A discrete-space urban model with environmental amenities
This paper analyzes the effects of providing environmental amenities associated with open space in a discrete-space urban model and characterizes optimal provision of open space across a metropolitan area. The discrete-space model assumes distinct neighborhoods in which developable land is homogeneous within a neighborhood but heterogeneous across neighborhoods. Open space provides environmental amenities within the neighborhood it is located and may provide amenities in other neighborhoods (amenity spillover). We solve for equilibrium under various assumptions about amenity spillover effects and transportation costs in both open-city (with in- and out-migration) and closed-city (fixed population) versions of the model. Increasing open space tends to increase equilibrium housing density and price within a neighborhood. In an open-city model, open space provision also increases housing density and price in other neighborhoods if there is an amenity spillover effect. In a closed-city model, housing density and prices in other neighborhoods can decrease if the pull of the local amenity value is stronger than the push from reduced availability of developable land. We use numerical simulation to solve for the optimal pattern of open space in two examples: a simple symmetric case and a simulation based on the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, Minnesota, USA. With no amenity spillover, it is optimal to provide the same amount of open space in all neighborhoods regardless of transportation cost. With amenity spillover effects and relatively high transportation cost, it is optimal to provide open space in a greenbelt at the edge of the city. With low transportation cost, open space is provided throughout the city with the exception of neighborhoods on the periphery of the city, where the majority of the population lives. A greenbelt still occurs but its location is inside the city.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Richard Arnott & Alex Anas & Kenneth Small, 1997.
"Urban Spatial Structure,"
Boston College Working Papers in Economics
388., Boston College Department of Economics.
- Anas, Alex & Arnott, Richard & Small, Kenneth A., 1997. "Urban Spatial Structure," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt835049q3, University of California Transportation Center.
- Kent F. Kovacs & Douglas M. Larson, 2007. "The Influence of Recreation and Amenity Benefits of Open Space on Residential Development Patterns," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 83(4), pages 475-496.
- Nelson, Jon P., 1979. "Airport noise, location rent, and the market for residential amenities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 6(4), pages 320-331, December.
- repec:cup:cbooks:9780521346627 is not listed on IDEAS
- McMillen Daniel P. & McDonald John F., 1993. "Could Zoning Have Increased Land Values in Chicago?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 167-188, March.
- Vossler, Christian A. & Kerkvliet, Joe & Polasky, Stephen & Gainutdinova, Olesya, 2003. "Externally validating contingent valuation: an open-space survey and referendum in Corvallis, Oregon," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 261-277, June.
- Brueckner, J.K. & Thisse, J.-F. & Zenou, Y., 1996.
"Why is central Paris rich and downtown Detroit poor ? An amenity-based theory,"
CORE Discussion Papers
1996065, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Brueckner, Jan K. & Thisse, Jacques-Francois & Zenou, Yves, 1999. "Why is central Paris rich and downtown Detroit poor?: An amenity-based theory," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 91-107, January.
- BRUECKNER, Jan K. & THISSE, Jacques-François & ZENOU, Yves, . "Why is central Paris rich and downtown Detroit poor? An amenity-based theory," CORE Discussion Papers RP -1370, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Wu, JunJie & Plantinga, Andrew J., 2003. "The influence of public open space on urban spatial structure," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 288-309, September.
- Mitchell Polinsky, A. & Shavell, Steven, 1976. "Amenities and property values in a model of an urban area," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1-2), pages 119-129.
- Marcus Berliant & Shin-Kun Peng & Ping Wang, 2004.
"Welfare Analysis of the Number and Locations of Local Public Facilities,"
0407015, EconWPA, revised 20 Jul 2005.
- Berliant, Marcus & Peng, Shin-Kun & Wang, Ping, 2006. "Welfare analysis of the number and locations of local public facilities," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 207-226, March.
- Marcus Berliant & Shin-kun Peng & Ping Wang, 2000. "Welfare Analysis of the Number and Locations of Local Public Facilities," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 0035, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
- Marcus Berliant & Shin-Kun Peng & Ping Wang, 2004. "Welfare Analysis of the Number and Locations of Local Public Facilities," IEAS Working Paper : academic research 04-A011, Institute of Economics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan.
- Flatters, Frank & Henderson, Vernon & Mieszkowski, Peter, 1974. "Public goods, efficiency, and regional fiscal equalization," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 99-112, May.
- JunJie Wu, 2001. "Environmental Amenities and the Spatial Pattern of Urban Sprawl," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(3), pages 691-697.
- Nelson, Erik & Uwasu, Michinori & Polasky, Stephen, 2007. "Voting on open space: What explains the appearance and support of municipal-level open space conservation referenda in the United States?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 580-593, May.
- Wu, JunJie, 2006. "Environmental amenities, urban sprawl, and community characteristics," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 527-547, September.
- Marshall, Elizabeth P. & Homans, Frances R., 2002. "Urban Planning And The Location Of Environmental Amenities," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19610, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
- Parks, Peter J. & Schorr, James P., 1997. "Sustaining Open Space Benefits in the Northeast: An Evaluation of the Conservation Reserve Program," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 85-94, January.
- Robert E. Lucas & Esteban Rossi-Hansberg, 2002. "On the Internal Structure of Cities," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(4), pages 1445-1476, July.
- C H Yang & M Fujita, 1983. "Urban spatial structure with open space," Environment and Planning A, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 15(1), pages 67-84, January.
- Mark R. Correll & Jane H. Lillydahl & Larry D. Singell, 1978. "The Effects of Greenbelts on Residential Property Values: Some Findings on the Political Economy of Open Space," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 54(2), pages 207-217.
- Mills, David E., 1981. "Growth, speculation and sprawl in a monocentric city," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 201-226, September.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:resene:v:30:y:2008:i:2:p:170-196. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.