Cited by 72Urban Stormwater Management SolutionsUrban Heat Island MitigationLand Use and Ecosystem Services

Environmental Reviews and Case Studies: Building Green Infrastructure via Citizen Participation: A Six-Year Study in the Shepherd Creek (Ohio)

Mayer, Audrey L., Shuster, William D., Beaulieu, Jake J., Hopton, Matthew E., Rhea, Lee K., Roy, Allison H., Thurston, Hale W.·2012·Environmental Practice

Abstract

Green infrastructure at the parcel scale provides critical ecosystem goods and services when these services (such as flood mitigation) must be provided locally. Here we report on an approach that encourages suburban landowners to mitigate impervious surfaces on their properties through a voluntary auction mechanism. We used an economic incentive to place rain gardens and rain barrels onto parcels in a 1.8-km2 watershed near Cincinnati, Ohio. A comprehensive hydrologic, water-quality, and ecological monitoring campaign documented environmental conditions before and after treatment. In 2007 and 2008, we engaged private landowners through a reverse auction to encourage placement of one rain garden and up to four rain barrels on their property. The program led to the installation of 83 rain gardens and 176 rain barrels onto more than 20% of the properties, and preliminary analyses indicate that the overall discharge regime was altered by the treatments. The length of the study (six years) may have precluded observation of treatment effects on water quality and aquatic biological communities, as we would expect these conditions to respond more slowly to management changes. These distributed storm-water installations contributed to ecosystem services such as flood protection, water supply, and water infiltration; provided benefits to the local residents; and reduced the need for larger, expensive, centralized retrofits (such as deep tunnel storage).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1466046611000494

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • The Shepherd Creek Project in Cincinnati, Ohio, used a reverse auction system to install 83 rain gardens and 176 rain barrels within a single watershed.

    “The Shepherd Creek Project in Cincinnati, Ohio, used a reverse auction system to install 83 rain gardens and 176 rain barrels within a single watershed (Mayer et al. 2012).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mayer, A. L., Shuster, W. D., Beaulieu, J. J., Hopton, M. E., Rhea, L. K., Roy, A. H., & Thurston, H. W.
Affiliations
  • Michigan Technological University (US)
  • Environmental Protection Agency (US)
  • United States Geological Survey (US)
Corresponding author
Mayer, Audrey L.
Venue
Environmental Practice
Published
2012-03
Volume
14
Issue
1
Pages
57-67
ISSN
  • 1466-0466 (ISSN-L)
  • 1466-0474
OpenAlex
W2105083641
Cited by
72
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 12 · 2012: 2
FWCI
5.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Environmental Practice (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Commons - Michigan Tech (Michigan Technological University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Urban Stormwater Management Solutions
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Urban Heat Island Mitigation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
Keywords
green infrastructure, rain gardens, rain barrels, reverse auctions, citizen participation, stormwater management, flood control, ecosystem services, watershed management, water infiltration, water supply

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