IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/sfb649/sfb649dp2015-002.html

Estimating the value of Urban Green Space: A hedonic pricing analysis of the housing market in Cologne, Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Kolbe, Jens
  • Wüstemann, Henry

Abstract

Urban Green Space (UGS) such as parks and forests provide a wide range of environmental and recreational benefits. One objective in the conservation efforts of UGS is to analyse the benefits associated with UGS in order to make them more visible and to provide support for landscape planning. This paper examines the effects of UGS on house prices applying a Hedonic Pricing Method (HPM). The data set contains over 85,046 geo-coded apartment transactions for the years 1995- 2012 and contains information on three intrinsic variables of the real estate (e.g. transaction price, floor area and age). In order to examine the capitalization of UGS in real estate prices we further incorporate crosssection geo-coded data for the different types of UGS: forests, parks, farmland and fallow land drawn from the European Urban Atlas (EUA) of the European Environment Agency for the year 2006. In order to control for additional open space categories we further incorporated geo-coded data on water bodies and fallow land. Using a Geographical Information System (GIS) we calculated the coverage of UGS in pre-defined buffers around households as well as the distance in a continuous fashion (Euclidian distance) between UGS and the households. Our results show a capitalization of UGS in real estate prices but the effect of the structural variables is higher. We found a positive price effect of parks, forests and water and an inverse relation between the price variable and the presence of fallow land and farmland.

Suggested Citation

  • Kolbe, Jens & Wüstemann, Henry, 2014. "Estimating the value of Urban Green Space: A hedonic pricing analysis of the housing market in Cologne, Germany," SFB 649 Discussion Papers 2015-002, Humboldt University Berlin, Collaborative Research Center 649: Economic Risk.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:sfb649:sfb649dp2015-002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/107911/1/815374305.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wiktor Adamowicz & Peter Boxall & Michael Williams & Jordan Louviere, 1998. "Stated Preference Approaches for Measuring Passive Use Values: Choice Experiments and Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 64-75.
    2. Isabel Vanslembrouck & Guido Van Huylenbroeck & J. Van Meensel, 2005. "Impact of Agriculture on Rural Tourism: A Hedonic Pricing Approach," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(1), pages 17-30, March.
    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. Shultz, Steven D & King, David A, 2001. "The Use of Census Data for Hedonic Price Estimates of Open-Space Amenities and Land Use," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(2-3), pages 239-252, March-May.
    5. Elena G. Irwin, 2002. "The Effects of Open Space on Residential Property Values," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(4), pages 465-480.
    6. Appelbaum, Elie, 1979. "On the Choice of Functional Forms," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 20(2), pages 449-458, June.
    7. F Alpizar & F Carlsson & P Martinsson, 2003. "Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 8(1), pages 83-110, March.
    8. Brent L. Mahan & BStephen Polasky & Richard M. Adams, 2000. "Valuing Urban Wetlands: A Property Price Approach," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(1), pages 100-113.
    9. Rambonilaza, Tina, 2005. "Land-use planning and public preferences: What can we learn from choice experiments method?," MPRA Paper 9225, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised May 2007.
    10. repec:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2012-040 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Smith, V. Kerry & Poulos, Christine & Kim, Hyun, 2002. "Treating open space as an urban amenity," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1-2), pages 107-129, February.
    12. repec:diw:diwwpp:dp1216 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Lansford, Notie H., Jr. & Jones, Lonnie L., 1995. "Recreational And Aesthetic Value Of Water Using Hedonic Price Analysis," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 20(2), pages 1-15, December.
    14. Benson, Earl D & Hansen, Julia L. & Schwartz Jr., Arthur & Smersh, Greg T., 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.
    15. Richard C. Ready & Charles W. Abdalla, 2005. "The Amenity and Disamenity Impacts of Agriculture: Estimates from a Hedonic Pricing Model," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(2), pages 314-326.
    16. James W. Kitchen & William S. Hendon, 1967. "Land Values Adjacent to an Urban Neighborhood Park," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 43(3), pages 357-360.
    17. JunJie Wu & Richard M. Adams & Andrew J. Plantinga, 2004. "Amenities in an Urban Equilibrium Model: Residential Development in Portland, Oregon," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 80(1), pages 19-32.
    18. Jan Melichar & Pavel Rieger & Ondřej Vojáček & Karel Jedlička, 2009. "Measuring the Value of Urban Forest using," Regionální studia, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2009(2), pages 13-20.
    19. Jeff Bennett & Russell Blamey (ed.), 2001. "The Choice Modelling Approach to Environmental Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2028, 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. Kexin Cheng & Angshuo Zhan & Haoyuan Luo & Yujing Ma & Zhifang Wang, 2024. "The Influencing Thresholds and Interactive Effects of Urban Green Spaces on Housing Prices: A Case Study of Beijing, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-16, December.

