Valuation of cultural ecosystem services in urban parks with different social contexts in the city of Recife (PE), Brazil

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5327/Z2176-94781336

Keywords:

urban green areas; willingness to pay; contingent valuation method; urban planning.

Abstract

The accelerated process of urbanization of the planet and the significant accumulation of the human population make the existence of green areas in cities more and more necessary. Even so, in developing countries, measuring the cultural benefits generated by these areas is scarce. The insertion of ecosystem services into urban planning is also very infrequent. This work sought to estimate the monetary value of the benefits generated by urban parks in different social contexts in the city of Recife. For this, we used the Contingent Valuation Method (CVM), applying 421 questionnaires in three parks located in neighborhoods with different characteristics. We adopted the Bivariate Probit to analyze the dichotomous questions and calculate the willingness to pay (WTP) estimates. The estimated flow of annual benefits in cultural ecosystem services is calculated based on two scenarios of potential beneficiaries who live between 800 m and 4,800 m from the parks. The results showed that the annual WTP varied between R$ 34 and R$ 87. The user characteristics such as age and sex were significant for the model, while the education level was not. Users with higher income had a higher WTP in absolute terms, while in proportional terms, users with lower income had a higher WTP. In this way, the results seem to demonstrate that the cultural ecosystem services provided by urban parks are more important in less favored social contexts. This factor can support more equitable planning in providing these public spaces.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aizaki, H.; Nakatani, T.; Sato, K., 2015. Stated Preference Methods Using R. Boca Raton: CRC Press-Taylor & Francis Group.

Alberini, A., 1995. Optimal designs for discrete choice contingent valuation surveys: Single-bound, double-bound, and bivariate models. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, v. 28, (3), 287-306. https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.1995.1019.

Andrade, D.C.; Romeiro, A.R.; Fasiaben, M. C. R.; Garcia, J. R., 2012. Dinâmica do uso do solo e valoração de serviços ecossistêmicos: notas de orientação para políticas ambientais. Desenvolvimento e Meio Ambiente, v. 25, 53-71. https://doi.org/10.5380/dma.v25i0.26056.

Astell-Burt, T.; Hartig, T.; Eckermann, S.; Nieuwenhuijsen, M.; McMunn, A.; Frumkin, H.; Feng, X., 2021. More Green, Less Lonely? A Longitudinal Cohort Study. International Journal of Epidemiology, v. 51, (1), 99-110. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyab089.

Barboza, E.P.; Cirach, M.; Khomenko, S.; Iungman, T.; Mueller, N.; Barrera-Gómez, J.; Rojas-Rueda, D.; Kondo, M.; Nieuwenhuijsen, M., 2021. Green space and mortality in European cities: a health impact assessment study. The Lancet Planetary Health, v. 5, (10), e718-e730. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(21)00229-1.

Brandli, L.L.; Prietto, P.D.M.; Neckel, A., 2015. Estimating the willingness to pay for improvement of an urban park in southern Brazil using the contingent valuation method. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, v. 141, (4), 05014027. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)up.1943-5444.0000254.

Brasil, 2016. Ministério da Saúde. Conselho Nacional de Saúde. Resolução nº 510, 7 de abril. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde (Accessed Sept 3, 2022) at:. http://conselho.saude.gov.br/resolucoes/2016/Reso510.pdf.

Carbone, A.S.; Coutinho, S.M.V.; Fernandes, V.; Philippi Junior, A., 2020. Serviços ecossistêmicos no planejamento integrado do território metropolitano: oferta, demanda e pressões sobre a provisão de água na região metropolitana de Curitiba. Brazilian Journal of Environmental Sciences (Online), v. 55, (3), 381-400. https://doi.org/10.5327/Z2176-947820200705.

Castro, J.D.B.; Nogueira, J.M., 2019. Valoração Econômica do meio ambiente: teoria e prática. Curitiba: CRV.

