IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i23p10612-d1536009.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Urban Park Green Spaces Landscape Premium Functional Value Accounting System: Construction and Application

Author

Listed:
  • Lingling Duan

    (Ecology and Nature Conservation Institute, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China
    Key Laboratory of Forest Ecology and Environment, State Forestry and Grassland Administration, Beijing 100091, China
    Dagangshan National Key Field Observation and Research Station for Forest Ecosystem, Xinyu 338033, China)

  • Xiang Niu

    (Ecology and Nature Conservation Institute, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China
    Key Laboratory of Forest Ecology and Environment, State Forestry and Grassland Administration, Beijing 100091, China
    Dagangshan National Key Field Observation and Research Station for Forest Ecosystem, Xinyu 338033, China)

  • Bing Wang

    (Ecology and Nature Conservation Institute, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China
    Key Laboratory of Forest Ecology and Environment, State Forestry and Grassland Administration, Beijing 100091, China
    Dagangshan National Key Field Observation and Research Station for Forest Ecosystem, Xinyu 338033, China)

Abstract

Urban park green spaces have the functions of improving the urban ecological environment and providing recreational services, and at the same time, they have a certain effect on the value of the surrounding residential property. To quantitatively assess the value of the landscape premium function of park green space, many scholars have carried out research exploration and adopted a variety of methods (such as the contingent valuation method (CVM), travel cost method (TCM) and hedonic price method (HPM)), which have developed from simple theoretical models with single factors to complex empirical models with multiple factors. Among them, the hedonic price method has become the mainstream research method, and in recent years, it has been widely adopted in combination with GIS technology. In terms of research objects, single park green space or multiple park green spaces in large cities are the main focus, while there are fewer studies on park green spaces in built-up areas of small and medium-sized cities. In terms of research content, there are more studies on the value-added coefficient of landscape premium and influence distance, and there are fewer studies on the total value of landscape premium. This article aims to calculate the total landscape premium value of all park green spaces in the built-up areas of small and medium-sized cities, proposing a complete and operable accounting system for the functional value of park green space landscape premiums by combining GIS with a hedonic pricing model and remote sensing image interpretation methods. For the first time, a method for interpreting the height of residential buildings within the benefit range of landscape premium through remote sensing images is proposed, and then the floor area ratio of residential plots is estimated, so as to estimate the total area of actual beneficial buildings. Therefore, this paper takes Chifeng City, a small and medium-sized city, as a case study, and empirically demonstrates the assessment of the landscape premium function of parks and green spaces in the built-up area of Chifeng City by using this accounting system. Research shows that this method has certain feasibility, not only calculating the total value of landscape premium but also addressing the issue in existing studies where all areas within the potential range of landscape premium function are counted as appreciated areas, leading to an overestimation of the premium. It further advances the accuracy of accounting for the value of landscape premium function of urban park green space and provides theoretical reference for the planning and construction of urban park green space.

