CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 84Urban Planning and ValuationEnvironmental Justice and Health DisparitiesEconomic and Environmental Valuation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Optimising value from the soft re-use of brownfield sites

Open access
Bardos, R. Paul, Jones, Sarah, Stephenson, Ian, Menger, Pierre, Beumer, Victor, Neonato, Francesca, Maring, Linda, Ferber, Uwe, Track, Thomas, Wendler, Katja·2016·Science of The Total Environment
DOI 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.12.002
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Soft re-use of brownfields describes intended temporary or final re-uses of brownfield sites which are not based on built constructions or infrastructure ('hard' re-use). Examples of soft re-uses include the creation of public green space. These are essentially uses where the soil is not sealed. Often the case for soft re-use of brownfields has not been easy to demonstrate in strictly financial terms. The purpose of this paper is to describe a value based approach to identify and optimise services provided by the restoration of brownfields to soft re-uses, on a permanent or interim basis. A 'Brownfield Opportunity Matrix' is suggested as means of identifying and discussing soft restoration opportunities. The use of 'sustainability linkages' is suggested as a means of understanding the sustainability of the services under consideration and providing a structure for the overall valuation of restoration work, for example as part of design or option appraisal processes, or to support the solicitation of interest in a project.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.12.002

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 46

  1. Adelaja, 2010, Renewable energy potential on brownfield sites: a case study of Michigan, Energ Policy, 38, 7021, 10.1016/j.enpol.2010.07.021 · DOI
  2. Atkinson, 2008, Environmental cost–benefit analysis, Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour., 33, 317, 10.1146/annurev.environ.33.020107.112927 · DOI
  3. Atkinson, 2014, Brownfield regeneration to green space: delivery of project objectives for social and environmental gain, Urban For. Urban Green., 13, 586, 10.1016/j.ufug.2013.04.002 · DOI
  4. Bambra, 2014, Healthy land? An examination of the area-level association between brownfield land and morbidity and mortality in England, Environ. Plan. A, 46, 433, 10.1068/a46105 · DOI
  5. Bardos, 2008, Report of the NICOLE/SAGTA workshop: sustainable remediation 3rd March 2008, London, UK, Land Contamination and Reclamation, 16, 381, 10.2462/09670513.921 · DOI
  6. Bardos, 2014, Progress in sustainable remediation, Remediation Journal Winter, 2014, 23, 10.1002/rem.21412 · DOI
  7. Bardos, 2011, Applying sustainable development principles to contaminated land management using the SuRF-UK framework, Remediat. J., 21, 77, 10.1002/rem.20283 · DOI
  8. Bartke, 2011, Valuation of market uncertainties for contaminated land, Int. J. Strateg. Prop. Manag., 15, 356, 10.3846/1648715X.2011.633771 · DOI
  9. Bartke, 2015, No perfect tools: trade-offs of sustainability principles and user requirements in designing support tools for land-use decisions between greenfields and brownfields, J. Environ. Manag., 153, 11, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.01.040 · DOI
  10. BenDor, 2011, The dynamics of brownfield redevelopment, Sustainability, 3, 914, 10.3390/su3060914 · DOI
  11. Benedict, 2006, Green infrastructure, Renewable Resources Journal, 20, 12
  12. Bleicher, 2010, Sustainability assessment and the revitalization of contaminated sites: operationalizing sustainable development for local problems, International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 17, 57, 10.1080/13504500903488263 · DOI
  13. Bolund, 1999, Ecosystem services in urban areas, Ecol. Econ., 29, 293, 10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00013-0 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Brouwer, 2004, Integrated ecological, economic and social impact assessment of alternative flood control policies in the Netherlands, Ecol. Econ., 50, 1, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.01.020 · DOI
  15. Cappuyns, 2012, Evaluation of the environmental impact of brownfield remediation options: comparison of two life cycle assessment-based evaluation tools, Environ. Technol., 33, 2447, 10.1080/09593330.2012.671854 · DOI
  16. Cellini, S.R. and Kee, J.E. (2010). Cost-effectiveness and cost–benefit analysis, in (Eds. Wholey, J. S., Hatry, H. P. and Newcomer, K. E.) Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation, 3rd edition, Wiley, pp 493–530. ISBN: 978-0-470-52247-9.
  17. Chiesura, 2004, The role of urban parks for the sustainable city, Landsc. Urban Plan., 68, 129, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2003.08.003 · DOI · Paper page
  18. CL:AIRE. (2006). The role of the UK development industry in brownfield regeneration. subr:im Bulletin SUB 1. Contaminated Land: Applications in Real Environments (CL:AIRE), London, UK. www.claire.co.uk. Accessed July 2015.
  19. CL:AIRE. (2007a). Uncovering the true impacts of remediation. subr:im Bulletin SUB 2.CL:AIRE, London, UK. www.claire.co.uk. Accessed July 2015.
  20. CL:AIRE. (2007b). Measuring sustainability: what's in a number? subr:im Bulletin SUB 4.CL:AIRE, London, UK. www.claire.co.uk. Accessed July 2015.
  21. Cundy, 2013, Developing principles of sustainability and stakeholder engagement for ‘gentle’ remediation approaches: the European context, J. Environ. Manag., 129, 283, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.07.032 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Döberl, 2013, Introducing a goal-oriented sustainability assessment method to support decision making in contaminated site management. Env, Sci, Policy, 25, 207
  23. Doick, 2009, Understanding success in the context of brownfield greening projects: the requirement for outcome evaluation in urban green space success assessment, Urban For. Urban Green., 8, 163, 10.1016/j.ufug.2009.05.002 · DOI
