Mixed Method Integration of Evidence and Valuation Findings for ULLs. REGREEN Deliverable D4.5.
Creators: name: Wheeler, Benedict
name: Lovell, Rebecca
name: Zandersen, Marianne
name: Garrett, Jo
name: Guell, Conny
name: Fullan, James
name: Jones, Laurence
name: Taylor, Timothy
name: Fletcher, David
name: Panduro, Toke Emil
name: Rice, Marissa
Publisher: name: REGREEN Fostering nature-based solutions for smart, green and healthy urban transitions in Europe and China. Horizon2020 Grant No. 821016.
Year: 2024
Subjects: Nature-based Solutions
Valuation
Mixed Methods
Photo-elicitation
ecological momentary assessment
deliberative valuation
ecosystem service valuation

description: “Value” is a multi-faceted concept. Even though we often think of value in terms of ascribing a monetary worth to goods and services, it is a term that relates to a variety of different forms of evidence about how people experience, interpret, and perceive entities such as Nature based Solutions (NBS). More broadly, ‘values’ relating to NBS can reflect principles and moral perspectives on importance and priorities.

This document, a key output from REGREEN Task 4.4, brings together the activities from across Work Package 4 “Wellbeing assessments and valuing benefits of nature-based solutions”. The primary objectives of the report are: 1) to summarise the multiple ways in which the health and wellbeing related values of NBS were investigated; 2) to illustrate the benefit of taking these multiple approaches to understanding NBS values; and 3) to present an integrated picture of what was learned. 

Producing and using different types of evidence of the value of NBS facilitates a more comprehensive understanding of the complexities of their selection, delivery, and reception. The different forms of evidence, individually and in combination, can reveal if and how an NBS action had the intended impact, clarifying who or what benefited, to what degree, and in what ways. A further purpose is that different audiences need, and will respond to, different types of evidence. 

There are risks to using constrained types of values and evidence in decision making relating to NBS. This includes the potential that decisions are made which fail to achieve optimum benefits, or at worst, could result in severe unintended consequences including wasted resources, or even harm to individuals or communities.

Some of the specific methodologies used in WP4 to understand the multiple values of NBS include: 

·       Theory building and complex systems to understand the multiple outcomes, feedback loops, and unexpected consequences of implementation of a specific NBS, street trees. 

·       Ecological momentary assessment of the experiences, behaviours, and moods of people in urban parks in three of the Urban Living Labs. 

·       Photo-elicitation to capture the responses of community groups to green space, specifically street trees. 

·       Deliberative valuation to explore people’s perceptions and preferences regarding ecosystem services and subsequent benefits, and disbenefits of NBS. 

·       Ecosystem service valuation of the public green spaces in Paris in terms of their cooling effect on nearby residents and the associated reduced risk of heat related mortality.  

Individually, the results of each study carry great meaning, but when considered as a whole, knowledge built from different types of evidence of value have revealed the multifaceted nature of the value of NBS.