A hedonic analysis of the demand for and benefits of urban recreation parks

Land Use Policy

Volumn 26, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 975-983

  Poudyal, Neelam C ^a   Hodges, Donald G ^a   Merrett, Christopher D ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE   (United States)

^b WESTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Demand; Hedonic model; Open space; Urban recreation parks

Indexed keywords

CLUSTER ANALYSIS; DEMAND ANALYSIS; HEDONIC ANALYSIS; LAND USE PLANNING; NUMERICAL MODEL; OPEN SPACE; PARK MANAGEMENT; URBAN AREA; URBAN PLANNING;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 64049111994     PISSN: 02648377     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.11.008     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Acharya G., and Bennett L.L. Valuing open space and land-use patterns in urban watersheds. Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics 22 (2001) 221-237
2. Allen M.T., Springer T.M., and Waller N.G. Implicit pricing across residential rental submarkets. Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics 11 (1995) 137-151
3. Anderson S.T., and West S.E. Open space, residential property values, and spatial context. Regional Science and Urban Economics 36 (2006) 773-789
4. Bolitzer B., and Netusil N.R. The impact of open spaces on property values in Portland, Oregon. Journal of Environmental Management 59 (2000) 185-193
5. Bourassa S.C., Hamelink F., Hoesli M., and MacGregir B.D. Defining housing submarkets. Journal of Housing Economics 8 (1999) 160-183
6. Bourassa S.C., Hoesli M., and Peng V.S. Do housing submarkets really matter?. Journal of Housing Economics 12 (2003) 12-28
7. Boyle K.J., Poor P.J., and Taylor L.O. Estimating the demand for protecting freshwater lakes from eutrophication. American Journal of Agriculture Economics 81 (1999) 1118-1122
8. Brasington D.M., and Hite D. Demand for environmental quality: a spatial hedonic analysis. Regional Science and Urban Economics 35 (2005) 57-82
9. Breffle W.S., Morey E.R., and Lodder T.S. Using contingent valuation to estimate a neighborhood's willingness to pay to preserve undeveloped land. Urban Studies 35 4 (1998) 715-727
10. Chattopadhaya S. Estimating the demand for air quality: new evidence based on the Chicago housing market. Land Economics 75 1 (1999) 22-38
11. Cho S., Poudyal N.C., and Lambert D. Estimating spatially varying effects of urban growth boundaries on land development and land value. Land Use Policy 25 (2008) 320-329
12. Chen Z., Cho S., Poudyal N.C., and Roberts R.K. Forecasting housing prices under different market segmentation assumptions. Urban Studies 46 1 (2009) 167-187
13. Clark D.E., and Cosgrove J.C. Hedonic prices, identification, and the demand for public safety. Journal of Regional Science 30 1 (1990) 105-121
14. Clark, J., Kruidenier, W., Wolf, J., 2007. A national research plan for urban forestry 2005-2015. National Urban and Community Forestry Advisory Council. USDA Forest Service.
15. Day, B., 2003. Submarket identification in property markets: a hedonic housing price model for Glasgow. Working Paper. The Center for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment, School of Environmental Science, University of East Anglia, UK.
16. Day B., Bateman I., and Lake I. Beyond implicit prices: recovering theoretically consistent and transferable values for noise avoidance from a hedonic property price model. Environmental and Resource Economics 37 (2007) 211-232
17. Ekeland I., Heckman J.J., and Nesheim L. Identifying hedonic models. The American Economics Review 92 2 (2002) 304-309
18. Ekeland I., Heckman J.J., and Nesheim L. Identification and estimation of hedonic models. The Journal of Political Economy 112 (2004) 60-109
19. Freeman, A.M., 1993. The measurement of environmental and resource values, theory and methods. Resources for the Future, Washington DC.
20. Geoghegan J. The value of open spaces in residential land use. Land Use Policy 19 (2002) 91-98
21. Goldman R.L., Thompson B.H., and Daily G.C. Institutional incentives for managing the landscape: inducing cooperation for the production of ecosystem services. Ecological Economics 64 (2007) 333-343
22. Goodman A.C., and Thibodeau T.G. Housing market segmentation. Journal of Housing Economics 7 (1998) 121-143
23. Green S.B., and Salkind N.J. Using SPSS for Windows and Macintosh: Analyzing and Understanding Data. third ed. (2003), Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey
24. Greene W.H. Econometric Analysis. fifth ed. (2003), Pearson Education Inc.
25. Grisby W., Baratz M., Galster G., and Maclennan D. The dynamics of neighborhood change and decline. Progress in Planning 28 1 (1987) 1-76
26. Hobden D.W., Laughton G.E., and Morgan K.E. Green space borders-a tangible benefit? Evidence from four neighborhoods in Surrey, British Columbia, 1980-2001. Land Use Policy 21 (2004) 129-138
