70 Multi-Benefit Resources


City Resilience Framework

Author: The Rockefeller Foundation, Arup International Development (2015)
Geography:
Level of Detail: ,

Availability:

Water Management Strategies: , , ,

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


City Resilience Framework provides a framework for analyzing the sustainability of a city. The framework identifies seven qualities of resilient cities (reflective, robust, redundant, flexible, resourceful, inclusive, and integrated) as well as four dimensions of resilient cities: health & wellbeing; economy & society; infrastructure & environment; and leadership & strategy. The report applies the City Resilience Framework to six cities across the globe, where the resiliency of each city was qualitatively analyzed following the four resiliency dimensions.

Water Reuse Project in Virginia Providing Multiple Benefits

Author: U.S. EPA (2015)
Geography:
Level of Detail: ,

Availability:

Water Management Strategies: ,

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs: , , , , , , , ,


Water Reuse Project in Virginia Providing Multiple Benefits provides an example of an effective water reuse project implemented in the Chesapeake Bay. Historically, treated wastewater in the region was discharged into Chesapeake Bay, the water reuse project redirected this water for beneficial uses such as cooling a waste-to-energy plant and irrigating a ball field and a golf course. The benefits produced by this innovative water reuse project include potable water conservation, reductions in phosphorus and nitrogen pollution, and discounts on water bills.

Milwaukee Green Infrastructure Scenarios Tool

Author: Climate Interactive, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (N/A)
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies: , , , ,

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs: , , , , , , , , , ,


The Milwaukee Green Infrastructure Scenarios Tool (GIST) helps decision makers to analyze various scenarios and determine the best stormwater management solutions in Milwaukee’s Kinnickinnic River Watershed. The tool recommends the green infrastructure project (i.e., green roofs, bioretention, stormwater trees, porous pavement, etc.) that best provides stormwater management, extreme weather resilience, job generation, aesthetics, and financial savings. The tool provides outputs of system performance measures (i.e., number of overflow events annually), capital and operational costs, and the co-benefits of the project, including improved water quality, energy savings, and increased jobs and property values.

Agricultural Water Conservation and Efficiency Potential in California

Author: NRDC, Pacific Institute (2014)
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies: ,

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Agricultural Water Conservation and Efficiency Potential in California outlines the benefits of improving agricultural efficiency in California. The benefits cited include reduced consumptive use, improved water quality and instream flow, energy savings, increased yields, improved crop quality, reduced fertilizer, water, and energy costs, improved reliability of existing supplies, management flexibility, improved downstream water quality, and enhanced recreation.

The Economic Benefits of Green Infrastructure A Case Study of Lancaster, PA

Author: U.S. EPA (2014)
Geography:
Level of Detail: ,

Availability:

Water Management Strategies: , , , ,

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


The Economic Benefits of Green Infrastructure: A Case Study of Lancaster, PA provides an economic valuation of green infrastructure in Lancaster, PA based on the Framework described in CNT’s “The Value of Green Infrastructure: A Guide to Recognizing Its Economic, Environmental and Social Benefits, 2010”. The report provides data requirements and methodologies for evaluation of water-related benefits (avoided capital costs of storage needs, avoided operational costs from wastewater treatment), energy-related benefits (reduced energy use for indoor temperature control), air-quality benefits (smog reduction, including NO2, O3, SO2 and PM10), and climate change-related benefits (CO2 reduction from carbon sequestration, reductions in water and wastewater pumping and treatment, and building energy use). The report also includes a discussion on the additional qualitative benefits including reduced urban heat island effect, increased property value, reduced noise pollution, increased recreational opportunities, habitat improvement, public education, and community cohesion.

Green Infrastructure Guide for Water Management

Author: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), UNEP-DHI Partnership, International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), The Nature Conservancy, World Resources Institute (2014)
Geography:
Level of Detail: ,

Availability:

Water Management Strategies: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Green Infrastructure: Guide for Water Management examines case studies of green infrastructure projects throughout the United States. The report argues that a lack of awareness of the solutions and additional cost benefits that green infrastructure projects can provide is the major barrier to implementation of green infrastructure solutions. The case studies include green infrastructure projects such as green roofs, permeable pavement, levee setbacks, wetland conservation and construction, reforestation and afforestation, and flood bypasses and coastal protection. The case studies cite benefits from the ecosystem service categories (i.e., provisioning services, regulating services, cultural services, habitat or supporting services), providing a qualitative discussion of primary benefits and co-benefits for each case study.

