The value of water-related amenities in an arid city: The case of the Phoenix metropolitan area

Landscape and Urban Planning

Volumn 109, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 45-55

  Larson, E K ^a,b,c   Perrings, C ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^b ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c NASA HEADQUARTERS   (United States)

Author keywords

GIS; Hedonic model; Phoenix; Urban ecology; Water

Indexed keywords

CLIMATE CHANGE; ECOSYSTEMS; GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS; GOLF; LAKES; VEGETATION; WATER;

HEDONIC MODEL; LONG-TERM ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH; METROPOLITAN REGIONS; PHOENIX; PHOENIX METROPOLITAN; SPATIALLY EXPLICIT; URBAN ECOLOGY; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

CLIMATE MODELS;

ARID REGION; CLIMATE CHANGE; GIS; GOLF COURSE; HEDONIC ANALYSIS; METROPOLITAN AREA; PARK DESIGN; URBAN PLANNING; URBAN POPULATION; VALUATION; VEGETATION COVER; WATER PLANNING; WATER RESOURCE; WATER USE;

ARIZONA; PHOENIX; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84870348709     PISSN: 01692046     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.10.008     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Anderson S.T., West S.E. Open space, residential property values, and spatial context. Regional Science and Urban Economics 2006, 36:773-789.
2. ADWR (Arizona Department of Water Resources). (1999). Third management plan: 2000-2010 Phoenix active management area.
3. Andersson E. Urban landscapes and sustainable cities. Ecology and Society 2006, 11:34.
4. Andersson E., Barthel S., Ahrne K. Measuring social-ecological dynamics behind the generation of ecosystem services. Ecological Applications 2007, 17:1267-1278.
5. Anselin L. Spatial effects in econometric practice in environmental and resource economics. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 2001, 83:705-710. Retrieved March 19, 2012.
6. Anselin L., Syabri I., Kho Y. GeoDa: An introduction to spatial data analysis. Geographical Analysis 2005, 38:5-22. 10.1111/j.0016-7363.2005.00671.x.
7. Archibold R. Western states agree to water-sharing pact 2007, December, The New York Times, New York, NY.
8. Baker L.A., Brazel A.J., Selover N., Martin C., McIntyre N., Steiner F.R., et al. Urbanization and warming of Phoenix (Arizona USA): Impacts, feedbacks and mitigation. Urban Ecosystems 2002, 6:183-203.
9. Bateman I.J., Cole M.A., Georgiou S., Hadley D.J. Comparing contingent valuation and contingent ranking: A case study considering the benefits of urban river water quality improvements. Journal of Environmental Management 2006, 79:221-231.
10. Bolund P., Hunhammar S. Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecological Economics 1999, 29:293-301.
11. Brander L.M., Koetse M.J. The value of urban open space: Meta-analyses of contingent valuation and hedonic pricing results. Journal of Environmental Management 2011, 92:2763-2773. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.06.019.
12. Buyantuyev A., Wu J., Gries C. Estimating vegetation cover in an urban environment based on Landsat ETM+ imagery: A case study in Phoenix, USA. International Journal of Remote Sensing 2007, 28:269-291.
13. Buyantuyev A., Wu J., Gries C. Multiscale analysis of the urbanization pattern of the Phoenix metropolitan landscape of USA: Time, space and thematic resolution. Landscape and Urban Planning 2010, 94:206-217.
14. Cadenasso M.L., Pickett S.T.A., Schwarz K. Spatial heterogeneity in urban ecosystems: Reconceptualizing land cover and a framework for classification. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2007, 5:80-88.
15. Can A. Specification and estimation of hedonic housing price models. Regional Science and Urban Economics 1992, 22:453-474.
16. Clark C., Adriaens P., Talbot F.B. Green roof valuation: A probabilistic economic analysis of environmental benefits. Environmental Science & Technology 2008, 42:2155-2161.
17. Escobedo P.J., Wagner J.E., Nowak D.J., De la Maza C.L., Rodriguez M., Crane D.E. Analyzing the cost effectiveness of Santiago, Chile's policy of using urban forests to improve air quality. Journal of Environmental Management 2008, 86:148-157.
18. Gammage G. Phoenix in perspective: Reflections on developing the desert 2003, Heberger Center for Design Excellence, Tempe, AZ.
19. Gober P. Metropolitan Phoenix: Place making and community building in the desert 2006, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.
20. Gober P., Burns E.K. The size and shape of Phoenix's urban fringe. Journal of Planning Education and Research 2002, 21:379-390.
21. Hirschboeck, K. K., & Meko, D. M. (2005, July). A tree-ring based assessment of synchronous extreme streamflow episodes in the Upper Colorado & Salt-Verde-Tonto River Basins. University of Arizona and Salt River Project. Retrieved from http://fp.arizona.edu/khirschboeck/srp.htm.
22. Hope D., Gries C., Casagrande D., Redman C.L., Grimm N.B., Martin C. Drivers of spatial variation in plant diversity across the Central Arizona-Phoenix ecosystem. Society & Natural Resources 2006, 19:101-116. 10.1080/08941920500394469.
23. Hougner C., Colding J., Soderqvist T. Economic valuation of a seed dispersal service in the Stockholm National Urban Park, Sweden. Ecological Economics 2006, 59:364-374.
24. Huete A. A soil-adjusted vegetation index (SAVI). Remote Sensing of Environment 1988, 25:295-309. 10.1016/0034-4257(88)90106-X.
25. Jacobs K.L., Holway J.M. Managing for sustainability in an arid climate: Lessons learned from 20 years of groundwater management in Arizona, USA. Hydrogeology Journal 2004, 12:52-65.