    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. repec:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2015-002 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Waltert, Fabian & Schläpfer, Felix, 2010. "Landscape amenities and local development: A review of migration, regional economic and hedonic pricing studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 141-152, December.
    3. Carriazo, Fernando & Ready, Richard & Shortle, James, 2013. "Using stochastic frontier models to mitigate omitted variable bias in hedonic pricing models: A case study for air quality in Bogotá, Colombia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 80-88.
    4. Poudyal, Neelam C. & Hodges, Donald G. & Tonn, Bruce & Cho, Seong-Hoon, 2009. "Valuing diversity and spatial pattern of open space plots in urban neighborhoods," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 194-201, May.
    5. repec:cha:ysa001:v:7:y:2014:i:1:p:48-59 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Fabian Waltert & Felix Schlaepfer, 2007. "The role of landscape amenities in regional development: a survey of migration, regional economic and hedonic pricing studies," SOI - Working Papers 0710, Socioeconomic Institute - University of Zurich.
    7. Marisa J. Mazzotta & Elena Besedin & Ann E. Speers, 2014. "A Meta-Analysis of Hedonic Studies to Assess the Property Value Effects of Low Impact Development," Resources, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-31, January.
    8. Boyd, James & Krupnick, Alan, 2009. "The Definition and Choice of Environmental Commodities for Nonmarket Valuation," RFF Working Paper Series dp-09-35, Resources for the Future.
    9. Henry Wüstemann & Gero Coppel & Marco Masin, 2015. "Landnutzung und ländlicher Tourismus: Eine hedonische Analyse," Journal of Socio-Economics in Agriculture (Until 2015: Yearbook of Socioeconomics in Agriculture), Swiss Society for Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, vol. 8(1), pages 48-59.
    10. Kriesel, Warren & Mullen, Jeffrey D., 2009. "Alternative Housing Development Strategies in Georgia's Coastal Marshlands," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49514, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Paul Asabere & Forrest Huffman, 2009. "The Relative Impacts of Trails and Greenbelts on Home Price," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 408-419, May.
    12. Seong-Hoon Cho & Christopher D. Clark & William M. Park & Seung Gyu Kim, 2009. "Spatial and Temporal Variation in the Housing Market Values of Lot Size and Open Space," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 85(1), pages 51-73.
    13. 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.
    14. Heather A Sander & Debarchana Ghosh & David van Riper & Steven M Manson, 2010. "How Do You Measure Distance in Spatial Models? An Example Using Open-Space Valuation," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 37(5), pages 874-894, October.
    15. Katz, G. & Colby, Bonnie G. & Osgood, Daniel E. & Bark-Hodgins, Rosalind H. & Stromberg, J., 2005. "Do Homebuyers Care about the 'Quality' of Natural Habitats?," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19283, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    16. Banzhaf, H. Spencer, 2009. "Economics at the Fringe: Non-Market Valuation Studies and their Role in Land Use Plans in the United States," MPRA Paper 101193, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. 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.
    18. Abbott, Joshua K. & Klaiber, H. Allen, 2010. "Is all space created equal? Uncovering the relationship between competing land uses in subdivisions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 296-307, December.
    19. Hao Huang & Jianyi Li, 2021. "The spatial variation of moderating effects of density and natural amenities on housing prices in Wuhan, China," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(6), pages 1778-1804, December.
    20. de Ayala, Amaia & Hoyos, David & Mariel, Petr, 2015. "Suitability of discrete choice experiments for landscape management under the European Landscape Convention," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 79-96.
    21. Jay Mittal, 2017. "Valuing Visual Accessibility of Scenic Landscapes in a Single Family Housing Market: A Spatial Hedonic Approach," ERES eres2017_1, European Real Estate Society (ERES).
    22. Nguyen, Thanh Cong & Le, Hoa Thu & Nguyen, Hang Dieu & Ngo, Mai Thanh & Nguyen, Hong Quang, 2021. "Examining ordering effects and strategic behaviour in a discrete choice experiment," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 394-413.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • R31 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Real Estate Markets, Spatial Production Analysis, and Firm Location - - - Housing Supply and Markets
    • C14 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Semiparametric and Nonparametric Methods: General
    • Q50 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - General

    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:zbw:sfb649:sfb649dp2015-002. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sohubde.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.