Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Use of Census Data for Hedonic Price Estimates of Open-Space Amenities and Land Use

  • Published:
The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Hedonic price models for determining marginal implicit prices of open-space amenities and nonresidential land use were estimated using housing data from the census. Alternative model specifications were compared to evaluate the effects of aggregating land-use data by alternative levels of census geography as well as the use of different sample sizes of census blocks. It was determined that land use is best aggregated at the block group level and that entire populations or very large sample sizes of census blocks should be used with hedonic models.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Benson, E. D., J. L. Hansen, A. L. Schwartz, and G. T. Smersh. (1998). “Pricing Residential Amenities: The Value of a View,” Journal of Real Estate Economics and Finance 16(1), 55–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blomquist, G., and L. Worley. (1981). “Hedonic Prices, Demands for Urban Housing Amenities, and Benefit Estimates,” Journal of Urban Economics 9, 212–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, R. V. (1982). “The Specification of Hedonic Indexes for Urban Housing,” Land Economics 58(1), 96–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cao, T. V., and D. C. Cory. (1981). Mixed Land Uses and Residential Property Values in the Tucson Metropolitan Region: Implications for Public Policy. Technical Bulletin No. 241, Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Arizona.

  • Dombrow, J., J. R. