 2015).
North East Trees is a Los Angeles-based program that educates and trains at-risk youth and young
adults in environmental disciplines that lead to permanent employment in the green industry. The
organization estimates that within the past two decades, it has planted over 50,000 trees and worked
with over 1,000 at-risk youth (North East Trees 2009).
PowerCorps PHL, an AmeriCorps program, provides job training opportunities for young adults in
Philadelphia. Beginning in 2013, the program enrolled 100 individuals per year, ages 18 to 26, The
members work six months full-time with city departments and are then given three months of job
placement support. As of 2015, companies in the green services industry were hiring PowerCorps crew
members (City of Philadelphia 2015).
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 14
-------
Economic modeling can be used to estimate the
number and type of jobs as well as the associated
economic benefits expected from future green
infrastructure expenditures. IMPLAN (IMpacts for
PLANning) is one commonly used economic model.
For a specified region, IMPLAN's input-output
table accounts for all dollar flows between different
economic sectors. Using this information, IMPLAN
models the way a dollar injected into one sector
is spent and re-spent in other sectors, generating
waves of economic activity or "economic multiplier"
effects. IMPLAN uses national industry data and
county-level economic data to estimate economic
impacts (City of Richmond 2010).
If modeling is not possible, a municipality could
estimate jobs created based on estimates of staffing
or contracting needs. Note that this would be a
conservative estimate and would not inciude any
indirect or induced economic benefits—such as
additional jobs created—that modeling would provide.
4.2 Property Value Benefits of
Green Space
Many studies have estimated the effect that
green infrastructure and similar practices have
on surrounding property values. Many aspects of
green infrastructure—including improved aesthetics,
drainage, and recreational opportunities—can increase
property values. One of the better-documented
benefits is how additional plants and trees increase
property value by improving aesthetics. Increases in
property value benefit individual property owners and
can also lead to increased tax revenue and general
economic improvement.
To estimate the impact of open space on nearby
property values., real estate sales can be analyzed
with data from a city or county property assessor.
Assessor's Offices often maintain extensive data on
all parcels in the area, including land use, buildings
on the parcel, taxes, and sales information as well as
proximity to amenities such as green infrastructure,
Philadelphia Water Commissioner Howard Neukrug and
Philadelphia Water Environmental Scientist Alex Warwood
with PowerCorps PHL workers. PowerCorpsPHL
parks, and waterbodies, A GIS can be used to
estimate distances between real estate and nearby
amenities. Using the available GIS data, a hedonic
analysis (a statistical method) can then estimate
property value trends, Figure 6 provides an example
of how to estimate green infrastructure impacts on
property values.
Table 6 summarizes several recent studies
that have estimated the effect that green
infrastructure or related practices have on
property values. The majority of these studies
addressed urban areas, although some suburban
studies are also included. To use iiterature values
to estimate the effect of green infrastructure
aesthetics on property value., a municipality would
select relevant values from Table 6, then take
the average percent increase and the average
distance from green infrastructure associated
with that increase. The municipality would then
select properties within that average distance
and apply the average percent increase to their
estimated property values. The total property
value benefit of green infrastructure can be
calculated by summing these individual property
value increases.
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 15
-------
Estimating Property Value Changes Based on Proximity to
Green Infrastructure (Gl) and Low Impact Development
Step 1:
Literature
Review
Step 2:
Synthesis
Step 3:
Find Average
Step 4:
Collect Local
Data
Step 5:
Determine
Increase
• Conduct literature
review of property
value studies for
chosen Gl
amenities
• Make sure to
account for
proximity
• Narrow studies
based on cities
with similar
population size,
demographics and
other characteris-
tics
• Compile literature
values for estimat-
ed % change in
property value
• Calculate average
property value
changes based on
literature values
• Also account for
proximity based
on literature
• Collect data on
average home
value and sales
prices from
municipal offices
and/or recent
sales
• Estimate current
property values
• Apply averages for
ranges from
literature to
average home
prices to deter-
mine expected
values of proper-
ties with chosen Gl
amenities
Property within
1,000 feet of open
space, trees, parks
Property value
increase range
between 0 and 100%
Average 5% increase
in property values
for properties within
1,500 feet of
amenity
*
Average home price
$200,000 ,
. Home values with
chosen Gl amenity
~ $210,000
Figure 6. Example of how to estimate property value changes based on proximity to green infrastructure.
