The social return on investment of an urban regeneration project using real-world data: the Connswater Community Greenway, Belfast, UK
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous research has illustrated the role of urban green and blue spaces in improving the economic, social, environmental, and health-related outcomes of urban populations. The Connswater Community Greenway is presented as a case study to assess the social value of an urban regeneration project. Using real-world data from two time points (2012 and 2017), our analysis focussed on eight key elements: property values; flood alleviation; tourism; biodiversity; climate change; health and wellbeing; crime; and employment and productivity. Using social return on investment analysis, we estimated the value of the Connswater Community Greenway over a 40-year horizon. The total value was estimated to be between £56.8m and £67m. After subtracting the costs (£42.2m), the net present value of the Connswater Community Greenway was £14.6m - £24.8m. The benefit-cost ratio was 1.34 – 1.59, meaning that for every £1 invested in the Connswater Community Greenway, the local economy gains between £1.34 and £1.59. Overall, the Connswater Community Greenway will provide a positive return on investment which will be realised after 30 years. Social return on investment analysis provides a framework for the incorporation of many multifunctional benefits of urban green and blue spaces into economic evaluation, providing a more complete analysis of value.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it