A Double-Hurdle model of urban green areas valuation: Dealing with zero responses

Landscape and Urban Planning

Volumn 84, Issue 3-4, 2008, Pages 241-251

  Saz Salazar, Salvador del ^a   Rausell Köster, Pau ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VALENCIA   (Spain)

^b Polibienestar Research Institute   (Spain)

Author keywords

Contingent valuation; Decision making; Double Hurdle model; Urban green areas

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; LAND USE; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; SOCIAL ASPECTS;

CONTINGENT VALUATION; DOUBLE HURDLE MODELS; ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES; RESPONDENT'S INCOME; URBAN GREEN AREAS;

URBAN PLANNING;

CONTINGENT VALUATION; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; GREENBELT; HOUSEHOLD SURVEY; MODELING; OPEN SPACE; PUBLIC SPACE; SOCIAL SECURITY; URBAN AREA; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

COMUNIDAD VALENCIA; EURASIA; EUROPE; SOUTHERN EUROPE; SPAIN;

EID: 38849086679     PISSN: 01692046     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.08.008     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Almansa Sáez C., and Calatrava Requena J. Reconciling sustainability and discounting in cost benefit analysis: a methodological proposal. Ecol. Econ. 60 (2007) 712-725
2. Alvarez-Farizo B., Hanley N., Wright R.E., and MacMillan D. Estimating the benefits of agri-environmental policy: econometric issues in open ended contingent valuation studies. J. Environ. Plan. Manage. 42 (1999) 23-43
3. Arrow K., Solow R., Portney P.P., Leamer E.E., Radner R., and Schuman H. Report of the national oceanic and atmospheric administration panel on contingent valuation. Fed. Register 58 (1993) 4602-4614
4. Barreiro J., Sánchez M., and Viladrich-Grau M. How much are pople willing to pay for silence? A contingent valuation study. Appl. Econ. 37 (2005) 1233-1246
5. Bateman I.J., Cole M.A., Georgiu S., and Hadley D.J. Comparing contingent valuation and contingent ranking: a case study considering the benefits of urban river quality improvements. J. Environ. Manage. 79 (2006) 221-231
6. Bateman I.J., Lovett A.A., and Brainard J.S. Applied Environmental Economics: A GIS Approach to Cost-Benefit Analysis (2003), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
7. Bengochea A. A hedonic valuation of urban green areas. Land. Urban Plan. 66 (2003) 35-41
8. Berrens R.P. Reluctant respondents and contingent valuation surveys. Appl. Econ. Lett. 7 (2000) 263-266
9. Bishop R.C., Champ P.A., and Mullarkey D.J. Contingent valuation. In: Bromley D.W. (Ed). The Handbook of Environmental Economics (1995), Blacwell, Cambridge 626-654
10. Bolitzer B., and Netusil N.R. The impact of open spaces on property values in Portland, Oregon. J. Environ. Manage. 59 (2000) 185-193
11. Breffel W.S., Morey E.R., and Lodder T.S. Using contingent valuation to estimate a neighbourhood's willingness to pay to preserve undeveloped urban land. Urban Stud. 35 (1998) 715-727
12. Carson R.T. Constructed markets. In: Braden J.B., and Kolstad C.D. (Eds). Measuring the Demand for Environmental Quality (1991), North Holland, Amsterdam
13. Carson R.T. Valuation of tropical rainforest: philosophical and practical issues in the use of contingent valuation. Ecol. Econ. 24 (1998) 15-29
14. Carson R.T. Contingent valuation: a user's guide. Environ. Sci. Technol. 34 (2000) 1413-1418
15. Chiesura A. The role of urban parks for the sustainable city. Land. Urban Plan. 68 (2004) 129-138
16. Cragg J. Some statistical models for limited dependent variables with application to the demand for durable goods. Econometrica 39 (1971) 829-844
17. Damigos D., and Kaliampakos D. Assesing the benefits of reclaiming urban quarries: ACVM analysis. Land. Urban Plan. 64 (2003) 249-258
18. Diamond P.A. Testing the internal consistency of contingent valuation surveys. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 30 (1996) 337-347
19. Diamond P.A., and Hausman J.A. On contingent valuation measurement of nonuse values. In: Hausman J.A. (Ed). Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment (1993), North-Holland, Amsterdam 3-38
20. Diamond P.A., and Hausman J.A. Contingent valuation: is some number better than no number?. J. Econ. Perspect. 8 (1994) 45-64
21. Din A., Hoesli M., and Bender A. Environmental variables and real state prices. Urban Stud. 38 (2001) 1989-2000
22. Freeman A.M. The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values: Theory and Methods (1993), Resources for the Future, Washington DC
23. Geoghegan J. The value of open spaces in residential land use. Land Use Policy 19 (2002) 91-98
24. Goodwin B.K., Offenbach L., Cable T.T., and Cook P.S. Discrete/continuous contingent valuation of private hunting access in Kansas. J. Environ. Manage. 39 (1993) 1-12
25. Halstead J.M., Lindsay B.E., and Brown C.M. Use of the Tobit model in contingent valuation: experimental evidence from the Pemigewasset Wilderness Area. J. Environ. Manage. 33 (1991) 78-89
26. In: Hausman J. (Ed). Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment (1993), North-Holland, Amsterdam
27. Hobden D.W., Laughton G.E., and Morgan K.E. Green space borders-a tangible benefit? Evidence from four neighbourhoods in Surrey, British Columbia, 1980-2001. Land Use Policy 21 (2004) 129-138
