IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i13p6809-d581808.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Premium of Public Perceived Greenery: A Framework Using Multiscale GWR and Deep Learning

Author

Listed:
  • Yonglin Zhang

    (State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China)

  • Xiao Fu

    (State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China)

  • Chencan Lv

    (State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China)

  • Shanlin Li

    (National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China)

Abstract

Population agglomeration and real estate development encroach on public green spaces, threatening human settlement equity and perceptual experience. Perceived greenery is a vital interface for residents to interact with the urban eco-environment. Nevertheless, the economic premiums and spatial scale of such greenery have not been fully studied because a comprehensive quantitative framework is difficult to obtain. Here, taking advantage of big geodata and deep learning to quantify public perceived greenery, we integrate a multiscale GWR (MGWR) and a hedonic price model (HPM) and propose an analytic framework to explore the premium of perceived greenery and its spatial pattern at the neighborhood scale. Our empirical study in Beijing demonstrated that (1) MGWR-based HPM can lead to good performance and increase understanding of the spatial premium effect of perceived greenery; (2) for every 1% increase in neighborhood-level perceived greenery, economic premiums increase by 4.1% (115,862 RMB) on average; and (3) the premium of perceived greenery is spatially imbalanced and linearly decreases with location, which is caused by Beijing’s monocentric development pattern. Our framework provides analytical tools for measuring and mapping the capitalization of perceived greenery. Furthermore, the empirical results can provide positive implications for establishing equitable housing policies and livable neighborhoods.

Suggested Citation

  • Yonglin Zhang & Xiao Fu & Chencan Lv & Shanlin Li, 2021. "The Premium of Public Perceived Greenery: A Framework Using Multiscale GWR and Deep Learning," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(13), pages 1-16, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:13:p:6809-:d:581808
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/13/6809/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/13/6809/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marco Helbich & Wolfgang Brunauer & Eric Vaz & Peter Nijkamp, 2014. "Spatial Heterogeneity in Hedonic House Price Models: The Case of Austria," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(2), pages 390-411, February.
    2. Zambrano-Monserrate, Manuel A. & Ruano, María Alejandra & Yoong-Parraga, Cristina & Silva, Carlos A., 2021. "Urban green spaces and housing prices in developing countries: A Two-stage quantile spatial regression analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    3. Youqin Huang & Leiwen Jiang, 2009. "Housing Inequality in Transitional Beijing," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(4), pages 936-956, December.
    4. Belcher, Richard N. & Chisholm, Ryan A., 2018. "Tropical Vegetation and Residential Property Value: A Hedonic Pricing Analysis in Singapore," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 149-159.
    5. Daams, Michiel N. & Sijtsma, Frans J. & Veneri, Paolo, 2019. "Mixed monetary and non-monetary valuation of attractive urban green space: A case study using Amsterdam house prices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 1-1.
    6. 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..
    7. Bertram, Christine & Rehdanz, Katrin, 2015. "The role of urban green space for human well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 139-152.
    8. Yoshimura, Nobuhiko & Hiura, Tsutom, 2017. "Demand and supply of cultural ecosystem services: Use of geotagged photos to map the aesthetic value of landscapes in Hokkaido," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 68-78.
    9. Sander, Heather & Polasky, Stephen & Haight, Robert G., 2010. "The value of urban tree cover: A hedonic property price model in Ramsey and Dakota Counties, Minnesota, USA," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1646-1656, June.
    10. Sheng Li & Yi Jiang & Shuisong Ke & Ke Nie & Chao Wu, 2021. "Understanding the Effects of Influential Factors on Housing Prices by Combining Extreme Gradient Boosting and a Hedonic Price Model (XGBoost-HPM)," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-15, May.
    11. Zheng, Siqi & Kahn, Matthew E., 2008. "Land and residential property markets in a booming economy: New evidence from Beijing," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 743-757, March.
    12. Yu Ye & Hanting Xie & Jia Fang & Hetao Jiang & De Wang, 2019. "Daily Accessed Street Greenery and Housing Price: Measuring Economic Performance of Human-Scale Streetscapes via New Urban Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-21, March.
    13. A. Stewart Fotheringham & Wenbai Yang & Wei Kang, 2017. "Multiscale Geographically Weighted Regression (MGWR)," Annals of the American Association of Geographers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 107(6), pages 1247-1265, November.
    14. Tyrvainen, Liisa & Miettinen, Antti, 2000. "Property Prices and Urban Forest Amenities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 205-223, March.
    15. Rencai Dong & Yonglin Zhang & Jingzhu Zhao, 2018. "How Green Are the Streets Within the Sixth Ring Road of Beijing? An Analysis Based on Tencent Street View Pictures and the Green View Index," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-22, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Qinyu Cui & Yiting Huang & Guang Yang & Yu Chen, 2022. "Measuring Green Exposure Levels in Communities of Different Economic Levels at Different Completion Periods: Through the Lens of Social Equity," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-26, August.