Table 6. Studies estimating percent increase in property value from tree planting,
low impact design with vegetation, or community gardens
Percent Increase
in Property
Source
Value
Notes
Ward et al. 2008
3.5 to 5%
Estimates the effect of low impact development on adjacent
properties relative to those farther away in King County (Seattle),
Washington.
Shultz and
Schmitz 2008
0.7 to 2.7%
Refers to the effect of clustered open spaces, greenways, and
similar practices in Omaha, Nebraska.
Wachter and
Bucchianeri 2008
7 to 11%
Estimates the effect of tree plantings on property values
for select neighborhoods in Philadelphia. The percent price
differential is identified within 4,000 feet of tree plantings.
Anderson and
Cordell 1988
3.5 to 4.5%
Estimates the value of trees on residential property (differences
between houses with five or more front yard trees and those that
have fewer) in Athens-Clarke County, Georgia.
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 16
-------
Table 6. Studies estimating percent increase in property value from tree planting,
low impact design with vegetation, or community gardens
Source
Percent Increase
in Property
Value
Notes
Voicu and Been
2008
9.4%
Refers to property within 1,000 feet of a park or garden and
within five years of park opening; effect increases over time in
New York City, New York.
Espey and
Owasu-Edusei
2001
11%
Refers to small, attractive parks with playgrounds within 600 feet
of houses in Greenville, South Carolina.
Pincetl et al.
2003
1.5%
Refers to the effect of an 11 percent increase in the amount of
greenery (equivalent to a one-third acre garden or park) within
a radius of 200 to 500 feet from the house in Los Angeles,
California.
Hobden et al.
2004
6.9%
Refers to greenway adjacent to property in Surrey, British
Columbia.
New Yorkers for
Parks and Ernst &
Young 2003
8 to 30%
Refers to homes within a general proximity to parks in New York
City, New York.
Sander et al. 2010
0.29 to 0.48%
Refers to a 10% increase in tree cover within 100 m of homes,
which increases average home sale price by $1,371 (0.48%);
within 250 m, tree cover increases sale price by $836 (0.29%). In
a model including both linear and squared tree cover terms, tree
cover of 40-60% within 100 and 250 m was found to increase sale
prices in Ramsey and Dakota Counties, Minnesota.
As discussed above, property value increases can
often be attributed to those green infrastructure
projects that provide trees and other aesthetic
amenities. Where stormwater management
facilities are visible to residents or the general
public, property value decreases have been
associated with those facilities that only
emphasize structure or function. In Texas., Lee and
Li (2009) found that dry basins can negatively
impact property values, whereas some wet
basins can have a positive effect. This suggests
that aesthetics may play a role in how detention
facilities affect property value. However, in places
where vegetated green infrastructure cannot
be implemented, gray infrastructure or non-
vegetated green infrastructure would still provide
valuable benefits. While permeable pavement, rain
barrels, and other green infrastructure may also
affect property values, the literature review did
not identify research on these effects.
Madison and Kovari (2013) examined the general
impacts that green infrastructure can have
on property values for industrial, commercial,
and residential properties in Wisconsin. In one
residential location along Lincoln Creek, the study
found that green infrastructure improvements
had a strong positive impact on the surrounding
property values. The Lincoln Creek project had
multiple components, including channel and
habitat restoration, naturalization, concrete
removal, addition of adjacent stormwater
detention basins, and bridge replacement. The
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 17
-------
combination of detention basins and
green infrastructure provides several
ecosystem services and results in a net
increase in property values of about
20 percent. However, any significant
infrastructure improvement project
would likely result in property value
increases.
4.3 Reduced Infrastructure
Costs
Green infrastructure provides an
opportunity to reduce the costs of gray
infrastructure. As green infrastructure
provides infiltration, evapotranspiration,
and storage, it reduces the need to
control stormwater runoff, which then
reduces the need to maintain existing
or build new gray infrastructure.
Several cities have implemented green
infrastructure on a large scale and have seen
significant cost savings. Green infrastructure
within the city of Philadelphia has reduced
combined sewer overflow (CSO) inputs by a
quarter-billion gallons and has saved the city
an estimated $170 million (U.S. EPA 2010b),
In addition to these cost savings, additional
savings could be expected from reduced upkeep
and maintenance costs for pipe networks and
treatment plants.
Some types of green infrastructure can also be
used instead of gray stormwater conveyance,
including vegetated swales. CWP (1998) estimated
that traditional structural conveyance systems
cost two to three times more than grass swales.
