MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320527591 · doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2022.101506

Modelling the net environmental and economic impacts of urban nature-based solutions by combining ecosystem services, system dynamics and life cycle thinking: An application to urban forests

2023· article· en· W4320527591 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEcosystem Services · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersMinistero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della RicercaEuropean CommissionHorizon 2020Fonds National de la Recherche LuxembourgDipartimenti di Eccellenza
KeywordsEcosystem servicesExternalityLife-cycle assessmentDynamismEnvironmental economicsUrban ecosystemEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental impact assessmentSystem dynamicsUrban planningComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceEcosystemEconomicsEngineeringProduction (economics)EcologyCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nature-based solutions (NBS) are gaining relevance as sustainable urban actions because of their potential to provide multiple benefits in the form of ecosystem services (ES), and thus mitigate urban challenges. This paper presents an original semi-dynamic modelling framework that simultaneously considers i) ES supply and demand dynamics, ii) negative environmental impacts, externalities, and financial costs derived from NBS, and iii) life cycle NBS impacts beyond the use phase. Compared to other models, it also aims to be valuable for urban planning actions at site level, i.e., for evaluating the net impacts of specific urban NBS projects. To validate the modelling framework, a proof-of-concept model for urban forests is developed and tested for a case study in Madrid (Spain). The modelling framework is split in two interrelated parts: foreground (dynamic modelling) and background (static modelling). In the foreground, the environmental impacts derived from the use phase of an NBS project are quantified considering its spatio-temporal dynamism, by making use of system dynamics. In the background, the environmental impacts derived from the rest of the life cycle phases of the NBS are quantified making use of steady state life cycle impact assessment. The net economic impact of the NBS project, considering both financial values and externalities, is eventually calculated in the background encompassing all the life cycle phases. Results from the case study illustrate how planning, design, and management decisions over the entire life cycle of an urban forest can influence the net environmental and economic performance of this type of NBS. A discussion is provided to inform on how the modelling framework can help moving beyond the state-of-the-art, and how the derived model can be used for sustainability assessments of urban NBS projects.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.367
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.184 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it