IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaa107/6705.html

Expert Opinion Versus Transaction Evidence: Using The Reilly Index To Measure Open Space Premiums In The Urban-Rural Fringe

Author

Listed:
  • Cotteleer, Geerte
  • Stobbe, Tracy
  • van Kooten, G. Cornelis

Abstract

Due to economic and population growth farmland and to a lesser extend other undeveloped areas are under pressure in the urban-rural fringe in British Columbia, Canada. The objectives of this paper are to determine if residential property values near Victoria, BC include open-space premiums for farmland or parks or both, and to determine if using assessed values instead of market prices of the property result in the same findings. We estimate a SUR (Seemingly Unrelated Regression) model with two hedonic pricing equations, one with actual market values as the dependent variable and one with assessed property values, and compare the resulting estimates of shadow prices for open space amenities. Furthermore, we take account of spatial autocorrelation and combine Method of Moment estimates of the spatial parameters in both equations.

Suggested Citation

  • Cotteleer, Geerte & Stobbe, Tracy & van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 2008. "Expert Opinion Versus Transaction Evidence: Using The Reilly Index To Measure Open Space Premiums In The Urban-Rural Fringe," 107th Seminar, January 30-February 1, 2008, Sevilla, Spain 6705, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaa107:6705
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.6705
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/6705/files/pp08co01.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.6705?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tamer Isgin & D. Lynn Forster, 2006. "A Hedonic Price Analysis of Farmland Option Premiums Under Urban Influences," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 54(3), pages 327-340, September.
    2. Kelejian, Harry H & Prucha, Ingmar R, 1999. "A Generalized Moments Estimator for the Autoregressive Parameter in a Spatial Model," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 40(2), pages 509-533, May.
    3. Kelejian, Harry H. & Prucha, Ingmar R., 2004. "Estimation of simultaneous systems of spatially interrelated cross sectional equations," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 118(1-2), pages 27-50.
    4. Geerte Cotteleer & Tracy Stobbe & G. Cornelis van Kooten, 2011. "Bayesian Model Averaging In The Context Of Spatial Hedonic Pricing: An Application To Farmland Values," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(3), pages 540-557, August.
    5. 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.
    6. Robert W. Paterson & Kevin J. Boyle, 2002. "Out of Sight, Out of Mind? Using GIS to Incorporate Visibility in Hedonic Property Value Models," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(3), pages 417-425.
    7. Jeffrey Kline & Dennis Wichelns, 1996. "Public Preferences Regarding the Goals of Farmland Preservation Programs," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(4), pages 538-549.
    8. Yue Jin Shi & Timothy T. Phipps & Dale Colyer, 1997. "Agricultural Land Values under Urbanizing Influences," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 73(1), pages 90-100.
    9. Bucholtz, Shawn & Geoghegan, Jacqueline & Lynch, Lori, 2003. "Capitalization of Open Spaces into Housing Values and the Residential Property Tax Revenue Impacts of Agricultural Easement Programs," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 32(01), pages 1-13, April.
    10. Coro Chasco Yrigoyen & Jose Vicens Otero, 1998. "Spatial interaction models applied to the design of retail trade areas," ERSA conference papers ersa98p81, European Regional Science Association.
    11. Brian J. L. Berry & Robert S. Bednarz, 1975. "A Hedonic Model of Prices and Assessments for Single-Family Homes: Does the Assessor Follow the Market or the Market Follow the Assessor?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 51(1), pages 21-40.
    12. Cassel, Eric & Mendelsohn, Robert, 1985. "The choice of functional forms for hedonic price equations: Comment," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 135-142, September.
    13. Richard C. Ready & Charles W. Abdalla, 2005. "The Amenity and Disamenity Impacts of Agriculture: Estimates from a Hedonic Pricing Model," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(2), pages 314-326.
    14. Kenneth Y. Chay & Michael Greenstone, 2005. "Does Air Quality Matter? Evidence from the Housing Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 113(2), pages 376-424, April.
    15. 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.
    16. Rosen, Sherwin, 1974. "Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Product Differentiation in Pure Competition," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(1), pages 34-55, Jan.-Feb..
    17. Elena G. Irwin & Nancy E. Bockstael, 2001. "The Problem of Identifying Land Use Spillovers: Measuring the Effects of Open Space on Residential Property Values," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(3), pages 698-704.
    18. Haixiao Huang & Gay Y. Miller & Bruce J. Sherrick & Miguel I. Gómez, 2006. "Factors Influencing Illinois Farmland Values," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(2), pages 458-470.
    19. Cropper, Maureen L & Deck, Leland B & McConnell, Kenneth E, 1988. "On the Choice of Functional Form for Hedonic Price Functions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 70(4), pages 668-675, November.
    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. Monique DANTAS & Frédéric GASCHET & Guillaume POUYANNE, 2010. "Regulatory zoning and coastal housing prices: a bayesian hedonic approach (In French)," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2010-12, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).

