[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/canjag/v70y2022i3p179-201.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Willingness to pay for multiple dimensions of green open space: Applying a spatial hedonic approach

Author

Listed:
  • Ziwei Hu
  • Hotaka Kobori
  • Brent Swallow
  • Feng Qiu
Abstract
To optimize land conservation strategies with limited resources, it is necessary to understand people's preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for green open space. The hedonic pricing method (HPM) is widely used. However, the conventional HPM assumes no value spillovers between neighbouring properties. Here we adopt a spatial regression approach that allows us to relax the no‐spillover assumption. Through an analysis of access to different types, intensity and developability of open green space on house prices in the City of Edmonton, Canada, we illustrate how spatial HPM can be used to quantify direct and spillover values of different dimensions of open green space. We find that WTP for open space has significant spillover effects, ignoring such spillovers would under‐estimate the total value of open space protection and thus the socially optimal amount of land conservation. All else equal, people are willing to pay most for houses that are close to non‐developable green open space and woodlands. The highest price premiums are for woodlands and non‐developable green open space, followed by living near the University of Alberta farm. On the contrary, people need small compensation to live near large commercial farms. The results suggest a NIMBY attitude toward preservation of commercial agriculture. Pour optimiser les stratégies de conservation des terres avec des ressources limitées, il est nécessaire de comprendre les préférences et le consentement à payer (CAP) des personnes pour les espaces verts ouverts. La méthode des prix hédoniques (MPH) est largement utilisée. Cependant, le MPH conventionnel ne permet pas le débordement de valeur entre propriétés voisines. Ici, nous adoptons une approche de régression spatiale qui nous permet d'assouplir l'hypothèse de débordement de valeur. Grâce à une analyse de l'accès à différents types, l'intensité et le potentiel de développement d'espaces verts ouvert sur les prix des maisons dans la ville d'Edmonton, au Canada, nous illustrons comment la MPH spatiale peut être utilisée pour quantifier les valeurs directes et indirectes de différentes dimensions d'espaces verts ouverts. Nous constatons que le CAP pour les espaces ouverts a des effets de débordement de valeur significatifs; ignorer ces débordements de valeur sous‐estimerait la valeur totale de la protection des espaces ouverts et donc la quantité socialement optimale de conservation des terres. Toutes choses égales, les gens sont prêts à payer le plus pour des maisons situées à proximité d'espaces verts et de bois non aménageables. Les primes de prix les plus élevées concernent les boisés et les espaces verts non aménageables, suivis de la vie près de la ferme de l'Université de l'Alberta. Au contraire, les gens ont besoin d'une petite compensation pour vivre à proximité de grandes fermes commerciales. Les résultats suggèrent une attitude «pas dans ma cour» envers la préservation de l'agriculture commerciale.

Suggested Citation

  • Ziwei Hu & Hotaka Kobori & Brent Swallow & Feng Qiu, 2022. "Willingness to pay for multiple dimensions of green open space: Applying a spatial hedonic approach," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 70(3), pages 179-201, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:canjag:v:70:y:2022:i:3:p:179-201
    DOI: 10.1111/cjag.12317
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/cjag.12317
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/cjag.12317?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Manfred M. Fischer & Jinfeng Wang, 2011. "Spatial Data Analysis," SpringerBriefs in Regional Science, Springer, number 978-3-642-21720-3.
    2. Kelly C. Bishop & Nicolai V. Kuminoff & H. Spencer Banzhaf & Kevin J. Boyle & Kathrine von Gravenitz & Jaren C. Pope & V. Kerry Smith & Christopher D. Timmins, 2020. "Best Practices for Using Hedonic Property Value Models to Measure Willingness to Pay for Environmental Quality," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 14(2), pages 260-281.
    3. Seya, Hajime & Yamagata, Yoshiki & Tsutsumi, Morito, 2013. "Automatic selection of a spatial weight matrix in spatial econometrics: Application to a spatial hedonic approach," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 429-444.
    4. David M. Brasington & Diane Hite, 2005. "Demand for Environmental Quality: A Spatial Hedonic Approach," Departmental Working Papers 2005-08, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    5. Elena G. Irwin, 2002. "The Effects of Open Space on Residential Property Values," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(4), pages 465-480.