For the EPA North Carolina campus in Research
Triangle Park, several green infrastructure
techniques (grassy swales, water quality ponds,
and bioretention) were used instead of curb and
gutter and oil-grit separators, saving an estimated
$500,000 in construction costs (U.S. EPA 2001),
Using an enhanced swale design, Seters et al.
(2013) demonstrated that a curb and gutter were
not necessary, resulting in an estimated savings of
Green infrastructure, such as vegetated swales (top and bottom left),
can reduce costs associated with traditional gray infrastructure,
such as a curb and gutter (right)
Bioswale: By Brett VA [CC BY2.0 (http//creativecommons.org/Hcenses/by/2.0')J;
via Wikimedia Commons; Grass Swale: By Natural Resources Conservation Service
(NRCS) [Public domain or Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons; Curb and
gutter: By Robert Lawton (Own work) [CC BY-SA 2.5 (http://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by-sa/2.5)], via Wikimedia Commons
$5,500 to treat a 2,000 m2 section of pavement.
The difference between the life cycle cost of
vegetated swales and curb and gutter can
be estimated localiy by assuming a generic
road cross-section design and estimating the
costs of each conveyance type per linear foot
of road. The life cycle cost estimates should
include construction, design, engineering, and
maintenance costs.
In addition to the specific comparison of curb/
gutter to swales, individual development designs
may realize cost savings from green infrastructure
through the reduced size of culverts, pipes, and
other components of the stormwater conveyance
system. These cost savings are often site-specific,
but can be estimated at the planning level when
both a conventional and green infrastructure site
design have been developed.
4.4 Reduced Energy Use and
Heat Island Effects
Green space helps lower ambient temperatures
and—when incorporated on and around
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 18
-------
buildings—helps shade and insulate buildings
from wide temperature swings, decreasing
the energy needed for heating and cooling. In
addition, diverting stormwater from wastewater
collection, conveyance, and treatment systems
reduces the amount of energy needed to pump
and treat the water. Reduced energy demands in
buildings and increased carbon sequestration by
added vegetation also result in reduced carbon
dioxide emissions.
In the United States, the increase in air
temperature due to heat island effect is
responsible for 5 to 10 percent of urban peak
electric demand for air conditioning use, and
as much as 20 percent of population-weighted
smog concentrations in urban areas (Akbari
2001). Trees and other vegetation planted near
buildings and pavement can affect energy
consumption by shading, providing evaporative
cooling, and blocking winter winds. Green roofs
and bioretention areas also reduce the amount of
heat-absorbing materials and emit water vapor,
aii of which cool hot air and reduce the urban
heat island effect, in addition to energy savings,
reducing the heat island effect can reduce the
number of extreme heat days and help prevent
illness and mortality due to extreme heat events.
The Philadelphia Water Department (PWD)
Conducted a triple bottom line analysis to consider
a wide array of options for controlling CSO
events in its four relevant watershed areas. A
key component of PWD's analysis calculates the
amount of energy consumption added (or reduced)
by the various CSO control options and calculates
the value of the added energy costs (or the energy
cost savings) at current energy prices. The energy
use levels include the home energy cost savings
provided by shading from trees added under
green infrastructure options. Also included is the
increased consumption of motor fuel associated
with construction-related vehicles, For the 50
percent green infrastructure option, the analysis
indicates a net energy savings over the 40-year
planning period of nearly 370 million kilowatt-
hours of electricity and nearly 600 million British
iiimniiJJLUl1 -
Green roof on Chicago City Hall.
Conservation Design Forum [CC BY-SA 4.0
(http://creativecommons.Org/licenses/by-sa/4.0)}
via Wikimedia Commons.
thermal units of natural gas. The monetized present
value of these changes from the 50 percent green
infrastructure option amount to nearly $34 miilion
in energy savings (PWD 2009).
A study in Milwaukee demonstrated that the
location of urban trees can provide significant
energy savings in summer cooling and can also
increase energy demand for heating in the winter
(USDA 2008b). Accounting for the increased
heating costs, trees in Milwaukee reduce overall
energy-related costs from residential buildings by
approximately $864,000 annually (USDA 2008b).
Buildings with green roofs have insulating effects
that can reduce the penetration of summer heat
and the escape of interior heat in winter (Banting
et al. 2005), They Can also provide important
evaporative cooling effects that decrease the
energy needed for heating and cooling. Energy
modeling conducted on the green roof installed
on City Hall in Chicago showed potential annual
heating and cooling savings of $4,000 (NREL
2004), Using the same model, it was estimated
that as much as $100 million could be saved
citywide if all the buildings in Chicago were
covered with green roofs.
