A Study on Co-benefits of Detention Park from Environmental Impacts Perspective

• Main Authors: Yi_HsuanLin, 林逸璇
• Other Authors: Hsueh-Sheng Chang
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2016
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/6dtjp7

碩士 === 國立成功大學 === 都市計劃學系 === 104 === In recent years, intergraded flood control method such as using green infrastructure like detention park to mitigate flood damages has been proposed. However, the main emphasis of flood mitigation policies evaluation usually focused on financial analysis, which caused to underestimate or neglect environmental benefits of flood mitigation policies. Besides, detention park always leads to greatly land use change, which might impact landscape ecological structure, but there’s no discussion about this in flood mitigation policies evaluation. Therefore, the concept of “co-benefits” was embedded into this study which was proposed by IPCC AR4 for adaptation and mitigation strategies of climate change, considering environmental externality of detention park and tried to establish detention park co-benefits evaluation framework. This study divided the co-benefits of detention park into two parts - could be monetized and non-monetized to illustrate its environmental value and effects on landscape ecological structure to comprehensively consider the benefits arose from detention park. Via literature review, this study found that the co-benefits of detention park including carbon storage, water purification, micro-climate regulation, ground water recharge, irrigation water supplement, recreation and biodiversity maintenance. For co-benefits that could be monetized, this study evaluated the economic value performed by InVEST model, and for co-benefits that couldn’t be monetized, this study computed landscape ecological structure of detention park by FRAGSTATS. Moreover, through the comparison between traditional flood control engineering and detention park, while detention park needed much money to build, it had positive impact on environment and its value was higher than traditional flood control engineering.