Do sorting and heterogeneity matter for open space policy analysis? An empirical comparison of hedonic and sorting models

American Journal of Agricultural Economics

Volumn 91, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 1312-1318

  Allen Klaiber, H ^a   Phaneuf, Daniel J ^b  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATABASE; HEDONIC ANALYSIS; HETEROGENEITY; LAND USE; METROPOLITAN AREA; MODEL; OPEN SPACE; POLICY ANALYSIS; WELFARE PROVISION; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

MINNEAPOLIS; MINNESOTA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 74549210301     PISSN: 00029092     EISSN: 14678276     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8276.2009.01303.x     Document Type: Article

References (8)

1. Bayer, P., and C. Timmins. 2007. "Estimating Equilibrium Models of Sorting Across Locations." The Economic Journal 117:353-374
2. --. 2005. "The Equilibrium Properties of Locational Sorting Models." Journal of Urban Economics 57:462-477
3. Irwin, E.G. "The Effects of 2002: Open Space on Residential Property Values." Land Economics 78:465-480
4. Klaiber, H.A. 2008. "Valuing Open Space in a Locational Equilibrium Model of the Twin Cities." Ph.D. dissertation, North Carolina State University.
5. Klaiber, H.A., and D.J. Phaneuf. 2008. "Valuing Open Space in a Residential Sorting Model of the Twin Cities." Working paper, Dept. of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Pennsylvania State University.
6. McConnell, V.D., and H.A.Walls. 2004. "The Value of Open Space: Evidence from Studies of Nonmarket Benefits." Working paper, Lincoln Institute for Land Policy, Boston, MA.
7. Palmquist, R. 2005. "Property Value Models." In K. Mäler and J. Vincent, eds. Handbook of Environmental Economics Vol. 2. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 763-819.
8. Smith,V. K., C. Poulos, and H. Kim. 2002. "Treating Open Space as an Urban Amenity." Resource and Energy Economics 24:107-129