Green Infrastructure in Parks: A Guide to Collaboration, Funding, and Community Engagement

Author: U.S. EPA (2017)
Geography:
Level of Detail: ,

Availability:

Water Management Strategies: , , , , , , , , ,

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs: , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Green Infrastructure in Parks: A Guide to Collaboration, Funding, and Community Engagement analyzes green infrastructure projects in parks and the resulting benefits. The report uses case studies to discuss the multiple benefits and encourage cities to invest in green infrastructure projects within their public parks. The multiple benefits cited within the report include recreation value, attractive park features, social and environmental equity, reduced maintenance, drainage, education, water quality, economic benefits, and overall benefits to environment.

Reducing Stormwater Costs through Low Impact Development (LID) Strategies and Practices

Author: U.S. EPA (2007)
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies: , , , , ,

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs: , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Reducing Stormwater Costs through Low Impact Development (LID) Strategies and Practices analyzes 17 case studies of low impact development (LID) projects throughout the United States. The low impact development projects referenced include conservation designs, infiltration practices, runoff storage, runoff conveyance, filtration, and low impact landscaping. The benefits considered within the analysis include environmental benefits (i.e., pollution abatement, protection of downstream water resources, groundwater recharge, water quality improvements, reduced incidence of combined sewer overflows (CSO), habitat improvement), land value and quality of life benefits (i.e., reduced risk of downstream flooding and property damage, increased real estate values, lot yield, improved aesthetics, enhanced public space), and compliance benefits (i.e., regulatory compliance). The analysis also includes a cost comparison of low impact development projects to traditional grey infrastructure projects. The report concludes that low impact development projects significantly reduce costs and improve environmental performance.

The Hidden Value of Landscapes: Implications for Drought Planning

Author: Johnson, Koski, & O'Connor, Colorado State University (2017)
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies: ,

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


The Hidden Value of Landscapes: Implications for Drought Planning analyzes the impacts of landscaping on quality of life, environment, and land values in Colorado. The report illustrates that while landscaping can provide the primary goal of drought relief, it also provides a suite of co-benefits. These benefits include environmental benefits (i.e., air quality, carbon sequestration, cooling effects, stormwater management, and wildlife habitat), increased real estate value, and enhanced community and health.

Stormwater Capture Master Plan

Author: Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) (2015)
Geography:
Level of Detail: ,

Availability:

Water Management Strategies: , , , , , , , , , ,

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Los Angeles’ Department of Water and Power (LADWP) Stormwater Capture Master Plan develops a strategy for long-term stormwater capture potential, examination of projects and programs, estimation of the value of projects with ancillary benefits, and stormwater program and policy implementations in California. Stormwater programs include on-site infiltration, green streets, subregional infiltration, on-site direct use, subregional direct use, and impervious replacement. The multiple benefits cited from increased stormwater capture include groundwater recharge, water conservation, open space alternatives, and improved downstream water quality and peak flow.

Envision V3 User Manual

Author: Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure (2017)
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies: , ,

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


The Envision V3 (Draft Credits for Public Review and Comment) user manual outlines additions to the Envision framework, a sustainability framework that aims to analyze infrastructure projects and promote collaboration on multi-benefit projects in order to improve system synergy. The framework defines co-benefits as services not directly related to the project’s primary function, and identifies five benefit categories: 1) quality of life, 2) leadership, 3) resource allocation, 4) natural world, and 5) climate and risk. Envision V3, launched in late 2017, modifies the final category, instead calling it ‘risk and resilience’.

Envision Framework

Author: Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure (N/A)
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies: , ,

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Envision is a framework that provides the guidance needed to initiate this systemic change in the planning, design and delivery of sustainable and resilient infrastructure. Envision is a decision-making guide, not a set of prescriptive measures. Envision provides industry-wide sustainability metrics for all types and sizes of infrastructure to help users assess and measure the extent to which their project contributes to conditions of sustainability across the full range of social, economic, and environmental indicators.

Barriers and Gateways to Green Infrastructure

Author: Clean Water America Alliance (2011)
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies: , , , , ,

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Barriers and Gateways to Green Infrastructure identifies and explores the major barriers to implementation of green infrastructure for stormwater management. The barriers were identified through a survey of various stakeholder groups from across the United States, and included the following themes: technical and physical barriers, legal and regulatory barriers, financial barriers, and community and institutional barriers. The report also provides several recommendations to the U.S. EPA for overcoming these barriers, including creation of new stormwater regulations and permits, full accounting for economic and environmental benefits, embracing of new stormwater approaches, and increased federal funding for green infrastructure.

