IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/foi/wpaper/2016_06.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Estimating demand schedules in hedonic analysis: The case of urban parks

Author

Listed:
  • Toke Emil Panduro

    (Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen)

  • Cathrine Ulla Jensen

    (Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen)

  • Thomas Hedemark Lundhede

    (Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen
    Center for Macroecology, Evolution and Climate, University of Copenhagen)

  • Kathrine von Graevenitz

    (Department of Environmental and Resource Economics, Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW))

  • Bo Jellesmark Thorsen

    (Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen
    Center for Macroecology, Evolution and Climate, University of Copenhagen)

Abstract

The hedonic pricing method has been used extensively to obtain implicit prices for availability of urban green space, but few hedonic studies have obtained households’ preference parameters. We estimate willingness to pay functions for park availability in Copenhagen using an approach that places identifying restrictions on the utility function. We do this for two different measures of park availability. We apply our results to a policy scenario and show how estimates of aggregate welfare changes are highly sensitive to the measure of park availability applied. Thus, the approach in this study applies an alternative path for estimation of demand schedules for public goods using hedonic data. The findings also stress the importance of paying attention to how public goods are defined when undertaking welfare economic policy analyses.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:foi:wpaper:2016_06
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://okonomi.foi.dk/workingpapers/WPpdf/WP2016/IFRO_WP_2016_06.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Okmyung Bin & Craig E. Landry & Gregory F. Meyer, 2009. "Riparian Buffers and Hedonic Prices: A Quasi-Experimental Analysis of Residential Property Values in the Neuse River Basin," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(4), pages 1067-1079.
    2. Brasington, David M. & Hite, Diane, 2005. "Demand for environmental quality: a spatial hedonic analysis," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 57-82, January.
    3. 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.
    4. Patrick Bajari & C. Lanier Benkard, 2001. "Demand Estimation With Heterogeneous Consumers and Unobserved Product Characteristics: A Hedonic Approach," NBER Technical Working Papers 0272, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Patrick Bajari & Matthew E. Kahn, 2005. "Estimating Housing Demand With an Application to Explaining Racial Segregation in Cities," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 23, pages 20-33, January.
    6. 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.
    7. Mansfield, Carol & Pattanayak, Subhrendu K. & McDow, William & McDonald, Robert & Halpin, Patrick, 2005. "Shades of Green: Measuring the value of urban forests in the housing market," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 177-199, December.
    8. Bin, Okmyung & Landry, Craig E. & Meyer, Gregory F., 2009. "Title: “AJAE appendix for Riparian Buffers and Hedonic Prices: A Quasi-Experimental Analysis of Residential Property Values in the Neuse River Basin”," American Journal of Agricultural Economics APPENDICES, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(4), pages 1-3, February.
    9. Scott Orford, 2002. "Valuing Locational Externalities: A GIS and Multilevel Modelling Approach," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 29(1), pages 105-127, February.
    10. Kathrine von Graevenitz & Toke Emil Panduro, 2015. "An Alternative to the Standard Spatial Econometric Approaches in Hedonic House Price Models," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 91(2), pages 386-409.
    11. Patrick Bajari & C. Lanier Benkard, 2005. "Demand Estimation with Heterogeneous Consumers and Unobserved Product Characteristics: A Hedonic Approach," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 113(6), pages 1239-1276, December.
    12. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, December.
    13. Brett Day & Ian Bateman & Iain Lake, 2007. "Beyond implicit prices: recovering theoretically consistent and transferable values for noise avoidance from a hedonic property price model," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 211-232, May.
    14. David M. Brasington & Diane Hite, 2005. "Demand for Environmental Quality: A Spatial Hedonic Approach," Departmental Working Papers 2005-08, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    15. Noelwah R. Netusil & Sudip Chattopadhyay & Kent F. Kovacs, 2010. "Estimating the Demand for Tree Canopy: A Second-Stage Hedonic Price Analysis in Portland, Oregon," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 86(2), pages 281-293.
    16. 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.
    17. 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..
    18. Toke Panduro & Bo Thorsen, 2014. "Evaluating two model reduction approaches for large scale hedonic models sensitive to omitted variables and multicollinearity," Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 85-102, July.
    19. 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. Cathrine Ulla Jensen & Toke Emil Panduro & Thomas Hedemark Lundhede & Kathrine von Graevenitz & Bo Jellesmark Thorsen, 2016. "Robin Hood in reverse? Assessing distributional effects of green space policy using a second-stage hedonic house price model," IFRO Working Paper 2016/07, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.

