IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Redeveloping Derelict and Underused Historical City Areas: Evidence from a Survey of Real Estate Developers

  • Paolo Rosato

    (University of Trieste)

  • Anna Alberini

    (University of Maryland)

  • Valentina Zanatta

    (Ca’ Foscari University of Venice)

  • Margaretha Breil

    ()

    (Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, FEEM)

Infill redevelopment—the transformation of previously used urban sites—is generally regarded as an important way to attain environmental and urban sustainability goals. At many locales, however, such urban renewal, community development, and tax revenue goals must be reconciled with historic preservation objectives. Are economic incentives and regulatory relief useful tools for encouraging reuse of abandoned or underutilized urban sites with historic buildings? Answering this question is of key importance for many European cities and for older US cities, and has important implications in terms of urban sustainability and “smart growth” initiatives. We use conjoint choice experiments to explore the relative importance of economic incentives, regulatory relief, land use and property regime offerings at underutilized historical sites in Venice, Italy. We survey real estate developers and investors, and ask them to choose between pairs of hypothetical projects in three Venice locations, as well as between one of these projects and the alternative to do a development project elsewhere. Statistical models of the responses to these choice questions indicate that respondents are sensitive to the price of acquiring the land (and hence to any policies that influence prices), and especially sensitive to the property regime that would be granted to developers and investors and to the allowable land use. Contrary to expectations, our respondents were insensitive to tightening or relaxing the stringency of building conservation restrictions. Our findings sound a common theme with Howland (2004), who warns that redevelopment of previously used sites in Baltimore is impaired by obsolete land uses, zoning and infrastructure (but not by suspected or actual contamination). We conclude that the City should focus on offering land uses and property regimes that are more in tune with developer demand.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.unive.it/media/allegato/DIP/Economia/Working_papers/Working_papers_2009/WP_DSE_ros_alb_zan_bre_02_09.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari" in its series Working Papers with number 2009_02.

as
in new window

Length: 34
Date of creation: 2009
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ven:wpaper:2009_02
Contact details of provider: Postal: Cannaregio, S. Giobbe no 873 , 30121 Venezia
Phone: +39-0412349621
Fax: +39-0412349176
Web page: http://www.unive.it/dip.economia
Email:


More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Christopher De Sousa, 2004. "The greening of brownfields in American cities," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(4), pages 579-600.
  2. McGrath, Daniel T., 2000. "Urban Industrial Land Redevelopment and Contamination Risk," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 414-442, May.
  3. Cameron Trudy Ann & Quiggin John, 1994. "Estimation Using Contingent Valuation Data from a Dichotomous Choice with Follow-Up Questionnaire," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 218-234, November.
  4. Alberini, Anna & Longo, Alberto & Tonin, Stefania & Trombetta, Francesco & Turvani, Margherita, 2002. "The Role Of Liability, Regulation And Economic Incentives In Brownfield Remediation And Redevelopment: Evidence From Surveys Of Developers," Working Papers 28582, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
  5. Paul K. Asabere & Forrest E. Huffman, 1991. "Historic Districts and Land Values," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 6(1), pages 1-8.
  6. Anna Alberini & Alberto Longo & Patrizia Riganti, 2006. "Using Surveys to Compare the Public’s and Decisionmakers’ Preferences for Urban Regeneration: The Venice Arsenale," Working Papers 2006.137, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
  7. Alan H. Peters & Peter S. Fisher, 2002. "State Enterprise Zone Programs: Have They Worked?," Books from Upjohn Press, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, number sezp, June.
  8. Michael Greenstone & Enrico Moretti, 2003. "Bidding for Industrial Plants: Does Winning a 'Million Dollar Plant' Increase Welfare?," NBER Working Papers 9844, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  9. Anna Alberini, 2006. "Determinants and Effects on Property Values of Participation in Voluntary Cleanup Programs: The Case of Colorado," Working Papers 2006.1, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
  10. Douglas S. Noonan, 2007. "Finding an Impact of Preservation Policies: Price Effects of Historic Landmarks on Attached Homes in Chicago, 1990-1999," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 21(1), pages 17-33, February.
  11. Timothy J. Bartik, 1991. "Who Benefits from State and Local Economic Development Policies?," Books from Upjohn Press, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, number wbsle, June.
  12. Peter S. Fisher & Alan H. Peters, 1998. "Industrial Incentives: Competition among American Cities and States," Books from Upjohn Press, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, number ii, June.
  13. Michael Wasylenko, 1997. "Taxation and economic development: the state of the economic literature," New England Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, issue Mar, pages 37-52.
  14. Kris Wernstedt & Peter B. Meyer & Anna Alberini, 2006. "Attracting private investment to contaminated properties: The value of public interventions," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(2), pages 247-369.
  15. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521549486 is not listed on IDEAS
  16. Hanley, Nick & Mourato, Susana & Wright, Robert E, 2001. " Choice Modelling Approaches: A Superior Alternative for Environmental Valuation?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 435-62, July.
  17. Christopher De Sousa, 2000. "Brownfield Redevelopment versus Greenfield Development: A Private Sector Perspective on the Costs and Risks Associated with Brownfield Redevelopment in the Greater Toronto Area," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(6), pages 831-853.
  18. Newman, Robert J. & Sullivan, Dennis H., 1988. "Econometric analysis of business tax impacts on industrial location: What do we know, and how do we know it?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 215-234, March.
  19. Marie Howland, 2004. "The Role of Contamination in Central City Industrial Decline," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 18(3), pages 207-219, August.
  20. Arthur Sementelli & Robert A. Simons, 1997. "Regulation of Leaking Underground Storage Tanks: Policy Enforcement and Unintended Consequences," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 11(3), pages 236-248, August.
  21. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521840187 is not listed on IDEAS
  22. Philippe Cyrenne & Robert Fenton & Joseph Warbanski, 2006. "Historic Buildings and Rehabilitation Expenditures: A Panel Data Approach," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 28(4), pages 349-380.
  23. William F. Fox & Matthew N. Murray, 2004. "Do Economic Effects Justify the Use of Fiscal Incentives?," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 71(1), pages 78-92, July.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ven:wpaper:2009_02. 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: (Geraldine Ludbrook)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.