USDA's i-Tree tools suite (http:/ywww.itreetools.
org/eco/overview.php) can be used to calculate
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 19
-------
the energy saving benefits of trees used in green
infrastructure. The science-based, peer-reviewed
tools are adaptations of the USDA's Urban Forest
Effects (UFORE) model (2008a, 2008b).
4.5 Carbon Sequestration
Green infrastructure vegetation helps reduce the
amount of atmospheric carbon dioxide through
direct carbon sequestration and reduced energy
use in buildings, consequently reducing carbon
dioxide emissions from fossil-fuel-based power
plants. USDA's i-Tree tools suite2 can be used
to calculate the carbon sequestration benefits
of green infrastructure. While the term "carbon
sequestration" is used generally trees remove
more greenhouse gases (GHGs) than carbon
species alone. Therefore, the carbon dioxide
equivalent (C02e) is the recommended unit of
measure (the i-Tree tools provide output on a
variety of GHGs). To convert carbon sequestration
to a monetary value, multiply the reduced C02e
estimates by the most recent estimate of carbon's
social cost published by the U.S. government's
Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of
Carbon (U.S. EPA 2015). Double counting of
values may occur from reporting the social cost
of carbon, which includes some consideration of
energy use and a direct estimate of energy use
differences.
4.6 Improved Air Quality
Poor air quality can affect human health (e.g.,
cause or worsen respiratory diseases) and
damage other environmental resources such as
water, aquatic life, and trees. Urban trees can help
improve air quality by reducing air temperature,
removing air pollutants, and reducing energy
consumption (USDA 2008b). The Milwaukee
urban forest study estimated that trees and
shrubs in the city remove 496 tons of air pollution
annually based on field data as well as recent
pollution and weather data (USDA 2008b). This
is equivalent to 74 pounds of pollution removed
each year per acre of the city's tree canopy.
These air quality improvements can reduce the
incidence and severity of respiratory illness.
USDA's i-Tree tools suite provides a readily
available method for estimating the air quality
benefits of green infrastructure vegetation. The
tools require data on existing or planned trees
and then simulate tree growth and air pollutant
reduction. The output includes the monetary
value of reduced air pollution based on avoided
costs from reduced public health impacts and
other externalities.
2 Available online at http://www.itreetools.org/eco/overview.php.
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 20
-------
5 SUMMARY
EPA's literature review revealed several promising
methods and studies available to inform the value
estimation of Springfield-Greene County's water
resources. By focusing on their community's most
prominent water resource ecosystem services
(i.e., recreational opportunities), the impact of
improved water quality on property values, and
the added benefits and vaiue gained from projects
and programs that restore and enhance water
resources, community leaders and stakeholders
should begin to see the value of preserving their
water resources.
The information obtained through EPA's literature
review show existing data and similar cases
that can be used as benchmarks and points of
reference for assessing the value of Springfield-
Greene County's water resources. Community
leaders and stakeholders can use the literature
review results to help estimate the economic
impacts of water resource improvement, a key
consideration in integrated planning decision-
making. EPA's review revealed that the value in
restoring water resources is experienced both
directly through water quality improvement—
as may be seen with increased water-based
recreation—and indirectly through increased
property values and integrated planning projects
(e.g., green infrastructure) that benefit the
community beyond water quality. Stakeholders
need to keep this holistic view in mind when
planning projects and making decisions that will
have long-term impacts on the community.
Boardwalk at Springfield Conservation Nature Center.
City of Springfield, Department of Environmental Services
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 21
-------
0 REFERENCES
Akbari, H., M. Pomerantz, and H. Taha. 2001. Cool surfaces and shade trees to reduce energy use and improve
air quality in urban areas. Solar Energy 70(3): 295-310.
American Rivers and Alliance for Water Efficiency. 2008. Creating jobs and stimulating the economy through
investment in green water infrastructure
Anderson, L„ and H. Cordell. 1988. Influence of trees on property values in Athens, Georgia (USA): A survey on
actual sales prices. Landscape and Urban Planning 15(1-2):153-164.
Banting, D„ H. Doshi, J. Li, and P. Missios. 2005. Report on the environmental benefits and costs of green roof
technology for the City of Toronto. Prepared for City of Toronto and Ontario Centres of Excellence -Earth
and Environmental Technologies (OCE-ETech)
BKwart. 2015. Green Streets Crew revives north Camden trees. Accessed September 2015.
Boyle, K., P. Poor, and L. Taylor. 1999. Estimating the demand for protecting freshwater lakes from
eutrophication. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 81(5): 1118-1122.
