Evidence of the effects of water quality on residential land prices

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management

Volumn 39, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 121-144

  Leggett, Christopher G ^a   Bockstael, Nancy E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

Hedonic models; Residential land prices; Water quality

Indexed keywords

HEDONIC ANALYSIS; LAND MARKET; PRICE DETERMINATION; PROPERTY MARKET; WATER QUALITY;

CHESAPEAKE BAY; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0034025578     PISSN: 00950696     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/jeem.1999.1096     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Anselin L. Spatial Econometrics: Methods and Models. 1988;Kluwer Academic Press, Dordrecht.
2. Bartik T. Measuring the benefits of amenity improvements in hedonic price models. Land Econom. 64:1988;172-183.
3. K. Bell, and, N. Bockstael, Applying the generalized moments estimation approach to spatial problems involving micro-level data, Rev. Econom. Statist, forthcoming.
4. Bockstael N. E., Bell K. Land use patterns and water quality: the effect of differential land management controls. Just R., Netanyahu S. International Water and Resource Economics Consortium, Conflict and Cooperation on Trans-Boundary Water Resources. 1997;Kluwer, Boston.
5. E. Brashares, Estimating the instream value of lake water quality in Southeast Michigan, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1985.
6. Burridge P. On the Cliff-Ord test for spatial autocorrelation. J. Royal Statist. Soc. B. 42:1980;107-108.
7. Can A. C. Specification and estimation of hedonic housing price models. Regional Sci. Urban Econom. 22:1992;453-474.
8. Cassel E., Mendelsohn R. The choice of functional forms for hedonic price equations: comment. J. Urban Econom. 18:1985;135-142.
9. State of the Chesapeake Bay. 1995;Chesapeake Bay Program, Annapolis.
10. Toxics Reduction Strategy Reevaluation. 1993;Chesapeake Bay Program, Annapolis.
11. Cliff A., Ord J. K. Spatial Autocorrelation. 1973;Pion, London.
12. Cropper M. L., Deck L. B., McConnell K. E. On the choice of functional form for hedonic price functions. Rev. Econom. Statist. 70:1988;668-675.
13. David E. L. Lakeshore property values: a guide to public investment in recreation. Water Resources Research. 4:1968;697-707.
14. Diamond D. B. The relationship between amenities and urban land prices. Land Econom. 56:1980;21-32.
15. Dubin R. A. Spatial autocorrelation and neighborhood quality. Regional Sci. Urban Econom. 22:1992;433-452.
16. Epp D., Al-Ani K. S. The effect of water quality on rural non-farm residential property values. Amer. J. Agric. Econom. 61:1979;529-534.
17. Feenberg D., Mills E. Measuring the Benefits of Water Pollution Abatement. 1980;Academic, New York.
18. Feitelson E. Consumer preferences and willingness-to-pay for water-related residences in non-urban settings: a vignette analysis. Regional Studies. 26:1992;49-68.
19. Harrison D., Rubinfeld D. L. The air pollution and property value debate: some empirical evidence. Rev. Econom. Statist. 6:1978;635-638.
20. E. Irwin, Do spatial externalities matter? The role of endogenous interactions in the evolution of land use pattern, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Maryland, 1998.
21. Jackson J. R. Intra-urban variation in the price of housing. J. Urban Econom. 6:1979;464-479.
22. Kelejian H., Robinson D. Spatial autocorrelation: a new computationally simple test with an application to per capita county police expenditures. Regional Sci. Urban Econom. 22:1992;317-331.
23. Li M., Brown J. H. Micro-neighborhood externalities and hedonic housing prices. Land Econom. 56:1980;125-140.
24. Maryland Office of Planning, Maryland Property View CDs, Annapolis, MD, 1996-1998.
25. Mendelsohn R., Hellerstein D., Huguenin M., Unsworth R., Brazee R. Measuring hazardous waste damages with panel models. J. Environ. Econom. Management. 22:1992;259-271.
26. Moran P. The interpretation of statistical maps. J. Roy. Statist. Soc. B. 10:1948;243-251.
27. Palmquist R. B. Hedonic methods. Braden J., Kolstad C. Environmental Benefit Measurement. 1991;North-Holland, Amsterdam.
28. Palmquist R. B. Valuing localized externalities. J. Urban Econom. 31:1992;59-68.
29. Palmquist R. B., Roka F., Vukina T. Hog operations, environmental effects, and residential property values. Land Econom. 73:1997;114-124.
30. Polinsky A. M., Shavell S. Amenities and property values in a model of an urban area. J. Public Econom. 5:1976;119-129.
31. Rosen S. Hedonic prices and implicit markets: product differentiation in pure competition. J. Pol. Econom. 82:1974;34-55.
32. Small K. A. Air pollution and property values: further comment. Rev. Econom. Statist. 57:1974;105-107.
33. Smith V. K., Huang J.-C. Hedonic models and air pollution: twenty-five years and counting. Environ. Res. Econom. 3:1993;381-394.
34. Smith V. K., Huang J.-C. Can markets value air quality? A meta-analysis of hedonic property value models. J. Polit. Econom. 103:1995;209-227.
35. Steinnes D. Measuring the economic value of water quality. Ann. Regional Sci. 26:1992;171-176.
36. Water quality criteria and standards plan: priorities for the future. 1998;U.S. EPA, Washington.
37. Vogan C. R. Pollution abatement and control expenditures, 1972-94. Survey Current Business. 76:1996;48-67.
38. Waugh F. V. Quality factors influencing vegetable prices. J. Farm Econom. 10:1928;185-196.
39. Whittle P. On stationary processes in the plane. Biometrica. 41:1954;434-449.