    6. Brasington, David M. & Hite, Diane, 2005. "Demand for environmental quality: a spatial hedonic analysis," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 57-82, January.
    7. Amrita Singh & Jean-Daniel Saphores & Tim Bruckner, 2018. "A spatial hedonic analysis of the housing market around a large, failing desert lake: the case of the Salton Sea in California," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 61(14), pages 2549-2569, December.
    8. Cao, Yangzhe & Swallow, Brent & Qiu, Feng, 2021. "Identifying the effects of a land-use policy on willingness to pay for open space using an endogenous switching regression model," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    9. Richard C. Ready & Charles W. Abdalla, 2005. "The Amenity and Disamenity Impacts of Agriculture: Estimates from a Hedonic Pricing Model," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(2), pages 314-326.
    10. Okmyung Biny & Stephen Polasky, 2004. "Effects of Flood Hazards on Property Values: Evidence Before and After Hurricane Floyd," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 80(4).
    11. Rosen, Sherwin, 1974. "Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Product Differentiation in Pure Competition," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(1), pages 34-55, Jan.-Feb..
    12. Elena G. Irwin & Nancy E. Bockstael, 2001. "The Problem of Identifying Land Use Spillovers: Measuring the Effects of Open Space on Residential Property Values," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(3), pages 698-704.
    13. Meng Yang & Feng Qiu & Juan Tu, 2022. "Premiums for Residing in Unfavorable Food Environments: Are People Rational?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(12), pages 1-14, June.
    14. Qiu, Feng & Tong, Qingmeng, 2021. "A spatial difference-in-differences approach to evaluate the impact of light rail transit on property values," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    15. Brent L. Mahan & BStephen Polasky & Richard M. Adams, 2000. "Valuing Urban Wetlands: A Property Price Approach," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(1), pages 100-113.
    16. Acharya, Gayatri & Bennett, Lynne Lewis, 2001. "Valuing Open Space and Land-Use Patterns in Urban Watersheds," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(2-3), pages 221-237, March-May.
    17. Sedgley, Norman H. & Williams, Nancy A. & Derrick, Frederick W., 2008. "The effect of educational test scores on house prices in a model with spatial dependence," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 191-200, June.
    18. Łaszkiewicz, Edyta & Czembrowski, Piotr & Kronenberg, Jakub, 2019. "Can proximity to urban green spaces be considered a luxury? Classifying a non-tradable good with the use of hedonic pricing method," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 237-247.
    19. Murakami, Jin, 2018. "The Government Land Sales programme and developers’ willingness to pay for accessibility in Singapore, 1990–2015," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 292-302.
    20. José-María Montero & Román Mínguez & Gema Fernández-Avilés, 2018. "Erratum to: Housing price prediction: parametric versus semi-parametric spatial hedonic models," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 107-109, January.
    21. Du, Xuejun & Huang, Zhonghua, 2018. "Spatial and temporal effects of urban wetlands on housing prices: Evidence from Hangzhou, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 290-298.
    22. Tong, Qingmeng & Qiu, Feng, 2020. "Population growth and land development: Investigating the bi-directional interactions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    23. Luc Anselin & Daniel Arribas-Bel, 2013. "Spatial fixed effects and spatial dependence in a single cross-section," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 92(1), pages 3-17, March.
    24. Sanglim Yoo & John E. Wagner, 2016. "A review of the hedonic literatures in environmental amenities from open space: a traditional econometric vs. spatial econometric model," International Journal of Urban Sciences, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 141-166, March.
    25. José-María Montero & Román Mínguez & Gema Fernández-Avilés, 2018. "Housing price prediction: parametric versus semi-parametric spatial hedonic models," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 27-55, January.
    26. Robert J. Johnston & James J. Opaluch & Thomas A. Grigalunas & Marisa J. Mazzotta, 2001. "Estimating Amenity Benefits of Coastal Farmland," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 305-325.
    27. J. Elhorst, 2010. "Applied Spatial Econometrics: Raising the Bar," Spatial Economic Analysis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 9-28.
    28. Darla Hatton MacDonald & Michele M. Veeman, 1996. "Valuing Housing Characteristics: A Case Study of Single Family Houses in Edmonton, Alberta," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 29(s1), pages 510-514, April.
