IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i21p6096-d282816.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does the Difference in Urban Public Facility Allocation Cause Spatial Inequality in Housing Prices? Evidence from Chongqing, China

Author

Listed:
  • Linlin Zhang

    (School of Construction Management and Real Estate, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400045, China)

  • Tao Zhou

    (School of Construction Management and Real Estate, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400045, China)

  • Chao Mao

    (School of Construction Management and Real Estate, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400045, China)

Abstract

The current study argues that the capitalisation effect of urban public facilities on housing will be considerable when the accessibility or availability of facilities has a serious stake in the location or property rights of houses. The supply level and supply quantity of urban public facilities determine whether there is a significant difference in the accessibility or availability of facilities amongst neighbourhoods, and subsequently determines whether the capitalisation effect of facilities on surrounding houses is considerable, which ultimately affects the spatial inequality in housing prices (i.e. spatial dispersion of housing prices). However, previous studies have rarely considered the fact that the supply and demand of urban public facilities vary with the type of facilities. Thus, according to the law of diminishing marginal utility, the current study proposes a theoretical framework for the impact of the allocation of urban public facilities at different supply levels on the spatial inequity in housing prices and verifies this through a case study. Results indicate that the difference in urban public facility allocation caused by the unequal supply quantity or unbalanced spatial distribution has a notable impact on the spatial inequality in housing prices. There are three states of allocation of urban public facilities available according to different supply levels, namely, disequilibrium, quantitative equilibrium and spatial equilibrium: (I) Scarce and high-quality public resources that may always be in the disequilibrium state create a substantial capitalisation effect on nearby housing, and their presence will aggravate spatial inequality in housing prices; (II) Public facilities that can only reach the quantitative equilibrium state have a considerable capitalisation effect on nearby housing, and their supply densities have a positive impact on the spatial inequality in housing prices; (III) Public facilities in the spatial equilibrium state have a negligible capitalisation effect on nearby housing, and their supply densities have a negative impact on the spatial inequality in housing prices. Therefore, it is reasonable to argue that urban public facilities at different supply levels have a diversified impact on the housing market. This study can contribute to having a comprehensive and in-depth understanding of the diversified impact of urban public facilities on the housing market.

