<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?><xml><records><record><source-app name="HighWire" version="7.x">Drupal-HighWire</source-app><ref-type name="Journal Article">17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Earnhart, Dietrich</style></author></authors><secondary-authors></secondary-authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Using Contingent-Pricing Analysis to Value Open Space and Its Duration at Residential Locations</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Land Economics</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2006</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2006-02-01 00:00:00</style></date></pub-dates></dates><pages><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">17-35</style></pages><doi><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">10.3368/le.82.1.17</style></doi><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">82</style></volume><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1</style></issue><abstract><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">To estimate benefits from open space adjacent to residences, this paper blends contingent valuation and conjoint analysis within a housing market context. The resulting framework — “contingent-pricing analysis,” — represents the stated preference counterpart to hedonic-pricing analysis by asking individuals to state prices for hypothetical housing locations, which include an environmental amenity. Then, it asks individuals to state their willingness to pay for a better and longer lasting environmental amenity. As an advantage over hedonic-pricing analysis, it directly isolates willingness to pay. Results indicate that potentially short-lasting open space adds no value, while preserved open space adds $ 5,066 or 5% to housing value. (JEL R14, Q24)</style></abstract></record></records></xml>