IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa16p640.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Tree canopies, urban green amenities and the residential real estate market: Remote sensing and spatial hedonic applications to Lisbon, Portugal

Author

Listed:
  • Jacob Macdonald
  • Sofia Franco

Abstract

This paper explores the use of remote sensing techniques and hedonic pricing methods for the valuation of urban green amenities and in particular street trees. The classification and study of these amenities in an urban area is challenged by the high level of spatially detailed data required. While tree canopies are important not only for their aesthetics and ecological benefits, it is difficult to obtain such data to be used for informed policy discussions. A classification algorithm is tested and applied to high resolution aerial photographs of Lisbon to assess the usage of remote sensing techniques for the detection of tree canopies in the city. Results indicate a high accuracy rate of approximately 90%. We further explore how the heterogeneity of urban green amenities influence the residential real estate market under the hedonic valuation framework with a spatial error specification, focusing on the impact of parks, urban forests, cemeteries, playgrounds, the Tagus River and Monsanto Forest Park. Results indicate that different types of green spaces are valued differently and further that there is varying effects in how the real estate market values different types of street trees. Residential real estate capitalizes these trees based on their heterogeneous characteristics such as location and relative age, with results showing that trees have significant positive amenity values in mitigating flood risk in the urban area. This highlights the importance in considering how different trees are contextualized in an urban environment. Remote sensing techniques of tree canopies are thus worthwhile in providing additional dimensions from which urban green amenities can be valued via the hedonic framework. In this way, our findings contribute to the broader debate on applying remote sensing and hedonic pricing to the valuation of ecosystem and environmental services and to assess strategies to increase the level of greenness within urban areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Jacob Macdonald & Sofia Franco, 2016. "Tree canopies, urban green amenities and the residential real estate market: Remote sensing and spatial hedonic applications to Lisbon, Portugal," ERSA conference papers ersa16p640, European Regional Science Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa16p640
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa16/Paper640_JacobMacdonald.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Bowker, James Michael & Park, William M., 2006. "Measuring the Contribution of Water and Green Space Amenities to Housing Values: An Application and Comparison of Spatially Weighted Hedonic Models," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 31(3), pages 1-23, December.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    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. Fleming, David & Grimes, Arthur & Lebreton, Laurent & Maré, David & Nunns, Peter, 2018. "Valuing sunshine," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 268-276.
      • David Fleming & Arthur Grimes & Laurent Lebreton & David C Maré & Peter Nunns, 2017. "Valuing Sunshine," Working Papers 17_13, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.

    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. Franco, Sofia F. & Macdonald, Jacob L., 2018. "Measurement and valuation of urban greenness: Remote sensing and hedonic applications to Lisbon, Portugal," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 156-180.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Marisa J. Mazzotta & Elena Besedin & Ann E. Speers, 2014. "A Meta-Analysis of Hedonic Studies to Assess the Property Value Effects of Low Impact Development," Resources, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-31, January.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Reeves, Tyler & Mei, Bin & Siry, Jacek & Bettinger, Pete & Ferreira, Susana, 2020. "Effect of working forest conservation easements on surrounding property values," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    9. Özge Öner, 2017. "Retail city: the relationship between place attractiveness and accessibility to shops," Spatial Economic Analysis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 72-91, January.
    10. Chiang Hsieh, Lin-Han, 2021. "Is it the flood, or the disclosure? An inquiry to the impact of flood risk on residential housing prices," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Sharma, Bijay P. & Cho, Seong-Hoon, 2021. "Analyzing how forest-based amenity values and carbon storage benefits affect spatial targeting for conservation investment," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    15. Neil Metz, 2017. "Value for Open Space: Protection and Access Level," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(1), pages 127-152, March.
    16. Matthew Chadourne & Seong-Hoon Cho & Roland Roberts, 2013. "Identifying priority target areas for the Knoxville–Knox County hillside and ridgetop protection plan: using the value of visual amenity during the real estate boom of 2002–2007 and the recession of 2," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 50(3), pages 911-934, June.
    17. 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.
    18. Hao Huang & Jianyi Li, 2021. "The spatial variation of moderating effects of density and natural amenities on housing prices in Wuhan, China," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(6), pages 1778-1804, December.
    19. H. Allen Klaiber & Joshua K. Abbott & V. Kerry Smith, 2017. "Some Like It (Less) Hot: Extracting Trade-Off Measures for Physically Coupled Amenities," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(4), pages 1053-1079.
    20. 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).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental amenities; tree canopy; spatial hedonic; remote sensing;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects
    • R21 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Household Analysis - - - Housing Demand

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ersa16p640. 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.