    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. Panduro, Toke Emil & Jensen, Cathrine Ulla & Lundhede, Thomas Hedemark & von Graevenitz, Kathrine & Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark, 2018. "Eliciting preferences for urban parks," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 127-142.
    2. Cathrine Ulla Jensen & Toke Emil Panduro & Thomas Hedemark Lundhede & Kathrine von Graevenitz & Bo Jellesmark Thorsen, 2016. "Robin Hood in reverse? Assessing distributional effects of green space policy using a second-stage hedonic house price model," IFRO Working Paper 2016/07, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    3. Wei Li & Jean-Daniel Saphores, 2012. "A Spatial Hedonic Analysis of the Value of Urban Land Cover in the Multifamily Housing Market in Los Angeles, CA," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 49(12), pages 2597-2615, September.
    4. Mei, Yingdan & Hite, Diane & Sohngen, Brent, 2017. "Demand for urban tree cover: A two-stage hedonic price analysis in California," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 29-35.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Nicolai V. Kuminoff & V. Kerry Smith & Christopher Timmins, 2010. "The New Economics of Equilibrium Sorting and its Transformational Role for Policy Evaluation," NBER Working Papers 16349, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Nicolai V. Kuminoff & V. Kerry Smith & Christopher Timmins, 2013. "The New Economics of Equilibrium Sorting and Policy Evaluation Using Housing Markets," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 51(4), pages 1007-1062, December.
    9. von Graevenitz, Kathrine, 2018. "The amenity cost of road noise," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 1-22.
    10. Christophe Bontemps & Michel Simioni & Yves Surry, 2008. "Semiparametric hedonic price models: assessing the effects of agricultural nonpoint source pollution," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(6), pages 825-842.
    11. Kuminoff, Nicolai V., 2009. "Decomposing the structural identification of non-market values," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 123-139, March.
    12. Wolf, David & Klaiber, H. Allen & Gopalakrishnan, Sathya, 2022. "Beyond marginal: Estimating the demand for water quality," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    13. 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.
    14. Chen, Yong & Clapp, John M. & Tirtiroglu, Dogan, 2011. "Hedonic estimation of housing demand elasticity with a markup over marginal costs," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 233-248.
    15. 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.
    16. Ratzke, Leonie, 2023. "Revealing preferences for urban biodiversity as an environmental good," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    17. Sado-Inamura, Yukako & Fukushi, Kensuke, 2019. "Empirical analysis of flood risk perception using historical data in Tokyo," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 13-29.
    18. Łaszkiewicz, Edyta & Heyman, Axel & Chen, Xianwen & Cimburova, Zofie & Nowell, Megan & Barton, David N, 2022. "Valuing access to urban greenspace using non-linear distance decay in hedonic property pricing," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    19. Diane Hite, 2009. "Factors Influencing Differences between Survey and Market-based Environmental Value Measures," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 46(1), pages 117-138, January.
    20. Patrick Bayer & Fernando Ferreira & Robert McMillan, 2007. "A Unified Framework for Measuring Preferences for Schools and Neighborhoods," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115(4), pages 588-638, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    hedonic house price model; green space; preference heterogeneity; identification;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

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

    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:foi:wpaper:2016_06. 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: Geir Tveit (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/foikudk.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.