A comparison of the economic benefits of urban green spaces estimated with NDVI and with high-resolution land cover data

Landscape and Urban Planning

Volumn 133, Issue , 2015, Pages 105-117

  Li, Wei ^a   Saphores, Jean Daniel M ^b,c   Gillespie, Thomas W ^d  

^a TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b University of California at Irvine   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Cliff Ord; Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI); Spatial hedonic models; Urban ecosystem services; Urban green infrastructure; Urban trees

Indexed keywords

APPLICATION PROGRAMS; COSTS; ECONOMICS; ECOSYSTEMS; HOUSES; LAND USE; REFORESTATION; SATELLITE IMAGERY; VEGETATION;

CLIFF-ORD; GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE; HEDONIC MODEL; NORMALIZED DIFFERENCE VEGETATION INDEX; URBAN ECOSYSTEM; URBAN TREES;

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS;

CLIFF; DATA SET; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; GRASS; GREENSPACE; HEDONIC ANALYSIS; NDVI; PROFITABILITY; SPATIAL RESOLUTION; URBAN PLANNING;

CALIFORNIA; LOS ANGELES [CALIFORNIA]; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84908574925     PISSN: 01692046     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.09.013     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Apparicio P., Séguin A.-M., Naud D. The quality of the urban environment around public housing buildings in Montréal: An objective approach based on GIS and multivariate statistical analysis. Social Indicators Research 2008, 86(3):355-380. 10.1007/s11205-007-9185-4.
2. Arraiz I., Drukker D.M., Kelejian H.H., Prucha I.R. A spatial Cliff-Ord type model with heteroskedastic innovations: Small and large sample results. Journal of Regional Science 2010, 50(2):592-614.
3. Brasington D.M., Hite D. Demand for environmental quality: A spatial hedonic analysis. Regional Science and Urban Economics 2005, 35(1):57-82.
4. Cliff A., Ord J. Spatial processes, models and applications 1981, Pion, London.
5. Court A.T. Hedonic price indexes with automotive examples. The dynamics of automobile demand 1939, 98-119. General Motors, New York.
6. Des Rosiers F., Theriault M., Kesten Y., Villeneuve P. Landscaping and house values: An empirical investigation. Journal of Real Estate Research 2002, 23(1):139-162.
7. Donovan G.H., Butry D.T. Trees in the city: Valuing street trees in Portland, Oregon. Landscape and Urban Planning 2010, 94(2):77-83. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2009.07.019.
8. Drukker D.M., Peng H., Prucha I., Raciborski R. SPPACK: Stata module for cross-section spatial-autoregressive models (Version S457245) 2011, Boston College Department of Economics, Retrieved from http://ideas.repec.org/c/boc/bocode/s457245.html.
9. Ellis C.D., Lee S.-W., Kweon B.-S. Retail land use, neighborhood satisfaction and the urban forest: An investigation into the moderating and mediating effects of trees and shrubs. Landscape and Urban Planning 2006, 74(1):70-78. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2004.10.004.
10. Fung T., Siu W.-L. A study of green space and its changes in Hong Kong using NDVI. Geographical and Environmental Modelling 2001, 5(2):111-122. 10.1080/13615930120086032.
11. Gamon J.A., Field C.B., Goulden M.L., Griffin K.L., Hartley A.E., Geeske J., et al. Relationships between NDVI, canopy structure, and photosynthesis in three Californian vegetation types. Ecological Applications 1995, 5(1):28-41. 10.2307/1942049.
12. Ghaffari P.O., Monavari S.M. Physical development trend and green space destruction in developing cities: A GIS approach. Environment, Development and Sustainability 2013, 15(1):167-175. 10.1007/s10668-012-9381-5.
13. Gillespie T.W., Pincetl S., Brossard S., Smith J., Saatchi S., Pataki D., et al. A time series of urban forestry in Los Angeles. Urban Ecosystems 2011, 10.1007/s11252-011-0183-6.
14. Goward S.N., Compton J.T., Dye D.G. North American vegetation patterns observed with the NOAA-7 advanced very high resolution radiometer. Vegetatio 1985, 64(1):3-14. 10.2307/20037229.
15. Griliches Z. Hedonic prices for automobiles: An econometric analysis of quality change. The Price Statistics of the Federal Government, General Series No. 73 1961, 137-196. Columbia University Press for the National Bureau of Economic Research, New York.
16. 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 Applications 2011, 21(7):2637-2651.
17. Jensen J.R. Remote sensing of the environment: An earth resource perspective 2006, Prentice-Hall Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, USA.
18. Kadish J., Netusil N.R. Valuing vegetation in an urban watershed. Landscape and Urban Planning 2012, 104(1):59-65. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.09.004.
19. Kelejian H.H., Prucha I.R. A generalized moments estimator for the autoregressive parameter in a spatial model. International Economic Review 1999, 40(2):509-533.
20. Kestens Y., Thériault M., Des Rosiers F. The impact of surrounding land use and vegetation on single-family house prices. Environment and Planning 2004, 31:539-567.
