Blue-green infrastructure (BGI) options are considered to be more sustainable practices for water management and bring arange of benefits over and above water management. Davidshall in Malmö, Sweden, has been used as a case area toassess the multiple benefits of implementing BGI, considering seven alternative BGI schemes systematically developed alongtwo scales: naturalness (i.e. more/less engineered/complex) and spatial distribution (e.g. decentral vs. end-of-pipe). The baseline alternative was the existing situation. The Benefit Estimation Tool (B£ST) was used to carry out a socio-economicassessment. The overall benefits varied significantly (two orders of magnitude), depending on the BGI scheme implemented:the greatest values were associated with natural decentral, natural decentral/end-of-pipe, and engineered decentral/endof-pipe alternatives, those including sub-surface and open dry detention, stormwater tree pits, and rain gardens. The threeB£ST categories providing the greatest benefits were enhancing amenity, benefiting health, and reducing flooding. Cultural ecosystem services were provided by all alternatives, and two alternatives (natural decentral and natural decentral/end-of-pipe)also provided regulating ecosystem services. The study showed that amenity and health were the most significant benefitsof BGI implementation, contrasting with the main aim of BGI implementation, which was stormwater management (water quality and flood protection).