Cruz Neto, C.C.; Silva, C.E.M.; Ferreira, Z.R.; Albuquerque, V.E.A.; Morais, I.F.S.; Silva, I.R.V.; Santos, N.F.L.; Albuquerque, J.S.M., 2021. Disposição a pagar por espaços verdes urbanos. Fronteiras: Journal of Social, Technological and Environmental Science, v. 10, (3), 89-100. https://doi.org/10.21664/2238-8869.2021v10i3.p89-100

Daily, G.C., 1997. Nature's services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

Fish, R.; Church, A.; Winter, M., 2016. Conceptualising cultural ecosystem services: a novel framework for research and critical engagement. Ecosystem Services, v. 21, part B, 208-217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.09.002.

Gaudereto, G.L.; Gallardo, A.L.C.F.; Ferreira, M.L.; Nascimento, A.P.B.; Mantovani, W., 2018. Avaliação de serviços ecossistêmicos na gestão de áreas verdes urbanas: promovendo cidades saudáveis e sustentáveis. Ambiente & Sociedade, v. 21, e01203. https://doi.org/10.1590/1809-4422asoc0120r3vu18L4TD.

Gil, A.C., 2008. Método e técnicas de pesquisa social. 6ª ed. São Paulo: Atlas.

Groothuis, P.A.; Whitehead, J.C., 2002. Does don’t know mean no? Analysis of ‘don’t know’ responses in dichotomous choice contingent valuation questions. Applied Economics, v. 34, (15), 1935-1940. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840210128717.

Haab, T.C.; McConnell, K.E., 2002. Valuing environmental and natural resources: the econometrics of non-market valuation. Cheltenham,: Edward Elgar.

Haines-Young, R.; Potschin, M., 2018. Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) V5.1. Guidance on the Application of the Revised Structure. Nothinghan: Fabis Consulting.

Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE), 2021. Cities and States. IBGE (Accessed Sept. 3, 2022) at:. https://www.ibge.gov.br/en/cities-and-states/pe/recife.html.

Latinopoulos, D.; Mallios, Z.; Latinopoulos, P., 2016. Valuing the benefits of an urban park project: a contingent valuation study in Thessaloniki, Greece. Land Use Policy, v. 55, 130-141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.03.020.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA). 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

Meneses, A.R.S., 2018. Desafios da gestão dos parques urbanos de Recife. Doctoral Thesis, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife.

Meneses, A.R.S.; Monteiro, M.M.M.; Lima, W.N.; Barbosa, R.V.R., 2021. Cidades saudáveis: o acesso equitativo a parques urbanos como promoção da saúde. Journal of Engineering and Exact Sciences, v. 7, (1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.18540/jcecvl7iss1pp12020-01-14e.

Mertes, J.D.; Hall, J.R., 1996. Recreation, open space and greenway guidelines. 3ª ed. Lacey: American Academy for Park and Recreation Administration.

Mexia, T.; Vieira, J.; Príncipe, A.; Anjos, A.; Silva, P.; Lopes, N.; Freitas, C., 2018. Ecosystem services: urban parks under a magnifying glass. Environmental Research, v. 160, 469-478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2017.10.023.

Mota, M.T.; Leite, E.C.; Sola, F.; Mello, K., 2016. Categorização da infraestrutura verde do município de Sorocaba (SP) para criação de um sistema municipal integrando espaços livres e áreas protegidas. Brazilian Journal of Environmental Sciences (Online), (41), 122-140. https://doi.org/10.5327/Z2176-947820160121.

Motta, R.S., 1997. Manual para valoração econômica de recursos ambientais. Rio de Janeiro: CEMA/IPEA e COBIO/MMA, 242 pp.

Muñoz, A.M.M.; Freitas, S.R., 2017. Importância dos serviços ecossistêmicos nas cidades: revisão das publicações de 2003 a 2015. Revista de Gestão Ambiental e Sustentabilidade, v. 6, (2), 89-104. https://doi.org/10.5585/geas.v6i2.853.