  24. Haase, 2008, Urban ecology of shrinking cities: an unrecognized opportunity?, Nature and Culture, 3, 1, 10.3167/nc.2008.030101 · DOI
  25. Haase, 2012, Synergies, trade-offs and losses of ecosystem services in urban regions: an integral multiscale framework applied to the Leipzig–Halle region, Germany, Ecol. Soc., 17, 22, 10.5751/ES-04853-170322 · DOI
  26. Harbottle, 2008, Sustainability of land remediation, part 1: overall analysis, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers Geotechnical Engineering, 161, 75, 10.1680/geng.2008.161.2.75 · DOI
  27. Harbottle, 2008, Sustainability of land remediation, part 2: impact assessment, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers Geotechnical Engineering, 161, 117, 10.1680/geng.2008.161.3.117 · DOI
  28. Holland, 2013, Integrating remediation and reuse to achieve whole-system sustainability benefits, Remediat. J., 23, 5, 10.1002/rem.21345 · DOI
  29. Lee, 2005, Modeling the relationship among brownfields, property values, and community revitalization, Housing Policy Debate, 16
  30. Ling, C., Handley, J. and Rodwell, J. (2003) Multifunctionality and scale in post-industrial land regeneration. Pp27-34 in Land Reclamation Proceedings of the 7th International Conference, Runcorn, UK, 13–16 May 2003. (Eds Moore, H.M., Fox, H.R. and Elliott, S.) A A Balkema Publishers ISBN 9058095622. · DOI
  31. Lord, 2008, Biomass, remediation, restoration (BioReGen Life Project): reusing brownfield sites for renewable energy crops, GeoCongress, 177, 52
  32. Luederitz, 2015, A review of urban ecosystem services: six key challenges for future research, Ecosystem Services, 14, 98, 10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.05.001 · DOI
  33. Mathey, J., Rößle, S., Banse, J., Lehmann, I. and Bräuer, A. (2015) Brownfields as an element of green infrastructure for implementing ecosystem services into urban areas. Journal of Urban Planning and Development 141, 3 http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000275. · DOI
  34. Morrison, 2014, An initial assessment of spatial relationships between respiratory cases, soil metal content, air quality and deprivation indicators in Glasgow, Scotland, UK: relevance to the environmental justice agenda, Environ. Geochem. Health, 36, 319, 10.1007/s10653-013-9565-4 · DOI
  35. Nathanail, C. P. and Bardos, R.P. (2004). Reclamation of Contaminated Land. Wiley and Sons. ISBN 0471985600. (http://www.wileyeurope.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-0471985619.html). · DOI
  36. Nowak, 2006, Air pollution removal by urban trees and shrubs in the United States, Urban For. Urban Green., 4, 115, 10.1016/j.ufug.2006.01.007 · DOI
  37. Pediaditi, 2005, Monitoring the sustainability of brownfield redevelopment projects. The Redevelopment Assessment Framework (RAF), Contaminated Land and Reclamation, 13, 173, 10.2462/09670513.665 · DOI
  38. Pizzol, 2016, Timbre Brownfield Prioritization Tool to support effective brownfield regeneration, J. Environ. Manag., 166, 178, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.09.030 · DOI
  39. RESCUE Consortium (2005) Best Practice Guidance for Sustainable Brownfield Regeneration. May 2005. Land Quality Press, a Division of Land Quality Management Ltd. ISBN 0-9547474-0-2.
  40. Rizzo, 2016, Comparison of international approaches to sustainable remediation, J. Environ. Manag., 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.07.062 · DOI
  41. Rodríguez, 2006, Trade-offs across space, time, and ecosystem services, Ecol. Soc., 11, 28, 10.5751/ES-01667-110128 · DOI
  42. Skelhorn, 2014, The impact of vegetation types on air and surface temperatures in a temperate city: a fine scale assessment in Manchester, UK, Landsc. Urban Plan., 121, 129, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.09.012 · DOI
  43. Tang, 2012, Sticks and stones: the impact of the definitions of brownfield in policies on socio-economic sustainability, Sustainability, 4, 840, 10.3390/su4050840 · DOI
  44. Taylor, 2012, Mapping public and private spaces of urban agriculture in Chicago through the analysis of high-resolution aerial images in Google Earth, Landsc. Urban Plan., 108, 57, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.08.001 · DOI
  45. Thornton, 2007, The challenge of sustainability: incentives for brownfield restoration in Europe, Environ. Sci. Pol., 10, 116, 10.1016/j.envsci.2006.08.008 · DOI
  46. Van der Meulen, 2011, The use of economic valuation to create public support for green infrastructure investments in urban areas, Landsc. Urban Plan., 103, 198, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.07.010 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 84

Metadata

Authors
Bardos, R. P., Jones, S., Stephenson, I., Menger, P., Beumer, V., Neonato, F., Maring, L., Ferber, U., Track, T., & Wendler, K.
Affiliations
  • University of Reading (GB)
  • Euskadiko Parke Teknologikoa (ES)
  • Deltares (NL)
  • Society for Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology (DE)
ORCID
Venue
Science of The Total Environment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-09
Volume
563-564
Pages
769-782
ISSN
0048-9697 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.12.002
OpenAlex
W2202784791
Cited by
84
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5
FWCI
18.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • The Science of The Total Environment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Brighton Repository (University of Brighton) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • TECNALIA Publications (Fundación TECNALIA Research & Innovation) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
Funders
European Community (265097)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Geography, Planning and Development › Urban Planning and Valuation
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Environmental Justice and Health Disparities
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic and Environmental Valuation
Keywords
brownfields, brownfield restoration, ecosystem services valuation, public green spaces, land reuse

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review