Cartwright, L. 2006. Recreation evaluation of the multiple purpose reservoir for the East Locust Creek
Watershed, Missouri. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
Chesapeake Bay Foundation. 2011. Debunking the "job killer" myth: How pollution limits encourage jobs in the
Chesapeake Bay Region.
City of Chicago. 2015. Overview of Greencorps Chicago. Accessed September 2015.
City of Philadelphia. 2015. Philadelphia Water and PowerCorpsPHL: 'Perfect pipeline' for green jobs.
Watersheds Blog. City of Philadelphia Water Department. Accessed September 2015.
City of Richmond. 2010. Point Molate land use alternatives, Appendix E: Overview of IMPLAN.
Accessed July 2015
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 22
-------
CWP (Center for Watershed Protection). 1998. Better site design: A handbook for changing development
rules in your community. Ellicott City MD.
d'Arge, R.C., and J.F. Shogren. 1989. Non-market asset prices: A comparison of three valuation approaches. In
H. Folmer and E.C. van lerland (Eds.), Valuation methods and policy making in environmental economics
(pp. 15-36). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.
Dunn, A.D. 2010. Siting green infrastructure: Legal and policy solutions to alleviate urban poverty and promote
healthy communities. Environmental Affairs 37: 41.
Egan, K., J. Herriges, C. Kling, and J. Downing. 2004. Valuing water quality in Midwestern lake ecosystems.
Iowa Ag Review Online 10(3).
Espey, M„ and K. Owusu-Edusei. 2001. Neighborhood parks and residential property values in Greenville,
South Carolina. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 33(3): 487-492.
Feather, T,, E. Pettit, and P. Ventikos. 1992. Valuation of lake resources through hedonic pricing. IWR Report
92-R-8. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Water Resource Support Center. Fort Belvoir, VA.
Fu, B.-J,, C.-H. Su, Y.-P. Wei, I.R. Willett, Y.-H. Lu, and G.-H. Liu. 2011. Double counting in ecosystem services
valuation: Causes and countermeasures. Ecological Research 26(1): 1-14.
Green For All. 2011. Water Works: Rebuilding Infrastructure, Creating Jobs, Greening the Environment.
Accessed July 2015
GSP Consulting and Ecolibrium Group. 2010. Capturing the Storm: Profits, Jobs, and Training in Philadelphia's
Stormwater Industry Accessed July 2015
Hobden, D., G. Laughton. and K. Morgan. 2004. Green space borders—a tangible benefit? Evidence from four
neighbourhoods in Surrey British Columbia 1980-2001. Land Use Policy 21: 129-138.
Horsch, E.J,, and D.J. Lewis. 2009. The effects of aquatic invasive species on property values: Evidence from a
quasi-experiment. Land Economics 85(3): 391-409.
Johnson, M„ and M.E. Meder. 2013. Effects of aquatic invasive species on home prices: Evidence from
Wisconsin
Kashian, R„ Eiswerth, M. E„ and Skidmore, M. 2006. Lake rehabilitation and the value of shoreline real estate:
Evidence from Delavan, Wisconsin. The Review of Regional Studies 36(2): 221-238.
Keeler, B.L, S.A. Wood, S. Polasky, C. Kling, C.T. Filstrup, and J.A. Downing. 2015. Recreational demand for
clean water: evidence from geotagged photographs by visitors to lakes. Frontiers in Ecology and the
Environment 13(2): 76-81. doi:10.1890/140124.
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 23
-------
Kerr, R.S. 1969. James River—Wilson Creek study Springfield, Missouri. U.S. Department of the Interior,
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, Water Research Center Technical Services Program,
v. I, p. 60. Ada, OK.
Krysel, C, E. Marsh Boyer, C. Parson, and P. Welle. 2003. Lakeshore property values and water quality:
Evidence from property sales in the Mississippi Headwaters Region. Mississippi Headwater Board.
Lansford, N.H., Jr., and L.L. Jones. 1995. Marginal price of lake recreation and aesthetics: An hedonic approach.
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 27(1): 212-223.
Lee, J.S., and M.-H. Li. 2009. The impact of detention basin design on residential property value: Case studies
using GIS in the hedonic price modeling. Landscape and Urban Planning 89: 7-16.
Madison, C„ and J. Kovari. 2013. Impact of green infrastructure on property values within the Milwaukee
metropolitan sewerage district planning area: Case studies. The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Center
for Economic Development.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis. Washington, D.C.:
Island Press.
