Triple-bottom line evaluation of GreenShores projects

The Problem We Aimed to Solve

Interest in nature-based solutions (NbS) that address development pressures on coastal ecosystems and climate change is growing in Canada. Relative to built coastal protection, nature-based coastal protection offers a flow of co-benefits (e.g., water quality improvements and recreational use), the potential for self-recovery or repair after storms, and an ability to keep pace with sea-level rise. However, compared to the decades of implementation experience with engineered protective structures, applications of natural solutions remain limited on Canada’s shorelines. Data on the performance and cost-benefit ratio of these projects (relative to conventional built approaches) are scarce, there is still a relatively small pool of applicable expertise among coastal development professionals and regulatory barriers present challenges to widespread adoption.

How We Helped

We used two approaches to understand the impact and value of the Green Shores program in BC: social impact analysis and triple bottom line evaluation. Literature review and qualitative research with 13 stakeholders, including representatives from local governments, shoreline professionals and funders, informed a “theory of change” for Green Shores in BC that lays out the hypothesis for achieving social impact, using a framework that links activities and inputs to outputs, outcomes and impacts. To understand the benefits to society the Green Shores approach provides, we developed a methodology grounded in the valuation of ecosystem goods and services and applied it to three Green Shores for Shoreline Development (GSSD) case study sites: New Brighton Park, Jericho Beach Park and Riverbend Business Park. We monetized these case study sites’ improvements in generating habitat services, cultural services (mainly recreation) and regulatory services (nutrient cycling, waste processing, carbon storage and flood protection) and assessed the wider impacts of Green Shores program expenditures on BC’s economy.

Our Project’s Impacts

Our triple bottom line analysis (a form of extended cost-benefit analysis) supports the merits of investing in Green Shores. The net annualized benefits (NAB) of the program are about $6.1 million (2018 dollars), with improved provision of habitat services and cultural services accounting for over 90% these benefits. The corresponding benefit-cost ratio (BCR) is about 7.1. Both indicators suggest investments by the GSSD program represent an economically efficient use of scarce resources. Over the three restoration and development projects, social welfare was increased by about $7.10 for each $1 invested by the Green Shores program. Even allowing for errors in our valuation as high as +172% across all ecosystem service benefits, social welfare would still be increased by about $2.60 for each $1 invested by the program. Our supplementary economic impact assessment suggests investments (excluding annual recurring costs) as part of the Green Shores program have contributed $5.9-6.9 million to provincial gross domestic product (GDP), generating $0.5-0.7 million in tax revenues and supporting roughly 80 jobs. These values represent upper bound estimates of potential impacts on the economy, since they do not account for the opportunity costs of alternative uses of program funds.

We also highlight strategies to address challenges with Green Shores uptake in BC and support smart scaling of the program into Atlantic Canada. Our findings and the analytical tools we developed will help the Stewardship Centre for BC focus future outreach, advocacy and research in their pursuit of promoting healthy shorelines and habitats in BC and beyond.