    29. Anderson, Soren T. & West, Sarah E., 2006. "Open space, residential property values, and spatial context," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 773-789, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hu, Ziwei & Swallow, Brent & Qiu, Feng, 2021. "Measuring the Amenity Value of Urban Open Space Using a Spatial Hedonic Approach: The Case of Edmonton, Canada," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315287, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Waltert, Fabian & Schläpfer, Felix, 2010. "Landscape amenities and local development: A review of migration, regional economic and hedonic pricing studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 141-152, December.
    3. Fabian Waltert & Felix Schlaepfer, 2007. "The role of landscape amenities in regional development: a survey of migration, regional economic and hedonic pricing studies," SOI - Working Papers 0710, Socioeconomic Institute - University of Zurich.
    4. Poudyal, Neelam C. & Hodges, Donald G. & Tonn, Bruce & Cho, Seong-Hoon, 2009. "Valuing diversity and spatial pattern of open space plots in urban neighborhoods," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 194-201, May.
    5. Łaszkiewicz, Edyta & Heyman, Axel & Chen, Xianwen & Cimburova, Zofie & Nowell, Megan & Barton, David N, 2022. "Valuing access to urban greenspace using non-linear distance decay in hedonic property pricing," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    6. Sanglim Yoo & John E. Wagner, 2016. "A review of the hedonic literatures in environmental amenities from open space: a traditional econometric vs. spatial econometric model," International Journal of Urban Sciences, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 141-166, March.
    7. Seong-Hoon Cho & Christopher D. Clark & William M. Park & Seung Gyu Kim, 2009. "Spatial and Temporal Variation in the Housing Market Values of Lot Size and Open Space," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 85(1), pages 51-73.
    8. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Poudyal, Neelam C. & Roberts, Roland K., 2008. "Spatial analysis of the amenity value of green open space," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 403-416, June.
    9. Fernandez, Mario Andres & Bucaram, Santiago, 2019. "The changing face of environmental amenities: Heterogeneity across housing submarkets and time," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 449-460.
    10. Mei, Yingdan & Hite, Diane & Sohngen, Brent, 2017. "Demand for urban tree cover: A two-stage hedonic price analysis in California," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 29-35.
    11. David Christafore & Susane Leguizamon, 2015. "Willingness to Pay for Hospital Access in Areas with High Concentrations of Blacks," The Review of Regional Studies, Southern Regional Science Association, vol. 45(1), pages 87-104, Spring.
    12. Abbott, Joshua K. & Klaiber, H. Allen, 2010. "Is all space created equal? Uncovering the relationship between competing land uses in subdivisions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 296-307, December.
    13. Beal-Hodges, Mary, 2012. "Conservation land acquisition lists and nearby property values: evidence from the Florida Forever programme," Studies in Agricultural Economics, Research Institute for Agricultural Economics, vol. 114(1), pages 1-8.
    14. Carriazo, Fernando & Ready, Richard & Shortle, James, 2013. "Using stochastic frontier models to mitigate omitted variable bias in hedonic pricing models: A case study for air quality in Bogotá, Colombia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 80-88.
    15. Hansen, Winslow D. & Mueller, Julie M. & Naughton, Helen T., 2014. "Wildfire in Hedonic Property Value Studies," Western Economics Forum, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 13(1), pages 1-14.
    16. Livy, Mitchell R. & Klaiber, H. Allen, 2013. "Maintaining Public Goods: Household Valuation of New and Renovated Local Parks," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150634, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    17. Leguizamon, Susane & Christafore, David, 2014. "Racial Differences in Willingness to Pay for Hospital Access," MPRA Paper 55926, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Anderson, Soren T. & West, Sarah E., 2006. "Open space, residential property values, and spatial context," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 773-789, November.
    19. Joseph Hiebert & Karen Allen, 2019. "Valuing Environmental Amenities across Space: A Geographically Weighted Regression of Housing Preferences in Greenville County, SC," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-16, October.
    20. Anping Chen & Marlon Boarnet & Mark Partridge & Wenjie Wu & Guanpeng Dong, 2014. "Valuing The “Green” Amenities In A Spatial Context," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 569-585, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:canjag:v:70:y:2022:i:3:p:179-201. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/caefmea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.