21. Krizek K.J., Johnson P.J. Proximity to trails and retail: Effects on urban cycling and walking. Journal of the American Planning Association 2006, 72(1):33-42.
22. Laverne R.J., Winson-Geideman K. The influence of trees and landscaping on rental rates at office buildings. Journal of Arboriculture 2003, 29(5):281-290.
23. Lesage J.P. Econometrics toolbox 2010, Retrieved from http://www.spatial-econometrics.com/.
24. Li W., Saphores J.-D. A spatial hedonic analysis of the value of urban land cover in the multifamily housing market in Los Angeles, CA. Urban Studies 2012, 49(12):2597-2615. 10.1177/0042098011429486.
25. MacDonald D.H., Crossman N.D., Mahmoudi P., Taylor L.O., Summers D.M., Boxall P.C. The value of public and private green spaces under water restrictions. Landscape and Urban Planning 2010, 95(4):192-200. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.01.003.
26. Mansfield C., Pattanayak S.-K., McDow W., McDonald R., Halpin P. Shades of green: Measuring the value of urban forests in the housing market. Journal of Forest Economics 2005, 11(3):177-199.
27. Masek J.G., Lindsay F.E., Goward S.N. Dynamics of urban growth in the Washington DC metropolitan area, 1973-1996, from Landsat observations. International Journal of Remote Sensing 2000, 21(18):3473-3486. 10.1080/014311600750037507.
28. McPherson G., Simpson J., Xiao Q., Wu C. Los Angeles one million tree canopy cover assessment 2007, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Albany, CA.
29. Miller R.W. Urban forestry: Planning and managing urban green spaces 1997, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey. Second Edition.
30. Netusil N.R., Chattopadhyay S., Kovacs K.F. Estimating the demand for tree canopy: A second-stage hedonic price analysis in Portland, Oregon. Land Economics 2010, 86(2).
31. Odindi J.O., Mhangara P. Green spaces trends in the city of Port Elizabeth from 1990 to 2000 using remote sensing. International Journal of Environmental Research 2012, 6(3):653-662.
32. Pandit R., Polyakov M., Sadler R. Valuing public and private urban tree canopy cover. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 2013, 10.1111/1467-8489.12037.
33. Pau S., Gillespie T.W., Wolkovich E.M. Dissecting NDVI - Species richness relationships in Hawaiian dry forests. Journal of Biogeography 2012, 39(9):1678-1686. 10.1111/j.1365-2699.2012.02731.x.
34. Payton S., Lindsey G., Wilson J., Ottensmann J.R., Man J. Valuing the benefits of the urban forest: A spatial hedonic approach. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 2008, 51(6):717-736. 10.1080/09640560802423509.
35. Pettorelli N., Vik J.O., Mysterud A., Gaillard J.-M., Tucker C.J., Stenseth N.C. Using the satellite-derived NDVI to assess ecological responses to environmental change. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 2005, 20(9):503-510.
36. Rafiee R., Mahiny A.S., Khorasani N. Assessment of changes in urban green spaces of Mashad city using satellite data. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation 2009, 11(6):431-438. 10.1016/j.jag.2009.08.005.
37. Rosen S. Hedonic prices and implicit markets: Product differentiation in pure competition. Journal of Political Economy 1974, 82:34-55.
38. 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(8):1646-1656. 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.03.011.
39. Saphores J.-D., Li W. Estimating the value of urban green areas: A hedonic pricing analysis of the single family housing market in Los Angeles, CA. Landscape and Urban Planning 2012, 104(3-4):373-387. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.11.012.
40. Sellers P.J. Canopy reflectance, photosynthesis and transpiration. International Journal of Remote Sensing 1985, 6(8):1335-1372. 10.1080/01431168508948283.
41. Shultz S.D., King D.A. The use of census data for hedonic price estimates of open-space amenities and land use. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics 2001, 22(2-3):239-252.
42. Stefanov W.L., Netzband M. Assessment of ASTER land cover and MODIS NDVI data at multiple scales for ecological characterization of an arid urban center. Remote Sensing of Environment 2005, 99(1-2):31-43. 10.1016/j.rse.2005.04.024.
43. Tucker C.J., Sellers P.J. Satellite remote sensing of primary production. International Journal of Remote Sensing 1986, 7(11):1395-1416. 10.1080/01431168608948944.
44. Tung F. Environmental quality and changes: A view from NDVI in Hong Kong. Paper Presented at the Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 1997. IGARSS rsquo;"97. IEEE International on Remote Sensing - A Scientific Vision for Sustainable Development 1997.
45. US Census Bureau 2000 Census of Population and Housing Summary File 1 Technical Documentation 2007.
46. van Leeuwen W.J.D., Orr B.J., Marsh S.E., Herrmann S.M. Multi-sensor NDVI data continuity: Uncertainties and implications for vegetation monitoring applications. Remote Sensing of Environment 2006, 100(1):67-81.
47. Wolfe M.K., Mennis J. Does vegetation encourage or suppress urban crime? Evidence from Philadelphia, PA. Landscape and Urban Planning 2012, 108(2-4):112-122.