IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

The Effect Of Current And Future Land Use On House Prices

Listed author(s):
  • Guillaume POUYANNE
  • Frederic GASCHET

The control of urban sprawl often involves policies of allowable use zoning. By protecting large areas from development, such policies may, in fact, provoke 'leapfrog' development through their inflationary effect on the land and property markets in the area which is already urbanised. This inflationary effect results in particular from the positive external effects generated on neighbouring property by the land classified as unbuildable. This effect is dealt with in the vast amount of literature on the open space premium, where the capitalised premium in property prices arises from the positive externalities generated by open space as well as from the absence of negative external effects generated by land conversion. In this literature, the premium is derived uniquely from current land use. The future use of the land is nevertheless an important component of the premium. However, it is rarely taken into account, and then only in terms of whether the open space is permanent or temporary. This article proposes an evaluation of the impact of current and future surrounding land use on property prices. In a one-kilometre radius around the site of the transaction, we combine the actual use of land (residential, agricultural, forest) with its membership of a zoning category (which determines the future destination of land: buildable or unbuildable; if buildable, high or low density). We use a spatial hedonic model, corrected from endogeneity of the regressors thanks to the Fingleton-Le Gallo's procedure (2008). We show that both the current use and the future use of surrounding land have an impact on the price of a transaction. First, it is important to take into account the classification of land as buildable: thus urban green space is certainly responsible for a positive premium, but only on condition that it is not classified as buildable. Second, the fact that land is classified as unbuildable can have an ambiguous effect: forests protected as sensitive natural open spaces do bring a positive premium whereas forests protected for sylviculture tend to provoke depreciation in property prices due to the nuisances associated with their exploitation. Third, the 'type of buildability' may have an influence on prices: the dispersed nature of future development appears to cause fewer nuisances than big, uniform future development.

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-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa13/ERSA2013_paper_00249.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by European Regional Science Association in its series ERSA conference papers with number ersa13p249.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Nov 2013
Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa13p249
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Welthandelsplatz 1, 1020 Vienna, Austria

Web page: http://www.ersa.org

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. Cheshire, Paul & Sheppard, Stephen, 2002. "The welfare economics of land use planning," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 242-269, September.
  2. Turner, Matthew A., 2005. "Landscape preferences and patterns of residential development," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 19-54, January.
  3. Paul Thorsnes, 2002. "The Value of a Suburban Forest Preserve: Estimates from Sales of Vacant Residential Building Lots," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(3), pages 426-441.
  4. Wu, JunJie & Plantinga, Andrew J., 2003. "The influence of public open space on urban spatial structure," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 288-309, September.
  5. Luc Anselin & Nancy Lozano-Gracia, 2008. "Errors in variables and spatial effects in hedonic house price models of ambient air quality," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 5-34, February.
  6. 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.
  7. Wu, JunJie, 2006. "Environmental amenities, urban sprawl, and community characteristics," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 527-547, September.
  8. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Poudyal, Neelam C. & Roberts, Roland K., 2008. "Spatial analysis of the amenity value of green open space," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 403-416, June.
  9. Glaeser, Edward L. & Ward, Bryce A., 2009. "The causes and consequences of land use regulation: Evidence from Greater Boston," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 265-278, May.
  10. Thorsnes, Paul, 2000. "Internalizing Neighborhood Externalities: The Effect of Subdivision Size and Zoning on Residential Lot Prices," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 397-418, November.
  11. 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.
  12. Ihlanfeldt, Keith R., 2007. "The effect of land use regulation on housing and land prices," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 420-435, May.
  13. Crone, Theodore M., 1983. "Elements of an economic justification for municipal zoning," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 168-183, September.
  14. Elena G. Irwin, 2002. "Interacting agents, spatial externalities and the evolution of residential land use patterns," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 31-54, January.
  15. Hamilton, Bruce W., 1978. "Zoning and the exercise of monopoly power," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 116-130, January.
  16. Glaeser, Edward L & Gyourko, Joseph & Saks, Raven, 2005. "Why Is Manhattan So Expensive? Regulation and the Rise in Housing Prices," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 48(2), pages 331-369, October.
  17. 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.
  18. Jean Cavailhès & Thierry Brossard & Jean-Christophe Foltête & Mohamed Hilal & Daniel Joly & François-Pierre Tourneux & Céline Tritz & Pierre Wavresky, 2009. "GIS-Based Hedonic Pricing of Landscape," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 44(4), pages 571-590, December.
  19. Lichtenberg, Erik & Tra, Constant & Hardie, Ian, 2007. "Land use regulation and the provision of open space in suburban residential subdivisions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 199-213, September.
  20. Ohls, James C. & Weisberg, Richard Chadbourn & White, Michelle J., 1974. "The effect of zoning on land value," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(4), pages 428-444, October.
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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa13p249. 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: (Gunther Maier)

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.