IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa13p513.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Agricultural preservation, large-lot zoning, and real estate development in New Jersey, USA

Author

Listed:
  • Paul Gottlieb

Abstract

All developed countries have programs designed to help agricultural landscapes withstand market forces that might otherwise eliminate them. In peri-urban areas within the United States, minimum lot size zoning is a common tool designed to achieve this objective. Along with differential tax assessment and the purchase of development rights, minimum lot size zoning is a key element in many rural preservation programs. It is generally a local government prerogative, meaning that it is enacted at the county level in some states and at the municipal level in others. Large-lot zoning may be evaluated on a number of criteria, including equity outcomes and the supply of affordable housing. An understudied aspect of large-lot zoning is its effect on landscape change at the municipal level. On the one hand, a minimum lot size constraint on newly-constructed homes should reduce the number of local housing starts. Assuming that the main goal of such a policy is to postpone development in the interest of agricultural preservation, this is exactly what the policy intends. On the other hand, those homes that are built will presumably have larger front and backyards than would be the case in the absence of the lot size constraint. This is a potential unintended consequence of lot-size zoning policies. Not only that, it is the very essence of 'urban sprawl' -- a style of low-density development that is widespread in the US, but which is criticized for being socially, environmentally, and fiscally inefficient. This paper will present empirical results on zoning policies and development outcomes in 83 municipalities in northwestern New Jersey, USA. All 83 municipalities retained local control over zoning during the study period (although they subsequently lost some of these powers to a regional planning body). The dataset used for this study is uniquely suited for its intended purpose. It includes panel data on local zoning, open space acquisition, housing starts, and changes in landscape cover derived from aerial photography. It therefore addresses the so-called 'backyard problem' directly, while also deploying enough data to handle the expected endogeneity between residential development and zoning regulations.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul Gottlieb, 2013. "Agricultural preservation, large-lot zoning, and real estate development in New Jersey, USA," ERSA conference papers ersa13p513, European Regional Science Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa13p513
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa13/ERSA2013_paper_00513.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hamilton, Bruce W, 1976. "Capitalization of Intrajurisdictional Differences in Local Tax Prices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(5), pages 743-753, December.
    2. Newburn, David A. & Berck, Peter, 2011. "Growth Management Policies for Exurban and Suburban Development: Theory and an Application to Sonoma County, California," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(3), pages 375-392, December.
    3. Erik Lichtenberg & Ian Hardie, 2007. "Open Space, Forest Conservation, and Urban Sprawl in Maryland Suburban Subdivisions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1198-1204.
    4. J.M. Pogodzinski & Tim R. Sass, 1991. "Measuring the Effects of Municipal Zoning Regulations: A Survey," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 28(4), pages 597-621, August.
    5. Gottlieb, Paul D. & O’Donnell, Anthony & Rudel, Thomas & O’Neill, Karen & McDermott, Melanie, 2012. "Determinants of local housing growth in a multi-jurisdictional region, along with a test for nonmarket zoning," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 296-309.
    6. William Lockeretz, 1989. "Secondary Effects on Midwestern Agriculture of Metropolitan Development and Decreases in Farmland," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 65(3), pages 205-216.
    7. Douglas J. Miller & Andrew J. Plantinga, 1999. "Modeling Land Use Decisions with Aggregate Data," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(1), pages 180-194.
    8. Quigley, John M. & Rosenthal, Larry A., 2005. "The Effects of Land-Use Regulation on the Price of Housing: What Do We Know? What Can We Learn?," Berkeley Program on Housing and Urban Policy, Working Paper Series qt90m9g90w, Berkeley Program on Housing and Urban Policy.
    9. Moss, William G., 1977. "Large lot zoning, property taxes, and metropolitan area," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 408-427, October.
    10. Thorson, James A., 1997. "The Effect of Zoning on Housing Construction," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 81-91, March.
    11. Raup, Philip M., 1975. "Urban Threats To Rural Lands: Background And Beginnings," Staff Papers 13606, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    12. R Pendall, 1999. "Do Land-Use Controls Cause Sprawl?," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 26(4), pages 555-571, August.
    13. McConnell, Virginia & Walls, Margaret & Kopits, Elizabeth, 2006. "Zoning, TDRs and the density of development," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 440-457, May.
    14. Xiangping Liu & Lori Lynch, 2010. "Do Zoning Regulations Rob Rural Landowners' Equity?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(1), pages 1-25.
    15. Pasha, Hafiz A., 1996. "Suburban Minimum Lot Zoning and Spatial Equilibrium," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 1-12, July.
    16. Hans R. Isakson, 2004. "Analysis of the Effects of Large Lot Zoning," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 26(4), pages 397-416.
    17. Brian Roe & Elena G. Irwin & Hazel A. Morrow-Jones, 2004. "The Effects of Farmland, Farmland Preservation, and Other Neighborhood Amenities on Housing Values and Residential Growth," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 80(1), pages 55-75.