28. Jim C.Y., and Chen W.Y. Impacts of urban environmental elements on residential housing prices in Guangzhou (China). Land. Urban Plan. 78 (2006) 422-434
29. Jim C.Y., and Chen W.Y. Recreation-amenity use and contingent valuation of urban greenspaces in Guangzhou, China. Land. Urban Plan. 75 (2006) 81-96
30. Johansson P.-O. Cost-Benefit Analysis of Environmental Change (1993), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
31. Johnson B.K., and Whitehead J.C. Value of public goods from sports stadiums: the CVM approach. Contemp. Econ. Policy 18 (2000) 48-58
32. Kriström B. Spike models in contingent valuation. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 79 (1997) 1013-1023
33. Loomis J., Rameker V., and Seidl A. A hedonic model of public market transactions for open space protection. J. Environ. Plan. Manage. 47 (2004) 83-96
34. Luttik J. The value of trees, water and open space reflected by house prices in the Netherlands. Land. Urban Plan. 48 (2000) 161-167
35. Maddala G.S. Limited Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics (1983), Cambridge University Press, New York
36. Mansfield C., Pattanayak S.K., McDow W., McDonald R., and Halpin P. Shades of green: measuring the value of urban forests in the housing market. J. For. Econ. 11 (2005) 177-199
37. Martínez-Espiñeira R. A Box-Cox Double-Hurdle model of wildlife valuation: The citizen's perspective. Ecol. Econ. 58 (2006) 192-208
38. Mitchell R.C., and Carson R.T. Using Surveys to value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method (1989), Resources for the Future, Washington DC
39. Mitchell R.C., and Carson R.T. Current issues in the design, administration, and analysis of contingent valuation survey. In: Johansson P.O., Kriström B., and Mäller K.G. (Eds). Current Issues in Environmental Economics (1995), Manchester University Press
40. Palmquist R.D. Valuing localised externalities. J. Urban Econ. 31 (1992) 59-68
41. Piper S., and Martin W.E. Evaluating the accuracy of the benefit transfer method: a rural water supply application in the USA. J. Environ. Manage. 63 (2001) 223-235
42. Powe N.A., Garrod G.D., and Willis K.G. Valuation of urban amenities using a hedonic price model. J. Property Res. 12 (1995) 137-147
43. Rosen S. Hedonic prices and implicit markets: product differentiation in pure competition. J. Polit. Econ. 82 (1974) 34-55
44. Saz S.D., and García-Menéndez L. Estimating the non-market benefits of an urban park: does proximity matter?. Land Use Policy 24 (2007) 296-305
45. Saz S.D., and García-Menéndez L. The nonmarket benefits of redeveloping dockland areas for recreational purposes: the case of Castellón, Spain. Environ. Plan. A 35 (2003) 2115-2129
46. Sherer P.M. The Benefits of Urban Parks. Why America Needs More City Parks and Open Space (2006), The Trust for Public Land, San Francisco
47. Smith V.K. Fifty years of contingent valuation. In: Alberini A., and Khan J.R. (Eds). Handbook on Contingent Valuation (2006), Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK 7-65
48. Stumborg B.E., Baerenklau K.A., and Bishop R.C. Nonpoint source pollution and present values: a contingent valuation study of Lake Mendota. Rev. Agric. Econ. 23 (2001) 120-132
49. Tajima K. New estimates of the demand for urban green space: implications for valuing the environmental benefits of Boston's big dig project. J. Urban Affairs 25 (2003) 641-655
50. Tobin J. Estimation of relationships for limits dependent variables. Econometrica 26 (1958) 24-36
51. Tyrväinen L. The amenity value of the urban forest: an application of the hedonic pricing method. Land. Urban Plan. 37 (1997) 211-222
52. Tyrväinen L., Mäkinen K., and Schipperijn J. Tools for mapping social values of urban woodlands and other green areas. Land. Urban Plan. 79 (2007) 5-19
53. Tyrväinen L., and Meittinen A. Property prices and urban forest amenities. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 39 (2000) 205-233
54. Tyrväinen L., and Väänänen H. The economic value of urban forest amenities: and application of the contingent valuation method. Land. Urban Plan. 43 (1998) 105-118
55. UNFPA, 2005. State of World Population 2005. United Nations Population Fund.
56. 2's in the ordinal probit model. J. Math. Soc. 16 (1992) 333-342
57. Walker C. The Public Value of Urban Parks (2004), The Urban Institute, Washington
58. Weitzman M.L. Why the far-distant future should be discounted at its lowest possible rate. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 36 (1998) 201-208
59. Weitzman M.L. Gamma discounting. Am. Econ. Rev. 91 (2001) 260-271
60. Whitehead J.C. A practitioner's primer on the contingent valuation method. In: Alberini A., and Khan J.R. (Eds). Handbook on Contingent Valuation (2006), Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK 66-91
61. Whitehead J.C., Hoban T.J., and Clifford W.B. Measurement issues with iterated, continuous/interval contingent valuation data. J. Environ. Manage. 43 (1995) 129-139
62. Willis K.G. Pricing public parks. J. Environ. Plan. Manage. 46 (2003) 3-17
63. Wilson E.O. Biophilia and the conservation ethic. In: Keller S.R., and Wilson E.O. (Eds). The Biophilia Hypothesis (1993), Island Press, Washington, DC
64. Yoo S.-H., Kwak S.-J., and Kim T.-Y. Dealing with zero response data in contingent valuation surveys: application of least absolute deviations estimator. Appl. Econ. Lett. 7 (2000) 181-184