26. Jenerette G.D., Harlan S.L., Brazel A., Jones N., Larsen L., Stefanov W.L. Regional relationships between surface temperature, vegetation, and human settlement in a rapidly urbanizing ecosystem. Landscape Ecology 2007, 22:353-365.
27. Jenerette G.D., Harlan S.L., Stefanov W.L., Martin C.A. Ecosystem services and urban heat riskscape moderation: Water, green spaces, and social inequality in Phoenix, USA. Ecological ApplicationsV 21 2011, 2637-2651. 10.1890/10-1493.1.
28. Jenerette G.D., Wu J.G. Analysis and simulation of land-use change in the central Arizona-Phoenix region, USA. Landscape Ecology 2001, 16:611-626.
29. Jetter K., Paine T.D. Consumer preferences and willingness to pay for biological control in the urban landscape. Biological Control 2004, 30:312-322.
30. Jim C.Y., Chen W.Y. Recreation-amenity use and contingent valuation of urban greenspaces in Guangzhou, China. Landscape and Urban Planning 2006, 75:81-96.
31. Kadish J., Netusil N.R. Valuing vegetation in an urban watershed. Landscape and Urban Planning 2012, 104:59-65. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.09.004.
32. Kareiva P., Watts S., McDonald R., Boucher T. Domesticated nature: Shaping landscapes and ecosystems for human welfare. Science 2007, 316:1866-1869.
33. Karl T.R., Melillo J.M., Peterson T.C. Global climate change impacts in the United States 2009, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.
34. Kestens Y., Thériault M., Rosiers F.D. The impact of surrounding land use and vegetation on single-family house prices. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 2004, 31:539-567. 10.1068/b3023.
35. Larson E., Grimm N., Gober P., Redman C. The paradoxical ecology and management of water in the Phoenix, USA metropolitan area. Journal of Ecohydology and Hydrobiology 2005, 5:287-296.
36. Larson E., Grimm N. Small-scale and extensive hydrogeomorphic modification and water redistribution in a desert city and implications for regional nitrogen removal. Urban Ecosystems 2012, 15:71-85.
37. Lee J.S., Li M.-H. The impact of detention basin design on residential property value: Case studies using GIS in the hedonic price modeling. Landscape and Urban Planning 2009, 89:7-16. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.09.002.
38. Martin C.A., Peterson K.A., Stabler L.B. Residential landscaping in Phoenix, Arizona, U.S.: Practices and preferences relative to covenants, codes, and restrictions. Journal of Arboriculture 2003, 29:9-17.
39. MA Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis 2005, Island Press, Washington, DC.
40. McConnell, V., & Walls, M. (2005). The value of open space: Evidence from studies of nonmarket benefits. Resources for the Future, RFF Report, Washington, DC.
41. McPherson E.G. Accounting for benefits and costs of urban greenspace. Landscape and Urban Planning 1992, 22:41-51.
42. Morehouse B.J., Carter R.H., Tschakert P. Sensitivity of urban water resources in Phoenix, Tucson, and Sierra Vista, Arizona, to severe drought. Climate Research 2002, 21:283-297.
43. Parry M., Canziani O., Palutikof J., van der Linden P., Hanson C. Climate change 2007: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of working group II to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change 2007, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
44. Phoenix Water Services Department. (1995). Water for the future: Phoenix water needs, supplies, and strategies.
45. Redman C.L., Jones N.S. The environmental, social, and health dimensions of urban expansion. Population and Environment 2005, 26:505-520. Retrieved June 3, 2012.
46. Sander H., Polasky S., Haight R.G. The value of urban tree cover: A hedonic property price model in Ramsey and Dakota Counties, Minnesota, USA. Ecological Economics 2010, 69:1646-1656. 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.03.011.
47. Stefanov W.L., Ramsey M.S., Christensen P.R. Monitoring urban land cover change. Remote Sensing of Environment 2001, 77:173-185. 10.1016/S0034-4257(01)00204-8.
48. SYSTAT (2009). SYSTAT 13 [Computer Software]. Available at http://www.systat.com/SystatProducts.aspx.
49. Tiebout C. A pure theory of local expenditures. Journal of Political Economy 1956, 64:416-424.
50. Tong C., Feagin R.A., Lu J., Zhanq X., Zhu X., Wang W., et al. Ecosystem service values and restoration in the urban Sanyang wetland of Wenzhou, China. Ecological Engineering 2007, 29:249-258.
51. Tratalos J., Fuller R.A., Warren P.H., Davies R.G., Gaston K.J. Urban form, biodiversity potential and ecosystem services. Landscape and Urban Planning 2007, 83:308-317.
52. Troy A., Grove J.M. Property values, parks, and crime: A hedonic analysis in Baltimore, MD. Landscape and Urban Planning 2008, 87:233-245.
53. US Census Bureau (2008). Metropolitan and micropopulation statistical area estimate: Population change and rankings. From http://www.census.gov/popest/data/historical/2000s/vintage_2008/metro.html.
54. Vandermeulen V., Verspecht A., Vermeire B., Van Huylenbroeck G., Gellynck X. The use of economic valuation to create public support for green infrastructure investments in urban areas. Landscape and Urban Planning 2011, 103:198-206. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.07.010.
55. Walker J.S., Grimm N.B., Briggs J.M., Gries C., Dugan L. Effects of urbanization on plant species diversity in central Arizona. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2009, 7:465-470. 10.1890/080084.
56. Walsh C.J., Roy A.H., Feminella J.W., Cottingham P.D., Groffman P.M., Morgan R.P. The urban stream syndrome: Current knowledge and the search for a cure. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 2005, 24:706-723.