Suggested Citation

  • Lingling Duan & Xiang Niu & Bing Wang, 2024. "The Urban Park Green Spaces Landscape Premium Functional Value Accounting System: Construction and Application," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-17, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:23:p:10612-:d:1536009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/23/10612/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/23/10612/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kalle Seip & Jon Strand, 1992. "Willingness to pay for environmental goods in Norway: A contingent valuation study with real payment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(1), pages 91-106, January.
    2. Radcliffe G. Edmonds, 1984. "A Theoretical Basis for Hedonic Regression: A Research Primer," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 12(1), pages 72-85, March.
    3. Allan Din & Martin Hoesli & Andre Bender, 2001. "Environmental Variables and Real Estate Prices," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 38(11), pages 1989-2000, October.
    4. V. Kerry Smith, 1975. "Travel Cost Demand Models for Wilderness Recreation: A Problem of Non-Nested Hypotheses," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 51(2), pages 103-111.
    5. Timothy J. Bartik, 2008. "Measuring the Benefits of Amenity Improvements in Hedonic Price Models," Book chapters authored by Upjohn Institute researchers, in: Richard E. Just & Darrell L. Hueth & Andrew Schmitz (ed.),Applied Welfare Economics, pages 643-654, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    6. V. Kerry Smith & William H. Desvousges & Ann Fisher, 1986. "A Comparison of Direct and Indirect Methods for Estimating Environmental Benefits," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 68(2), pages 280-290.
    7. V. Kerry Smith & Raymond J. Kopp, 1980. "The Spatial Limits of the Travel Cost Recreational Demand Model," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 56(1), pages 64-72.
    8. Geoghegan, Jacqueline & Wainger, Lisa A. & Bockstael, Nancy E., 1997. "Spatial landscape indices in a hedonic framework: an ecological economics analysis using GIS," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 251-264, December.
    9. Bolund, Per & Hunhammar, Sven, 1999. "Ecosystem services in urban areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 293-301, May.
    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. Robert Deacon & Felix Schläpfer, 2010. "The Spatial Range of Public Goods Revealed Through Referendum Voting," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(3), pages 305-328, November.
    2. Damrongsak Rinchumphu & Chris Eves & Connie Susilawati, 2013. "Brand Value of Property in Bangkok Metropolitan Region (BMR), Thailand," International Real Estate Review, Global Social Science Institute, vol. 16(3), pages 296-322.
    3. 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.
    4. Brereton, Finbarr & Clinch, J. Peter & Ferreira, Susana, 2008. "Happiness, geography and the environment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 386-396, April.
    5. Revesz, Richard & Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Law and Policy," Working Paper Series rwp04-023, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    6. Richard T. Carson & Nicholas E. Flores & Kerry M. Martin & Jennifer L. Wright, 1996. "Contingent Valuation and Revealed Preference Methodologies: Comparing the Estimates for Quasi-Public Goods," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(1), pages 80-99.
    7. Haoxuan Zou & Guannan Teng, 2021. "Measuring Hukou Amenity by Using Urban Land Price in China," Journal of Applied Finance & Banking, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 11(3), pages 1-5.
    8. Veronika Liebelt & Stephan Bartke & Nina Schwarz, 2019. "Urban Green Spaces and Housing Prices: An Alternative Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-21, July.
    9. Goran Krsnik & Sonia Reyes-Paecke & Keith M. Reynolds & Jordi Garcia-Gonzalo & José Ramón González Olabarria, 2023. "Assessing Relativeness in the Provision of Urban Ecosystem Services: Better Comparison Methods for Improved Well-Being," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, May.
    10. Pamela Wicker & John C. Whitehead & Bruce K. Johnson & Daniel S. Mason, 2016. "Willingness-To-Pay For Sporting Success Of Football Bundesliga Teams," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 34(3), pages 446-462, July.
    11. Juergen Deppner & Marcelo Cajias, 2024. "Accounting for Spatial Autocorrelation in Algorithm-Driven Hedonic Models: A Spatial Cross-Validation Approach," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 68(2), pages 235-273, February.
    12. Parvez, Md Rezwanul & Ripplinger, David & Maduraperuma, Buddhika, 2015. "Modeling Land Use Pattern Change Analysis in the Northern Great Plains: A Novel Approach," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205868, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    13. Ali Azadeh & Mohammad Sheikhalishahi & Ali Boostani, 2014. "A Flexible Neuro-Fuzzy Approach for Improvement of Seasonal Housing Price Estimation in Uncertain and Non-Linear Environments," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 82(4), pages 567-582, December.
    14. Bala, Alain Pholo & Peeters, Dominique & Thomas, Isabelle, 2014. "Spatial issues on a hedonic estimation of rents in Brussels," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 104-123.
    15. Catherine Heyes & Anthony Heyes, 1999. "Willingness to Pay Versus Willingness to Travel: Assessing the Recreational Benefits from Dartmoor National Park," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(1), pages 124-139, January.
    16. Alexander V. Rusanov, 2019. "Dacha dwellers and gardeners: garden plots and second homes in Europe and Russia," Population and Economics, ARPHA Platform, vol. 3(1), pages 107-124, April.
    17. Hui, Ling Chui & Jim, C.Y., 2022. "Urban-greenery demands are affected by perceptions of ecosystem services and disservices, and socio-demographic and environmental-cultural factors," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    18. Monika Kopecká & Daniel Szatmári & Konštantín Rosina, 2017. "Analysis of Urban Green Spaces Based on Sentinel-2A: Case Studies from Slovakia," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-17, April.
    19. Veerkamp, Clara J. & Schipper, Aafke M. & Hedlund, Katarina & Lazarova, Tanya & Nordin, Amanda & Hanson, Helena I., 2021. "A review of studies assessing ecosystem services provided by urban green and blue infrastructure," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    20. Patricia Champ & Richard Bishop, 2001. "Donation Payment Mechanisms and Contingent Valuation: An Empirical Study of Hypothetical Bias," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(4), pages 383-402, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:23:p:10612-:d:1536009. 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.