MODNR. 2012. Missouri guide to green infrastructure: Integrating water quality into municipal stormwater
management. Missouri Department of Natural Resources. PUB2446.
New Yorkers for Parks and Ernst & Young. 2003. Analysis of secondary economic impacts resulting from park
expenditures. New Yorkers for Parks, New York, NY.
North East Trees. 2009. Overview of youth environmental stewardship program. Accessed September 2015.
NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory). 2004. Green roofs. Federal Technology Alert. U.S.
Department of Energy Federal Energy Management Program. DOE/EE-0298.
Obrecht, D.V., A.P. Thorpe, and J.R. Jones. 2005. Responses in the James River arm of Table Rock Lake,
Missouri (USA) to point source phosphorus reduction. Verhandlungen des Internationalen Verein
Limnologie 29: 1043-1048.
Otto, D., K. Tylka, and S. Erickson. 2012. Economic value of outdoor recreation activities in Iowa.
Pincetl, S., J. Wolch, J. Wilson, and T. Longcore. 2003. Toward a sustainable Los Angeles: A "nature's services"
approach. USC Center for Sustainable Cities, Los Angeles, CA.
PWD (Philadelphia Water Department). 2009. A triple bottom line assessment of traditional and green
infrastructure options for controlling CSO events in Philadelphia's watersheds: Final report.
Rangwala, K. 2008. A green paradigm. Economic Development Journal 7(3): 27-32.
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 24
-------
Rosenberger, R.S., and J.B. Loomis. 2001. Benefit transfer of outdoor recreation use values: A technical
document supporting the Forest Service Strategic Plan (2000 revision). Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-72.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Fort Collins, CO.
Rosenberger, R.S., and T.D. Stanley. 2007. Publication effects in the recreation use value literature: A
preliminary Investigation. Paper presented at the American Agricultural Economics Association Annual
Meeting, Portland, OR, July 29-August 1, 2007.
Sander, H„ S. Polasky, and R.G. Haight. 2010. The value of urban tree cover: A hedonic property price model in
Ramsey and Dakota Counties, Minnesota, USA. Ecological Economics 69(8): 1646-1656.
Schilling, J,, and J. Logan. 2008. Greening the Rust Belt: A green infrastructure model for right sizing
America's shrinking cities. Journal of the American Planning Association 74(4): 451-466.
Seters, T.V., C. Graham, L. Rocha, M. Uda, and C. Kennedy. 2013. Assessment of life cycle costs for low impact
development stormwater management practices. Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program, Toronto
and Region Conservation Authority and University of Toronto.
Shultz, S„ and N. Schmitz. 2008. How water resources limit and/or promote residential housing developments
in Douglas County. University of Nebraska-Omaha Research Center, Omaha, NE. Accessed September
2008
The Louis Berger Group. 2008. Analysis of job creation in PlaNYC Final Report. Accessed July 2015.
USDA. 2008a. i-Tree ecosystem analysis Milwaukee urban forest effects and values.
USDA. 2008b. Urban Forest Effects Model - UFORE. USDA Forest Service Northern Research Station.
U.S. EPA. 2001. The greening curve: Lessons learned in the design of the new EPA campus in North Carolina.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA 220/K-02-001.
U.S. EPA. 2010a. Guidelines for preparing economic analyses. EPA, National Center for Environmental
Economics. Accessed June 2015.
U.S. EPA. 2010b. Case studies: Municipal policies for managing stormwater with green infrastructure.
Accessed July 2015
U.S. EPA. 2013. Case studies analyzing the economic benefits of low impact development and green
infrastructure programs. Accessed November 2015.
U.S. EPA. 2014. The economic benefits of green infrastructure: A case study of Lancaster, PA.
EPA 800-R-14-007.
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 25
-------
U.S. EPA. 2015. Social cost of carbon. Accessed July 2015.
Voicu, I., and V. Been. 2008. The effect of community gardens on neighboring property values. Real Estate
Economics 36(2): 241-283.
Wachter, S.M., and G.W. Bucchianeri. 2008. What is a tree worth? Green-city strategies and housing prices.
Real Estate Economics 36(2).
Ward, B., E. MacMullan, and S. Reich. 2008. The effect of low-impact development on property values.
ECONorthwest, Eugene, Oregon.
Zhang, C., and K.J. Boyle. 2010. The effect of an aquatic invasive species (Eurasian watermilfoil) on lakefront
property values. Ecological Economics 70(2): 394-404.
Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review • 26
------- |