Suggested Citation

  • Linlin Zhang & Tao Zhou & Chao Mao, 2019. "Does the Difference in Urban Public Facility Allocation Cause Spatial Inequality in Housing Prices? Evidence from Chongqing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-20, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:21:p:6096-:d:282816
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/21/6096/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/21/6096/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephen Machin, 2011. "Houses and Schools: Valuation of School Quality through then Housing Market - EALE 2010 Presidential Address," CEP Occasional Papers 29, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    2. Heeyeun Yoon, 2018. "When and where do we see the proximity effect of a new park? –A case study of the Dream Forest in Seoul, Korea," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 61(7), pages 1113-1136, June.
    3. Sheppard, Stephen, 1999. "Hedonic analysis of housing markets," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: P. C. Cheshire & E. S. Mills (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 41, pages 1595-1635, Elsevier.
    4. Munoz-Raskin, Ramon, 2010. "Walking accessibility to bus rapid transit: Does it affect property values? The case of Bogotá, Colombia," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 72-84, March.
    5. Xia Feng & Brad R. Humphreys, 2007. "The Spatial Impact of Professional Sports Facilities on Residential Housing Values: Evidence from Census Block-Group Data," IASE Conference Papers 0719, International Association of Sports Economists.
    6. Oates, Wallace E, 1969. "The Effects of Property Taxes and Local Public Spending on Property Values: An Empirical Study of Tax Capitalization and the Tiebout Hypothesis," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 77(6), pages 957-971, Nov./Dec..
    7. Fack, Gabrielle & Grenet, Julien, 2010. "When do better schools raise housing prices? Evidence from Paris public and private schools," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(1-2), pages 59-77, February.
    8. Zhicheng Zheng & Haoming Xia & Shrinidhi Ambinakudige & Yaochen Qin & Yang Li & Zhixiang Xie & Lijun Zhang & Haibin Gu, 2019. "Spatial Accessibility to Hospitals Based on Web Mapping API: An Empirical Study in Kaifeng, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-14, February.
    9. Philippe Apparicio & Anne-Marie Seguin, 2006. "Measuring the Accessibility of Services and Facilities for Residents of Public Housing in Montreal," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 43(1), pages 187-211, January.
    10. Leon Cooper, 1963. "Location-Allocation Problems," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(3), pages 331-343, June.
    11. Wang, Yiming & Feng, Suwei & Deng, Zhongwei & Cheng, Shuangyu, 2016. "Transit premium and rent segmentation: A spatial quantile hedonic analysis of Shanghai Metro," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 61-69.
    12. Feng Lan & Qi Wu & Tao Zhou & Huili Da, 2018. "Spatial Effects of Public Service Facilities Accessibility on Housing Prices: A Case Study of Xi’an, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-20, November.
    13. D. K. Yoon & Jung Eun Kang & Juhyeon Park, 2017. "Exploring Environmental Inequity in South Korea: An Analysis of the Distribution of Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) Facilities and Toxic Releases," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-14, October.
    14. Haizhen Wen & Zaiyuan Gui & Chuanhao Tian & Yue Xiao & Li Fang, 2018. "Subway Opening, Traffic Accessibility, and Housing Prices: A Quantile Hedonic Analysis in Hangzhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-23, June.
    15. Machin, Stephen, 2011. "Houses and schools: Valuation of school quality through the housing market," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 723-729.
    16. Cervero, Robert & Kang, Chang Deok, 2011. "Bus rapid transit impacts on land uses and land values in Seoul, Korea," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 102-116, January.
    17. Charles C. Tu, 2005. "How Does a New Sports Stadium Affect Housing Values? The Case of FedEx Field," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(3).
    18. Ti-Ching Peng & Ying-Hui Chiang, 2015. "The non-linearity of hospitals' proximity on property prices: experiences from Taipei, Taiwan," Journal of Property Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(4), pages 341-361, December.
    19. Alex Michalos & Bruno Zumbo, 1999. "Public Services and the Quality of Life," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 125-157, October.
    20. Yu Zhao & Guoqin Zhang & Tao Lin & Xiaofang Liu & Jiakun Liu & Meixia Lin & Hong Ye & Lingjie Kong, 2018. "Towards Sustainable Urban Communities: A Composite Spatial Accessibility Assessment for Residential Suitability Based on Network Big Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-18, December.
    21. Lu, Chen & Zhang, Zixiao & Lan, Xiuting, 2019. "Impact of China's referral reform on the equity and spatial accessibility of healthcare resources: A case study of Beijing," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 235(C), pages 1-1.
    22. Dadashpoor, Hashem & Rostami, Faramarz, 2017. "Measuring spatial proportionality between service availability, accessibility and mobility: Empirical evidence using spatial equity approach in Iran," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 44-55.
    23. Mulley, Corinne & Tsai, Chi-Hong (Patrick), 2016. "When and how much does new transport infrastructure add to property values? Evidence from the bus rapid transit system in Sydney, Australia," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 15-23.
    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. Jinghong Shen & Jianquan Cheng & Wencong Huang & Fantao Zeng, 2020. "An Exploration of Spatial and Social Inequalities of Urban Sports Facilities in Nanning City, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-19, May.
    2. Laura Gabrielli & Aurora Greta Ruggeri & Massimiliano Scarpa, 2023. "“Location, Location, Location”: Fluctuations in Real Estate Market Values after COVID-19 and the War in Ukraine Based on Econometric and Spatial Analysis, Random Forest, and Multivariate Regression," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-23, June.
    3. Peishen Wu & Mei Liu, 2022. "A Framework for the Spatial Inequality in Urban Public Facility for Urban Planning, Design and Management," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-20, 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. Gibbons, Stephen & Machin, Stephen & Silva, Olmo, 2013. "Valuing school quality using boundary discontinuity," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 45246, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Rajapaksa, Darshana & Gono, Marcel & Wilson, Clevo & Managi, Shunsuke & Lee, Boon & Hoang, Viet-Ngu, 2020. "The demand for education: The impacts of good schools on property values in Brisbane, Australia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    3. Muñoz-Morales, Juan & Singh, Ruchi, 2023. "Do school shootings erode property values?," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    4. Christoph Basten & Maximilian von Ehrlich & Andrea Lassmann, 2014. "Income Taxes, Sorting, and the Costs of Housing," KOF Working papers 14-362, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    5. Jose Torres-Pruñonosa & Pablo García-Estévez & Josep Maria Raya & Camilo Prado-Román, 2022. "How on Earth Did Spanish Banking Sell the Housing Stock?," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, March.
    6. Gibbons, Stephen & Machin, Stephen & Silva, Olmo, 2013. "Valuing school quality using boundary discontinuities," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 15-28.
    7. Tobias Pfutze & Carlos Rodríguez-Castelán & Daniel Valderrama, 2023. "Urban transport infrastructure and household welfare: evidence from Colombia," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 65(3), pages 1409-1432, September.
    8. Mathilde Poulhes, 2017. "From Latin Quarter to Montmartre Investigating Parisian Real-Estate Prices," Working Papers 2017-13, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    9. Dubé, Jean & Andrianary, Eugénie & Assad-Déry, François & Poupart, Janie & Simard, Justine, 2018. "Exploring difference in value uplift resulting from new bus rapid transit routes within a medium size metropolitan area," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 258-269.
    10. Sylvie Charlot & Sonia Paty & Michel Visalli, 2013. "Assessing the impact of local taxation on property prices: a spatial matching contribution," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(9), pages 1151-1166, March.
    11. Filippova, Olga & Sheng, Mingyue, 2020. "Impact of bus rapid transit on residential property prices in Auckland, New Zealand," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    12. Peishen Wu & Mei Liu, 2022. "A Framework for the Spatial Inequality in Urban Public Facility for Urban Planning, Design and Management," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-20, August.
    13. Christoph Basten & Maximilian Ehrlich & Andrea Lassmann, 2017. "Income Taxes, Sorting and the Costs of Housing: Evidence from Municipal Boundaries in Switzerland," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0(601), pages 653-687, May.
    14. Zhang, Min & Yen, Barbara T.H. & Mulley, Corinne & Sipe, Neil, 2020. "An investigation of the open-system Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) network and property values: The case of Brisbane, Australia," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 16-34.
    15. Xiao, Yue & Wen, Haizhen & Hui, Eddie C.M. & Zhou, Ganghua, 2022. "Dynamic capitalization effects of educational facilities during different market stages: An empirical study in Hangzhou, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    16. Schwartz, Amy Ellen & Voicu, Ioan & Horn, Keren Mertens, 2014. "Do choice schools break the link between public schools and property values? Evidence from house prices in New York City," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 1-10.
    17. Ti-Ching Peng & Ying-Hui Chiang, 2015. "The non-linearity of hospitals' proximity on property prices: experiences from Taipei, Taiwan," Journal of Property Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(4), pages 341-361, December.
    18. 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.
    19. Zhang, Min & Yen, Barbara T.H., 2020. "The impact of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) on land and property values: A meta-analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    20. Agarwal, Sumit & Rengarajan, Satyanarain & Sing, Tien Foo & Yang, Yang, 2016. "School allocation rules and housing prices: A quasi-experiment with school relocation events in Singapore," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 42-56.

    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:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:21:p:6096-:d:282816. 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.