IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tin/wpaper/20080001.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Costs and Benefits of Providing Open Space in Cities

Author

Listed:
  • Jan Rouwendal

    () (VU University Amsterdam)

  • J. Willemijn van der Straaten

    (VU University Amsterdam, and CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis, The Hague)

Abstract

Although many researchers have investigated the value of open space in cities, few of them have compared them to the costs of providing this amenity. In this paper, we use the monocentric model of a city to derive a simple cost-benefit rule for the optimal provision of open space. The rule is essentially the Samuelson-condition for the optimal provision of a public good, with the price of land as the appropriate indicator for its cost. The condition is made operational by computing the willingness to pay for public and private space on the basis of empirical hedonic price functions for three Dutch cities. The conclusions with respect to the optimal provision of open space differ between the three cities. Further investigation reveals that willingness to pay for parks and public gardens increases with income, although not as fast as that for private residential space.

Suggested Citation

  • Jan Rouwendal & J. Willemijn van der Straaten, 2008. "The Costs and Benefits of Providing Open Space in Cities," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 08-001/3, Tinbergen Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20080001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://papers.tinbergen.nl/08001.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alex Anas & Richard Arnott & Kenneth A. Small, 1998. "Urban Spatial Structure," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(3), pages 1426-1464, September.
    2. Ivar Ekeland & James J. Heckman & Lars Nesheim, 2004. "Identification and Estimation of Hedonic Models," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(S1), pages 60-109, February.
    3. Kahn, Shulamit & Lang, Kevin, 1988. "Efficient Estimation of Structural Hedonic Systems," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 29(1), pages 157-166, February.
    4. Edward L. Glaeser & Joseph Gyourko, "undated". "The Impact of Zoning on Housing Affordability," Zell/Lurie Center Working Papers 395, Wharton School Samuel Zell and Robert Lurie Real Estate Center, University of Pennsylvania.
    5. Cheshire, Paul & Sheppard, Stephen, 1998. "Estimating the Demand for Housing, Land, and Neighbourhood Characteristics," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 60(3), pages 357-382, August.
    6. Epple, Dennis, 1987. "Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Estimating Demand and Supply Functions for Differentiated Products," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 95(1), pages 59-80, February.
    7. 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.
    8. Deaton,Angus & Muellbauer,John, 1980. "Economics and Consumer Behavior," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521296762, October.
    9. Bartik, Timothy J, 1987. "The Estimation of Demand Parameters in Hedonic Price Models," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 95(1), pages 81-88, February.
    10. John M. Quigley & Steven Raphael, 2005. "Regulation and the High Cost of Housing in California," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(2), pages 323-328, May.
    11. Cheshire, Paul & Sheppard, Stephen, 1995. "On the Price of Land and the Value of Amenities," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 62(246), pages 247-267, May.
    12. Brown, Gardner M, Jr & Pollakowski, Henry O, 1977. "Economic Valuation of Shoreline," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 59(3), pages 272-278, August.
    13. Kenneth A. Small & Seiji S.C. Steimetz, 2012. "Spatial Hedonics And The Willingness To Pay For Residential Amenities," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(4), pages 635-647, October.
    14. Paul Cheshire & Stephen Sheppard, 1997. "Welfare Economics of Land Use Regulation," Urban/Regional 9702001, EconWPA.
    15. 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.
    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. Paul Cheshire, 2009. "Urban Containment, Housing Affordability and Price Stability - Irreconcilable Goals," SERC Policy Papers 004, Spatial Economics Research Centre, LSE.
    2. Paul C. Cheshire, 2013. "Land market regulation: market versus policy failures," Journal of Property Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(3), pages 170-188, September.
    3. Niels Vermeer & Wouter Vermeulen, 2011. "External Benefits of Brownfield Redevelopment: An Applied Urban General Equilibrium Analysis," CPB Discussion Paper 178, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    4. Mark van Duijn & Jan Rouwendal, 2015. "Sorting based on Urban Heritage and Income: Evidence from the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 15-030/VIII, Tinbergen Institute, revised 19 Mar 2018.
    5. De Lara, Michel & de Palma, André & Kilani, Moez & Piperno, Serge, 2013. "Congestion pricing and long term urban form: Application to Paris region," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 282-295.
    6. Wouter Vermeulen & Jan Rouwendal, 2008. "Urban Expansion or Clustered Deconcentration?," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 08-043/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    7. Hans R.A. Koster & Jan Rouwendal, 2012. "The Impact Of Mixed Land Use On Residential Property Values," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(5), pages 733-761, December.
    8. Cheshire, Paul, 2009. "Urban land markets and policy failures," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 30837, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Monique DANTAS (GREThA UMR CNRS 5113) & Frédéric GASCHET (GREThA UMR CNRS 5113) & Guillaume POUYANNE (GREThA UMR CNRS 5113), 2010. "Regulatory zoning and coastal housing prices: a bayesian hedonic approach (In French)," Cahiers du GREThA 2010-12, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée.
    10. Ioulia Ossokina, 2010. "Geographical range of amenity benefits: Hedonic price analysis for railway stations," CPB Discussion Paper 146, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    11. Friso de Vor & Henri de Groot, 2011. "The Impact of Industrial Sites on Residential Property Values: A Hedonic Pricing Analysis from the Netherlands," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(5), pages 609-623.
    12. Michel De Lara & André De Palma & Moez Kilani & Serge Piperno, 2008. "Congestion pricing and long term urban form: Application to Ile-de-France," Working Papers hal-00348439, HAL.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    spatial planning; provision of public goods; cost-benefit analysis;

    JEL classification:

    • R52 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - Land Use and Other Regulations
    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods
    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis

    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:tin:wpaper:20080001. 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: (Tinbergen Office +31 (0)10-4088900). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/tinbenl.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.