    18. Wu, JunJie & Cho, Seong-Hoon, 2007. "The effect of local land use regulations on urban development in the Western United States," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 69-86, January.
    19. Chamberlain, Gary, 1992. "Sequential Moment Restrictions in Panel Data: Comment," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 10(1), pages 20-26, January.
    20. Miller, Douglas & Plantinga, Andrew J., 1999. "Modeling Land Use Decisions with Aggregate Data," Staff General Research Papers Archive 1487, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    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. Gottlieb, Paul D. & O’Donnell, Anthony & Rudel, Thomas & O’Neill, Karen & McDermott, Melanie, 2012. "Determinants of local housing growth in a multi-jurisdictional region, along with a test for nonmarket zoning," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 296-309.
    2. Maria A. Cunha‐e‐Sá & Sofia F. Franco, 2017. "The Effects of Development Constraints on Forest Management at the Urban‐Forest Interface," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 99(3), pages 614-636, April.
    3. Magliocca, Nicholas & McConnell, Virginia & Walls, Margaret & Safirova, Elena, 2012. "Zoning on the urban fringe: Results from a new approach to modeling land and housing markets," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 198-210.
    4. Ehrlich, Maximilian V. & Hilber, Christian A.L. & Schöni, Olivier, 2018. "Institutional settings and urban sprawl: Evidence from Europe," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 4-18.
    5. Lichtenberg, Erik, 2008. "Open Space and Urban Sprawl: The Case of the Maryland Forest Conservation Act," Working Papers 37812, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    6. Zabel, Jeffrey & Dalton, Maurice, 2011. "The impact of minimum lot size regulations on house prices in Eastern Massachusetts," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 571-583.
    7. Magliocca, Nicholas & McConnell, Virginia & Walls, Margaret, 2015. "Exploring sprawl: Results from an economic agent-based model of land and housing markets," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 114-125.
    8. Sims, Katharine R.E. & Schuetz, Jenny, 2009. "Local regulation and land-use change: The effects of wetlands bylaws in Massachusetts," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 409-421, July.
    9. Maria A. Cunha-e-Sa & Sofia F. Franco, 2013. "The effects of land-use development policies on forest management," Nova SBE Working Paper Series wp576, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Nova School of Business and Economics.
    10. Wade, Tara & Kurkalova, Lyubov & Secchi, Silvia, 2016. "Modeling Field-Level Conservation Tillage Adoption with Aggregate Choice Data," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(2), May.
    11. KURKALOVA, Lyubov A. & WADE, Tara R., 2013. "Aggregated Choice Data And Logit Models: Application To Environmental Benign Practices Of Conservation Tillage By Farmers In The State Of Iowa," Applied Econometrics and International Development, Euro-American Association of Economic Development, vol. 13(2), pages 119-128.
    12. Carrión-Flores, Carmen E. & Flores-Lagunes, Alfonso & Guci, Ledia, 2018. "An estimator for discrete-choice models with spatial lag dependence using large samples, with an application to land-use conversions," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 77-93.
    13. CARPENTIER, Alain & GOHIN, Alexandre & SCKOKAI, Paolo & THOMAS, Alban, 2015. "Economic modelling of agricultural production: past advances and new challenges," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 96(1), March.
    14. Chakir, Raja & Lungarska, Anna, 2015. "Agricultural land rents in land use models: a spatial econometric analysis," 150th Seminar, October 22-23, 2015, Edinburgh, Scotland 212641, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Catherine L. Kling & Raymond W. Arritt & Gray Calhoun & David A. Keiser, 2016. "Research Needs and Challenges in the FEW System: Coupling Economic Models with Agronomic, Hydrologic, and Bioenergy Models for Sustainable Food, Energy, and Water Systems," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 16-wp563, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    16. Basak Bayramoglu & Raja CHAKIR & Anna LUNGARSKA, 2016. "Land Use and Freshwater Ecosystems in France," EcoMod2016 9420, EcoMod.
    17. Hyunseok Kim & GianCarlo Moschini, 2018. "The Dynamics of Supply: U.S. Corn and Soybeans in the Biofuel Era," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 94(4), pages 593-613.
    18. Walid Oueslati & Julien Salanié & JunJie Wu, 2014. "Urbanization and Agricultural Structural Adjustments: Some Lessons from European Cities," Working Papers 1442, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    19. Kurkalova, Lyubov A. & Rabotyagov, Sergey S., 2003. "Estimation Of A Discrete Choice Model When Individual Choices Are Not Observable," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22230, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    20. Li, Sheng & Nadolnyak, Denis & Hartarska, Valentina, 2019. "Agricultural land conversion: Impacts of economic and natural risk factors in a coastal area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 380-390.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R52 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - Land Use and Other Regulations
    • R14 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Land Use Patterns
    • R31 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Real Estate Markets, Spatial Production Analysis, and Firm Location - - - Housing Supply and Markets

    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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa13p513. 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: Gunther Maier (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ersa.org .

    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.