Neckel, A.; Silva, J.L.; Saraiva, P.P.; Kujawa, H.A.; Araldi, J.; Paladini, E.P., 2020. Estimation of the economic value of urban parks in Brazil, the case of the city of Passo Fundo. Journal of Cleaner Production, v. 264, 121369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121369.

Parron, L.M.; Cardoso, E.C.; Fidalgo, A.P.; Luz, M.M.; Campamha, A.P.D.; Turetta, B.C.C.G.; Prado, R.B., 2019. Research on ecosystem services in brazil: a systematic review. Revista Ambiente e Água, v. 14, (3), 445-458. https://doi.org/10.4136/ambi-agua.2263.

Recife, 2021. Governo Municipal. Secretaria de Saúde do Recife. Secretaria Executiva de Coordenação Geral. Plano Municipal de Saúde 2018–2021. Recife: Governo Municipal, Secretaria de Saúde do Recife.

Sabyrbekov, R.; Dallimer, M.; Navrud, S., 2020. Nature affinity and willingness to pay for urban green spaces in a developing country. Landscape and Urban Planning, v. 194, 103700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2019.103700.

Sannigrahi, S.; Chakraborti, S.; Banerjee, A.; Rahmat, S.; Bhatt, S.; Jha, S.; Singh, L.K.; Kumar, P.; Sen, S., 2020. Ecosystem service valuation of a natural reserve region for sustainable management of natural resources. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, v. 5, 100014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indic.2019.100014.

Silva, C.E.M.; Cruz Neto, C.C.; Bezerra, A.C.V.; Rodrigues, R.H.A.; Florencio, B.O.G., 2022. Valoração de serviços ecossistêmicos culturais como estratégia para o planejamento urbano. Revista Iberoamericana de Economía Ecológica, v. 35, (1), 19-35.

Silva, J.L.; Riva, M.A.; Bacarji, G.; Rodrigues, P.C., 2012. Valoração ambiental de áreas de preservação permanente (APP’s): um estudo de caso no bairro Jardim Universitário, Cuiabá, Mato Grosso. Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos Ambientais.

Souza, W.L.S., 2011. Produção de sedimentos da Bacia Hidrográfica do Rio Capibaribe para a Zona Costeira da Região Metropolitana do Recife. Dissertação de Mestrado. Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco, Pernambuco.

Travassos, S.K.M.; Leite, J.C.L.; Costa, J.I.F., 2018. Método de valoração contingente e modelo beta: uma visão econômica contábil para o dano ambiental do estaleiro Atlântico Sul. Revista Contabilidade & Finanças, v. 29, (77), 266-287. https://doi.org/10.1590/1808-057x201802900.

World Economic Forum, 2022. BiodiverCities by 2030: transforming cities’ relationship with nature. Switzerland: Gene.

World Health Organization (WHO), 2016. Urban green spaces and health. Copenhangen: WHO.

World Health Organization (WHO), 2017. Urban green space interventions and health. Copenhagen: WHO. v. 3.

Xu, F.; Wang, Y.; Xiang, N.; Tian, J.; Chen, L., 2020. Uncovering the willingness-to-pay for urban green space conservation: a survey of the capital area in China. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, v. 162, 105053. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105053.

Zuniga-Teran, A.A.; Gerlak, A.K.; Elder, A.D.; Tam, A., 2021. The unjust distribution of urban green infrastructure is just the tip of the iceberg: a systematic review of place-based studies. Environmental Science and Policy, v. 126, 234-245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2021.10.001.

Downloads

Published

2022-09-22

How to Cite

Florêncio, B. O. G., Menezes da Silva, C. E., & da Cruz Neto, C. C. (2022). Valuation of cultural ecosystem services in urban parks with different social contexts in the city of Recife (PE), Brazil. Revista Brasileira De Ciências Ambientais (RBCIAMB), 57(3), 442–450. https://doi.org/10.5327/Z2176-94781336