Evaluation monétaire de la qualité du paysage. Monetary valuation of the landscape quality
The aim of this project is to quantify in monetary terms the value of the landscape in the Alps for both residents and tourists. To do this, we selected the hedonic price method from the holistic quantitative methods for landscape evaluation. This method assumes that the cost of a good – as can be observed on a market – does not reflects the utility of the good itself, but the utility its characteristics in the eyes of the consumer. Thus, we put forward the hypothesis that one of these characteristics may be an environmental attribute, such as the quality of the landscape. Seen from this perspective, the price of the good (in the case in question the rent paid by tourists and residents for apartment accommodation) results from the juxtaposition of implicit prices, for example the price of the landscape. A sample comprising 510 apartments, distributed at the rate of 403 for tourists and 107 for residents, was selected in six Alpine stations in the Swiss canton of Valais. Among the 80 characteristics adopted for the purpose of the analysis, the characteristic «landscape» was understood in two ways: quality of the natural and built landscape at each station and access to the landscape from each apartment. The main challenge of this research resided in obtaining quantitative values that enable the representation of the qualitative dimension of the landscape. This was made possible using the MACBETH approach. Leaving aside certain “conventional” characteristics that influence the rents paid by residents and tourists, the implicit prices revealed by the hedonistic functions show that for a relative improvement in the quality of the natural landscape of 0.1 points, the estimated rent varies by around 2% for tourists. The same applies for residents. With regard to the quality of the built landscape, a relative increase of 0.1 points gives rise to a positive variation in rent for tourists estimated at 0.2%. Conversely, a relative increase in the quality of the built landscape is perceived negatively by residents and thus gives rise to a depreciation of 0.8%. Thus, it may be suggested that both tourists and residents have similar preferences with regard to the quality of the natural landscape, however their preferences differ in regard to the built landscape. Variations in rent prices can also be explained by access to the landscape. Finally, our analysis reveals that both groups of actors value the fact of being located at a distance from the station’s main infrastructure; this is expressed in a positive willingness to pay for locations away from the centre of the station, the ski lifts and food shops. Furthermore, and as assumed, the implicit price for an increase in the length of ski slopes and hiking trails is positive for tourists, whereas it is negative for residents.
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.:
- Carson, Richard T. & Hanemann, W. Michael, 2006.
Handbook of Environmental Economics,
in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 17, pages 821-936
- Maler, Karl-Goran, 1977. "A note on the use of property values in estimating marginal willingness to pay for environmental quality," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 355-369, December.
- Schmalensee, Richard, 1975. "Option Demand and Consumer's Surplus: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(4), pages 737-39, September.
- Benson, Earl D, et al, 1998. "Pricing Residential Amenities: The Value of a View," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 55-73, January.
- M. Fletcher & P. Gallimore & J. Mangan, 2000. "Heteroscedasticity in hedonic house price models," Journal of Property Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(2), pages 93-108, January.
- Kohlhase, Janet E., 1991. "The impact of toxic waste sites on housing values," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 1-26, July.
- Michaels, R. Gregory & Smith, V. Kerry, 1990. "Market segmentation and valuing amenities with hedonic models: The case of hazardous waste sites," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 223-242, September.
- 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..
- Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132.
- Freeman III, A. Myrick, 1985. "Methods for assessing the benefits of environmental programs," Handbook of Natural Resource and Energy Economics, in: A. V. Kneese† & J. L. Sweeney (ed.), Handbook of Natural Resource and Energy Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 6, pages 223-270 Elsevier.
- David E. Clark, 2000. "The Impact of Public School Attributes on Home Sale Prices in California," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 385-407.
- Goodman, Allen C. & Kawai, Masahiro, 1982. "Permanent income, hedonic prices, and demand for housing: New evidence," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 214-237, September.
- Fisher, Anthony C. & Hanemann, W. Michael, 1987. "Quasi-option value: Some misconceptions dispelled," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 183-190, June.
- Follain, James R. & Jimenez, Emmanuel, 1985. "Estimating the demand for housing characteristics: A survey and critique," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 77-107, February.
- McMillen, Daniel P. & Jarmin, Ronald & Thorsnes, Paul, 1992. "Selection bias and land development in the monocentric city model," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 273-284, May.
- Johansson,Per-Olov, 1987. "The Economic Theory and Measurement of Environmental Benefits," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521348102, June.
- Brown, Gardner M, Jr & Pollakowski, Henry O, 1977. "Economic Valuation of Shoreline," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 59(3), pages 272-78, August.
- Freeman, A Myrick, III, 1979. " Hedonic Prices, Property Values and Measuring Environmental Benefits: A Survey of the Issues," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 81(2), pages 154-73.
- Straszheim, Mahlon R, 1974. "Hedonic Estimation of Housing Market Prices: A Further Comment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 56(3), pages 404-06, August.
- Mok, Henry M K & Chan, Patrick P K & Cho, Yiu-sun, 1995. "A Hedonic Price Model for Private Properties in Hong Kong," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 37-48, January.
- Schafer, Robert, 1979. "Racial discrimination in the Boston housing market," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 176-196, April.
- A. G. Holtmann, 1972. "Prices, Time, and Technology in the Medical Care Market," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 7(2), pages 179-190.
- Palmquist, Raymond B., 1992. "Valuing localized externalities," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 59-68, January.
- 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.
- Mark R. Correll & Jane H. Lillydahl & Larry D. Singell, 1978. "The Effects of Greenbelts on Residential Property Values: Some Findings on the Political Economy of Open Space," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 54(2), pages 207-217.
- Bourassa, S.C. & Hoelsi, M., 1999. "The Structure of Housing Submarkets in a Metropolitain Region," Papers 99.15, Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales, Universite de Geneve-.
- Halvorsen, Robert & Pollakowski, Henry O., 1981. "Choice of functional form for hedonic price equations," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 37-49, July.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpur:0507002. 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: (EconWPA)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.