IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea26/404756.html

The Natural Amenities Scale: Conceptual and Empirical Advancements in Measuring Rural Natural Amenities in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Paul, Laura
  • Dobis, Elizabeth

Abstract

We present an updated Natural Amenities Scale that modernizes and expands the foundational 1999 index developed by the USDA Economic Research Service. Natural amenities—features such as climate, land cover, water resources, and terrain—continue to shape residential preferences, migration patterns, and regional development. Substantial advances in environmental data, along with shifting policy and demographic contexts, necessitate a revised scale that reflects contemporary conditions and supports modern research applications. The updated index incorporates high-resolution climate, land-cover, and terrain data from 1990–2020, emphasizes scientifically grounded thresholds of climatic comfort, and includes new measures such as forest cover and refined water-area calculations. It expands geographic coverage to all U.S. counties and census tracts, addressing past limitations related to boundary definitions and incomplete spatial coverage. Using a transparent additive framework with min-max rescaling, the scale preserves interpretability while improving accuracy, spatial detail, and conceptual grounding. This report documents the methodological decisions behind the updated scale, including variable selection, data processing, and index construction. It also outlines key differences from the 1999 edition and discusses implications for research on migration, economic development, environmental amenities, and community well-being. The resulting dataset will be released as a publicly available ERS data product at the county level. The updated scale is designed for reproducibility and future maintenance as environmental data and policy needs continue to evolve.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul, Laura & Dobis, Elizabeth, 2026. "The Natural Amenities Scale: Conceptual and Empirical Advancements in Measuring Rural Natural Amenities in the United States," 2026 Annual Meeting, July 26 - 28, 2026, Kansas City, Missouri 404756, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea26:404756
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.404756
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/404756/files/177680_195618_115232_Natural_Amenities_Scale_AAEA_draft.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.404756?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bark, R.H. & Osgood, D.E. & Colby, B.G. & Katz, G. & Stromberg, J., 2009. "Habitat preservation and restoration: Do homebuyers have preferences for quality habitat?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1465-1475, March.
    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. Liu, Xiangping & Taylor, Laura O. & Hamilton, Timothy L. & Grigelis, Peter E., 2013. "Amenity values of proximity to National Wildlife Refuges: An analysis of urban residential property values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 37-43.
    2. Tapsuwan, Sorada & Polyakov, Maksym & Bark, Rosalind & Nolan, Martin, 2015. "Valuing the Barmah–Millewa Forest and in stream river flows: A spatial heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation consistent (SHAC) approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 98-105.
    3. Mahmoudi, Parvin & MacDonald, Darla Hatton & Crossman, Neville D. & Summers, David M. & van der Hoek, John, 2013. "Space matters: the importance of amenity in planning metropolitan growth," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 57(01), pages 1-22.
    4. Thomy, Buyani & Morrison, Mark & Duncan, Roderick & Bark, Rosalind H. & Boyle, Kevin J. & Birtles, Phillip J., 2024. "Investigating revealed preferences for urban waterway conditions: A hedonic property valuation study," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 68(02), January.
    5. Toke Emil Panduro & Cathrine Ulla Jensen & Thomas Hedemark Lundhede & Kathrine von Graevenitz & Bo Jellesmark Thorsen, 2016. "Estimating demand schedules in hedonic analysis: The case of urban parks," IFRO Working Paper 2016/06, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    6. Siqi Feng & Yuefei Zhuo & Zhongguo Xu & Yang Chen & Guan Li & Xueqi Wang, 2024. "Nature’s Neighborhood: The Housing Premium of Urban Parks in Dense Cities," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-19, October.
    7. 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.
    8. Todd BenDor & T William Lester & Avery Livengood & Adam Davis & Logan Yonavjak, 2015. "Estimating the Size and Impact of the Ecological Restoration Economy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-15, June.
    9. Parvin Mahmoudi & Darla Hatton MacDonald & Neville D. Crossman & David M. Summers & John van der Hoek, 2013. "Space matters: the importance of amenity in planning metropolitan growth," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 57(1), pages 38-59, January.
    10. 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.
    11. James R. Meldrum, 2016. "Floodplain Price Impacts by Property Type in Boulder County, Colorado: Condominiums Versus Standalone Properties," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 64(4), pages 725-750, August.
    12. Sheila M. Olmstead, 2010. "The Economics of Managing Scarce Water Resources," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(2), pages 179-198, Summer.
    13. Ram Pandit & Maksym Polyakov & Rohan Sadler, 2014. "Valuing public and private urban tree canopy cover," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 58(3), pages 453-470, July.
    14. Catarina Archer de Carvalho & Mauro Raposo & Carlos Pinto-Gomes & Rute Matos, 2022. "Native or Exotic: A Bibliographical Review of the Debate on Ecological Science Methodologies: Valuable Lessons for Urban Green Space Design," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-17, July.
    15. Phillips, Mallory & Boyle, Kevin J. & Swedberg, Kristen, 2025. "Valuation of forested river riparian buffers: Support for riverine integrity and climate resilience," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    16. Kuwayama, Yusuke & Olmstead, Sheila & Krupnick, Alan, 2013. "Water Resoures and Unconventional Fossil Fuel Development: Linking Physical Impacts to Social Costs," RFF Working Paper Series dp-13-34, Resources for the Future.
    17. Bark, Rosalind H. & Osgood, Daniel E. & Colby, Bonnie G. & Halper, Eve B., 2011. "How Do Homebuyers Value Different Types of Green Space?," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 36(2), pages 1-21, 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:ags:aaea26:404756. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.