27. Kline J.D. Public demand for preserving local open space. Society and Natural Resources 19 (2006) 645-659
28. Kristrom B., and Riera P. Is the income elasticity of environmental improvements less than one?. Environmental and Resource Economics 7 (1996) 45-55
29. Lipscomb, C.A., 2003. Resolving the aggregation problem that plagues the hedonic pricing method. Ph.D. Dissertation. Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia (Chapter 1).
30. Lipscomb C.A. An alternative spatial hedonic estimation approach. Journal of Housing Research 15 2 (2006) 143-160
31. Lipscomb C.A., and Farmer M.C. Household diversity and market segmentation within a single neighborhood. Annals of Regional Science 39 (2005) 791-810
32. Lutzenhiser M., and Netusil N.R. The effect of open spaces on a home's sale price. Contemporary Economics Policy 19 3 (2001) 291-298
33. MacDonald D.N., White H.L., Taube P.M., and Huth W.L. Flood hazard pricing and insurance premium differentials: evidence from the housing market. The Journal of Risk and Insurance 57 (1990) 654-663
34. Mahan B.L., Polasky S., and Adams R.M. Valuing urban wetlands: a property price approach. Land Economics 76 1 (2000) 100-113
35. Mansfield C., Pattanayak S.K., McDow W., McDonald R., and Halpin O. Shades of green: measuring the value of urban forests in the housing market. Journal of Forest Economics 11 3 (2005) 177-199
36. McConnell, V., Walls, M., 2005. The value of open space: evidence from studies of non-market benefits. Resources for the Future, January 2005. Washington, DC.
37. McGarigal K., Cushman S., and Stafford S. Multivariate Statistics for Wildlife and Ecology Research (2000), Springer Verlag, New York
38. McPherson E.G. Urban forestry in North America. Renewable Resources Journal 2006 Autumn (2006) 8-12
39. Metropolitan Design Center. Designing Small Urban Parks: A Manual for Addressing Social and Ecological Concerns (2004), Metropolitan Design Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
40. Moore D.S., and McCabe G.P. Introduction to the Practice of Statistics. fourth ed. (2003), W.H. Freeman and Co., New York
41. Morancho A.B. A hedonic valuation of urban green areas. Landscape and Urban Planning 66 (2003) 35-41
42. Nowak, D.G., McPherson, E.G., 1993. Quantifying the impact of trees: the Chicago urban forest climate project. Unasylva: Journal of Urban and Peri-Urban Forestry 173. Online URL: http://www.fao.org/docrep/u9300e/u9300e08.htm.
43. OFHEO, 2006. Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight. Online URL: http://www.ofheo.gov.
44. Paez A., Long F., and Farber S. Moving window approaches for hedonic price estimation: an empirical comparison of modeling techniques. Urban Studies 45 8 (2008) 1565-1581
45. Palmquist R.B. Estimating the demand for the characteristics of housing. The Review of Economics and Statistics 66 3 (1984) 394-404
46. Palmquist, R.B., 2005. Property value models. In: Maler, K., Vincent, J. (Eds.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, vol. 2. North Holland.
47. PLC, 2004. Partnership for Livable Communities. Online URL: www.mostlivable.org.
48. Rosen S. Hedonic prices and implicit prices: product differentiation in pure competition. The Journal of Political Economy 82 1 (1974) 34-35
49. Salazar S.S., and Menendez L.G. Estimating the non-market benefits of urban park: does proximity matter?. Land Use Policy 24 (2007) 296-305
50. Schnare A., and Struyk R. Segmentation in urban housing markets. Journal of Urban Economics 3 (1976) 146-166
51. Strong N.A., and Jacobson M.G. Assessing agro-forestry adoption potential utilizing market segmentation: a case study in Pennsylvania. Small Scale Forest Economics, Management and Policy 4 2 (2005) 215-228
52. Tajima K. New estimates of the demand for urban green space: implications for valuing the environmental benefits of Boston's Big dig project. Journal of Urban Affairs 25 5 (2003) 641-655
53. Taylor L. In: Champ P., Boyle K., and Brown T. (Eds). The Hedonic Method in A primer on Non-Market Valuation (2003), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA
54. Thorsnes P. The value of a suburban forest preserves: estimates from sales of vacant residential building lots. Land Economics 78 3 (2002) 426-441
55. Trust for Public Land, 2005. LandVote 2004. Online URL: http://www.lta.org/publicpolicy/landvote_2004.pdf.
56. Tyrvainen L., and Miettinen A. Property prices and urban forest amenities. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 39 (2000) 205-223
57. Tyrvainen L. The amenity value of the urban forest: an application of the hedonic pricing method. Landscape and Urban Planning 37 (1997) 211-222
58. US Census, 2000. US Census Bureau report. Washington, DC. Online URL: www.census.gov.
59. White H. A heteroscedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroscedasticity. Econometrica 48 4 (1980) 847-938