ESTIMATING THE VALUE OF URBAN GREEN SPACE: A HEDONIC PRICING ANALYSIS OF THE HOUSING MARKET IN COLOGNE, GERMANY
Keywords:
Urban Green Space (UGS), open space, Hedonic Pricing Method (HPM), GIS-Analysis.Abstract
Urban Green Spaces (UGS), such as parks and forests, provide a wide range of environmental and recreational benefits. One objective in the conservation efforts of UGS is to analyse the benefits associated with UGS in order to make them more visible and to provide support for landscape planning.
This paper examines the effects of UGS on house prices applying a Hedonic Pricing Method (HPM). The data set contains over 85046 geo-coded apartment transactions for the years 1995-2012 and contains information on three intrinsic variables of the real estate (e.g. transaction price, floor area and age).
In order to examine the capitalisation of UGS in real estate prices, we further incorporated cross-section geo-coded data for the different types of UGS: forests, parks, farmland and fallow land drawn from the European Urban Atlas (EUA) of the European Environment Agency for the year 2006. In order to control for additional open space categories, we further incorporated geo-coded data on water bodies and fallow land. Using a Geographical Information System (GIS), we calculated the coverage of UGS in pre-defined buffers around households as well as the distance in a continuous fashion (Euclidian distance) between UGS and the households.
Our results show a capitalisation of UGS in real estate prices, but the effect of the structural variables is higher. We found a positive price effect of parks, forests and water and an inverse relation between the price variable and the presence of fallow land and farmland.
Downloads
References
Abkar M., Kamal M., Mariapan M., Maulan S., Sheybanic M. (2010), The Role of Urban Green Spaces in Mood Change, “Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences”, 4 (10).
Google Scholar
Acharya G., Bennett L. L. (2001), Valuing open space and land-use patterns in urban watersheds, “The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics”, 22 (2-3), pp. 221–237.
Google Scholar
Adamowicz W., Boxall P., Williams M., Louviere J. (1998), Stated preference approaches for measuring passive use values: choice experiments and contingent valuation, “American Journal of Agricultural Economics”, 80 (1), pp. 64–75.
Google Scholar
Alpizar F., Carlsson F., Martinsson P. et al. (2003), Using choice experiments for non-market valuation, “Economic Issues-Stoke On Trent”, 8 (1), pp. 83–110.
Google Scholar
Alriksson S., Öberg T. (2008), Conjoint analysis for environmental evaluation, “Environmental Science and Pollution Research”, 15 (3), pp. 244–257.
Google Scholar
Appelbaum E. (1979), On the choice of functional form, “Internat. Econ. Rev.”, 20, pp. 449–458.
Google Scholar
Bateman I. (1993), Evaluation of the environment: A survey of revealed preference techniques, Tech. rept. GEC Working Paper 93-06, CSERGE, University of East Anglia, Norwich, and University College, London.
Google Scholar
Bennett J., Blamey R. (2001), The choice modelling approach to environmental valuation. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Google Scholar
Benson E. D., Hansen J. L., Schwartz Jr A. L., Smersh G. T. (1998), Pricing residential amenities: the value of a view, “The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics”, 16 (1), pp. 55–73.
Google Scholar
Bolitzer B., Netusil N. R. (2000), The impact of open spaces on property values in Portland, Oregon, “Journal of environmental management”, 59 (3), pp. 185–193.
Google Scholar
Cavailhès J., Brossard T., Foltête J. C., Hilal M., Joly D., Tourneux F. P., Tritz C., Wavresky P. (2009), GIS-based hedonic pricing of landscape, “Environmental and resource economics”, 44 (4), pp. 571–590.
Google Scholar
Choumert J. (2010), An empirical investigation of public choices for green spaces, “Land Use Policy”, 27 (4), pp. 1123–1131.
Google Scholar
Cornelis J., Hermy M. (2004), Biodiversity relationships in urban and suburban parks in Flanders, “Landscape and Urban Planning”, 69 (4), pp. 385–401.
Google Scholar
Elsasser P. (1999), Recreational benefits of forests in Germany, The Living Forest: the Non-market Benefits of Forestry, London: The Stationery Office, pp, 175–188.
Google Scholar
Irwin E. G. (2002), The effects of open space on residential property values, “Land Economics”, 78 (4), pp. 465–480.
Google Scholar
Kitchen J. W., Hendon W. S. (1967), Land values adjacent to an urban neighborhood park, “Land Economics”, pp. 357–360.
Google Scholar
Kolbe J., Schulz R., Wersing M., Werwatz A. (2012), Location, location, location: Extracting location value from house prices, Tech. rept. SFB 649 Discussion Paper.
Google Scholar
Kong F., Yin H., Nakagoshi N. (2007), Using GIS and landscape metrics in the hedonic price modelling of the amenity value of urban green space: A case study in Jinan City, China, “Landscape and Urban Planning”, 79 (3), pp. 240–252.
Google Scholar
Kuhn I., Brandl R., Klotz S. (2004), The flora of German cities is naturally species rich, “Evolutionary Ecology Research”, 6 (5), pp. 749–764.
Google Scholar
Kuo F. E., Sullivan W. C. (2001a), Aggression and violence in the inner city effects of environment via mental fatigue, “Environment and Behaviour”, 33 (4), pp. 543–571.
Google Scholar
Kuo F. E., Sullivan W. C. (2001b), Environment and crime in the inner city does vegetation reduce crime? “Environment and Behavior”, 33 (3), pp. 343–367.