    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. Cotteleer, Geerte & van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 2012. "Expert opinion versus actual transaction evidence in the valuation of non-market amenities," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 32-40.
    2. 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.
    3. Yoo, James & Simonit, Silvio & Connors, John P. & Maliszewski, Paul J. & Kinzig, Ann P. & Perrings, Charles, 2013. "The value of agricultural water rights in agricultural properties in the path of development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 57-68.
    4. Margaret Walls & Carolyn Kousky & Ziyan Chu, 2015. "Is What You See What You Get? The Value of Natural Landscape Views," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 91(1), pages 1-19.
    5. Bruno Lanz & Allan Provins, 2013. "Valuing Local Environmental Amenity with Discrete Choice Experiments: Spatial Scope Sensitivity and Heterogeneous Marginal Utility of Income," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(1), pages 105-130, September.
    6. Seong-Hoon Cho & Dayton Lambert & Seung Kim & Roland Roberts & William Park, 2011. "Relationship between value of open space and distance from housing locations within a community," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 393-414, December.
    7. Fabian Waltert & Felix Schlaepfer, 2007. "The role of landscape amenities in regional development: a survey of migration, regional economic and hedonic pricing studies," SOI - Working Papers 0710, Socioeconomic Institute - University of Zurich.
    8. 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.
    9. Seong-Hoon Cho & Christopher D. Clark & William M. Park & Seung Gyu Kim, 2009. "Spatial and Temporal Variation in the Housing Market Values of Lot Size and Open Space," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 85(1), pages 51-73.
    10. 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.
    11. Yoo, James & Ready, Richard, 2016. "The impact of agricultural conservation easement on nearby house prices: Incorporating spatial autocorrelation and spatial heterogeneity," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 78-93.
    12. Black, Katie Jo, 2018. "Wide open spaces: Estimating the willingness to pay for adjacent preserved open space," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 110-121.
    13. Hu, Ziwei & Swallow, Brent & Qiu, Feng, 2021. "Measuring the Amenity Value of Urban Open Space Using a Spatial Hedonic Approach: The Case of Edmonton, Canada," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315287, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Delores Conway & Christina Li & Jennifer Wolch & Christopher Kahle & Michael Jerrett, 2010. "A Spatial Autocorrelation Approach for Examining the Effects of Urban Greenspace on Residential Property Values," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 150-169, August.
    15. Horsch, Eric J. & Lewis, David J., 2008. "The Effects of Aquatic Invasive Species on Property Values: Evidence from a Quasi-Random Experiment," Staff Papers 92216, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    16. Irwin, Nicholas B. & Klaiber, H. Allen & Irwin, Elena G., 2017. "Do Stormwater Basins Generate co-Benefits? Evidence from Baltimore County, Maryland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 202-212.
    17. Lynch, Lori & Duke, Joshua M., 2007. "Economic Benefits of Farmland Preservation: Evidence from the United States," Working Papers 7342, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    18. Monique DANTAS & Frédéric GASCHET & Guillaume POUYANNE, 2010. "Regulatory zoning and coastal housing prices: a bayesian hedonic approach (In French)," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2010-12, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    19. Kuminoff, Nicolai V. & Parmeter, Christopher F. & Pope, Jaren C., 2008. "Hedonic Price Functions: Guidance On Empirical Specification," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6555, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    20. Diana Mok & Ling‐Hin Li, 2010. "The Spatial Impact of Language Policies on the Marginal Bids for English Education in Hong Kong," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(4), pages 556-587, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • R14 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Land Use Patterns
    • R52 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - Land Use and Other Regulations
    • C21 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Cross-Sectional Models; Spatial Models; Treatment Effect Models
    • Q20 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - General
    • H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies

    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:ags:eaa107:6705. 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/eaaeeea.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.