    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. 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.
    2. Matthew Gnagey & Therese Grijalva, 2018. "The impact of trails on property values: a spatial analysis," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 60(1), pages 73-97, January.
    3. Chen, Yu & Liu, Gengyuan & Yan, Ningyu & Yang, Qing & Gao, He & Su, Liya & Santagata, Remo, 2023. "Comprehensive evaluation of urban greenspace ecological values marketability through the spatial relationship between housing price and ecosystem services," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 484(C).
    4. Marta Sylla & Tadeusz Lasota & Szymon Szewrański, 2019. "Valuing Environmental Amenities in Peri-Urban Areas: Evidence from Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-15, January.
    5. Belcher, Richard N. & Chisholm, Ryan A., 2018. "Tropical Vegetation and Residential Property Value: A Hedonic Pricing Analysis in Singapore," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 149-159.
    6. Panduro, Toke Emil & Jensen, Cathrine Ulla & Lundhede, Thomas Hedemark & von Graevenitz, Kathrine & Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark, 2018. "Eliciting preferences for urban parks," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 127-142.
    7. Tuffery, Laetitia, 2017. "The recreational services value of the nearby periurban forest versus the regional forest environment," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 33-41.
    8. 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.
    9. Stromberg, Per M. & Öhrner, Erik & Brockwell, Erik & Liu, Zhaoyang, 2021. "Valuing urban green amenities with an inequality lens," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    10. vom Hofe, Rainer & Mihaescu, Oana & Boorn, Mary Lynne, 2017. "Do urban parks really benefit homeowners economically? Evidence from a spatial hedonic study of the Cincinnati park system," HUI Working Papers 122, HUI Research.
    11. Shanaka Herath, 2021. "Elevating the Value of Urban Location: A Consumer Preference-Based Approach to Valuing Local Amenity Provision," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-14, November.
    12. Zhijiao Qin & Yan Yu & Dianfeng Liu, 2019. "The Effect of HOPSCA on Residential Property Values: Exploratory Findings from Wuhan, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, January.
    13. Sado-Inamura, Yukako & Fukushi, Kensuke, 2019. "Empirical analysis of flood risk perception using historical data in Tokyo," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 13-29.
    14. Å aszkiewicz, 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).
    15. Escobedo, Francisco J. & Adams, Damian C. & Timilsina, Nilesh, 2015. "Urban forest structure effects on property value," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 209-217.
    16. Wenjie Wu & Guanpeng Dong & Wenzhong Zhang, 2017. "The puzzling heterogeneity of amenity capitalization effects on land markets," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 96, pages 135-153, March.
    17. Toke Emil Panduro & Cathrine Ulla Jensen & Thomas Hedemark Lundhede & Kathrine von Graevenitz & Bo Jellesmark Thorsen, 2016. "Estimating demand schedules in hedonic analysis: The case of urban parks," IFRO Working Paper 2016/06, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    18. Pandit, Ram & Polyakov, Maksym & Sadler, Rohan, 2012. "The importance of tree cover and neighbourhood parks in determining urban property values," 2012 Conference (56th), February 7-10, 2012, Fremantle, Australia 124357, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    19. Cathrine Ulla Jensen, 2016. "Households’ willingness to pay for access to outdoor recreation: An application of the house price method using spatial quantile regressions," IFRO Working Paper 2016/09, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    20. 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.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:13:p:6809-:d:581808. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.