Google Scholar
Lansford N. H., Jones L. L. (1995), Recreational and Aesthetic Value of Water Using Hedonic Price Analysis, “Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics”, 20 (2), pp. 341-355.
Google Scholar
Luttik J. (2000), The value of trees, water and open space as reflected by house prices in the Netherlands, “Landscape and Urban Planning”, 48(3), pp. 161–167.
Google Scholar
Lutzenhiser M. T., Netusil N. R. (2001), The effect of open spaces on a home’s sale price, “Contemporary Economic Policy”, 19 (3), pp. 291–298.
Google Scholar
Mahan B. L., Polasky S., Adams R. M. (2000), Valuing urban wetlands: a property price approach, “Land Economics”, 76 (1).
Google Scholar
Mansfield C., Pattanayak S.K., McDow W., McDonald R. (2002), Shades of Green: Measuring the Value of Urban Forests in the Housing Market, Working paper 02_02. Research Triangle Institute.
Google Scholar
Marcus C. C., Barnes M. (1999), Healing gardens: Therapeutic benefits and design recommendations, John Wiley & Sons.
Google Scholar
McConnell V., Walls M. A. (2005), The value of open space: Evidence from studies of nonmarket benefits, Resources for the Future Washington, DC, USA.
Google Scholar
McPherson, E G. et al. (1998), Atmospheric carbon dioxide reduction by Sacramento’s urban forest, “Journal of Arboriculture”, 24, pp. 215–223.
Google Scholar
Melichar J., Vojáček O., Rieger P., Jedlička K. (2009), Measuring the value of urban forest using the Hedonic price approach, “Regional Studies”, 2, pp. 13–20.
Google Scholar
Morancho A. B. (2003), A hedonic valuation of urban green areas, “Landscape and urban planning”, 66 (1), pp. 35–41.
Google Scholar
Myeong S., Nowak D. J., Duggin M. J. (2006), A temporal analysis of urban forest carbon storage using remote sensing, “Remote Sensing of Environment”, 101 (2), pp. 277–282.
Google Scholar
Nowak D. J. (1994), Air pollution removal by Chicago´s s urban forest, Chicago´s urban forest ecosystem: Results of the Chicago urban forest climate project, pp. 63–81.
Google Scholar
Nowak D. J., Crane D. E., Stevens J. C., Ibarra M. (2002), Brooklyn’s urban forest, vol. 290. Citeseer.
Google Scholar
Rambonilaza M., Dachary-Bernard J. (2007), Land-use planning and public preferences: What can we learn from choice experiment method?, “Landscape and Urban Planning”, 83 (4), pp. 318–326.
Google Scholar
Ready R. C., Abdalla C. W. (2005), The Amenity and Disamenity Impacts of Agriculture: Estimates from a Hedonic Pricing Model, “American Journal of Agricultural Economics”, 87 (2), pp. 314-326.
Google Scholar
Rowntree R. A., Nowak, D. J. et al. (1991), Quantifying the role of urban forests in removing atmospheric carbon dioxide, “Journal of Arboriculture”, 17 (10), pp. 269–275.
Google Scholar
Shultz S. D., King D. A. (2001), The use of census data for hedonic price estimates of open-space amenities and land use, “The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics”, 22 (2-3), pp. 239–252.
Google Scholar
Smith V. K., Poulos C., Kim H. (2002), Treating open space as an urban amenity, “Resource and Energy Economics”, 24 (1), pp. 107–129.
Google Scholar
Sukopp H., Wittig R., Blume H. P. (1993). Stadtökologie, G. Fischer Stuttgart.
Google Scholar
Tameko A. M., Donfouet P., Pythagore H., Sikod F. (2011), The Economic Valuation of Improved Urban Parks: A Case Study of Warda Park, “Journal of Sustainable Development”, 4 (1).
Google Scholar
Thibodeau F. R., Ostro B. D. (1981), Economic analysis of wetland protection, “Journal of Environmental Management”, 12, pp. 19–30.
Google Scholar
Thorsnes P. (2002), The value of a suburban forest preserve: Estimates from sales of vacant residential building lots, “Land Economics”, 78 (3), pp. 426–441.
Google Scholar
Ulrich R. S., Simons R. F., Losito B. D., Fiorito E., Miles M. A., Zelson M. (1991), Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments, “Journal of environmental psychology”, 11 (3), pp. 201–230.
Google Scholar
Vanslembrouck I., Van Huylenbreock G., Van Meensel J. (2005), Impact of Agriculture on Rural Tourism: A Hedonic Pricing Approach, “Journal of Agricultural Economics”, 56 (1), pp. 17-30.
Google Scholar
Vanslembrouck I., Van Huylenbroeck G. (2006), Landscape amenities: economic assessment of agricultural landscapes, vol. 2. Springer.
Google Scholar
Weicher J. C., Zerbst R. H. (1973), The externalities of neighborhood parks: an empirical investigation, “Land Economics”, pp. 99–105.
Google Scholar
Willis K. G., Garrod G. D. (1993), Valuing landscape: a contingent valuation approach, “Journal of environmental management”, 37 (1), pp. 1–22.
Google Scholar
Wu J. J., Adams R. M., Plantinga A. J. (2004), Amenities in an Urban Equilibrium Model: Residential Development in Portland, Oregon, “Land Economics”, 80 (1), pp. 19-32.
Google Scholar