The Economics of Low-Impact Development: A Literature Review

Author: ECONorthwest (2007)
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies: , , , , ,

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


The Economics of Low-Impact Development: A Literature Review provides a review of economic valuations of low-impact development projects. The multiple benefits of low-impact development cited within the report include reduced flooding, improved water quality, increased groundwater recharge, reduced public expenditures on stormwater infrastructure, reduced energy use, improved air quality, and enhanced aesthetics and property values. The report provides guidance and literature discussion on methodologies for calculating the costs and benefits of low-impact development projects.

Environmental Farming Act Science Advisory Panel Bi-Annual Report (2011-2013)

Author: Gunasekara, California Department of Food and Agriculture (2013)
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies: ,

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Environmental Farming Act Science Advisory Panel – Bi-Annual Report (2011-2013) is a resource developed by the Environmental Farming Act Science Advisory Panel and organized by Secretary of the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA). The advisory panel aims to review the impact of agriculture on the environment and encourage agricultural practices with environmental benefits by providing incentives and modifying environmental regulations. The environmental benefit categories established by the advisory panel include: wildlife habitats; nutrient cycling; food, fiber, and fuel production; recreation and cultural; soil structure, formation, and fertility; biodiversity conservation; water cycling; atmospheric gas/climate regulation; pest control; pollination services; and water quality.

Living Streets Economic Feasibility Project: Final Report

Author: Abdullah & Blyth, Heal the Bay, Climate Resolve, GreenLA Coalition (2016)
Geography:
Level of Detail: ,

Availability:

Water Management Strategies: , , , , ,

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Living Streets Economic Feasibility Report presents an alternate, new paradigm to guide the future of street and sidewalk infrastructure design and creation for Los Angeles. The term they use for this new paradigm is “Living Streets”, and it incorporates green infrastructure and stormwater capture within street design to improve air quality, water quantity and quality, flooding, human health, and aesthetics within urban regions. The report presents the costs and benefits of Living Streets, and compares them to the costs and benefits of continuing with business as usual, as well as against what they call “Green Streets,” “Cool Streets,” and “Complete Streets.”

Banking on Green: A Look at How Green Infrastructure Can Save Municipalities Money and Provide Economic Benefits Community-wide

Author: American Rivers, the Water Environment Federation, the American Society of Landscape Architects, ECONorthwest (2012)
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies: , , , , ,

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Banking on Green provides a business case for green infrastructure practices in the United States. Benefits cited within the report include reduced stormwater runoff, reduced energy costs, reduced impacts of flooding, improvements in public health, and reduced infrastructure costs. Within the report, it is argued that green infrastructure can blend seamlessly with traditional grey infrastructure, and make communities more resilient in the face of extreme events and climate change. The report provides case studies of successful green infrastructure projects across the United States, and a qualitative discussion on the multiple benefits.

Using economic valuation techniques to inform water resources management: A survey and critical appraisal of available techniques and an application

Author: Birol, Karousakis, & Koundouri, (2006)
Geography:
Level of Detail: ,

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs: , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Using economic valuation techniques to inform water resources management presents a non-technical introduction to the economic valuation techniques of changes in the quantity and quality of environmental resources, with a specific focus on water. This report includes dozens of relevant articles that provide cost and benefit estimates of various aspects of water resources (e.g. environmental services). It also provides a case study applying the economic valuation techniques to the Cheimaditida wetland in Greece.

Proposition 1 Stormwater Grant Program Guidelines

Author: California State Resources Water Quality Control Board (2015)
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Proposition 1 Stormwater Grant Program Guidelines, related to the Stormwater Grant Program (SWGP), establishes the process and criteria by which Proposition 1 funds are awarded in the state of California. The guidelines seek to encourage public agencies to develop multi-benefit stormwater management plans, as specified in the Stormwater Resource Planning Act (SB 985), that reframe stormwater projects, including dry-weather runoff as a water supply resource.

Water Storage Investment Program Technical Reference

Author: California Water Commission (2016)
Geography:
Level of Detail: ,

Availability:

Water Management Strategies: , , , , , , , , ,

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Water Storage Investment Program Technical Reference details the methodology for quantifying the co-benefits or adverse impacts of water storage projects under California’s Water Storage Investment Program (WSIP). The report outlines methods for quantification of various co-benefits and adverse impacts, providing guidance on defining future site conditions, calculating physical changes, monetizing project benefits and costs, comparing benefits and costs, properly allocating costs to beneficiaries, determining cost-effectiveness and public-benefit ratio, and evaluating sources of uncertainty. Projects that quantify public benefits following these methodologies are eligible for California state bond funding to pay for the public benefits.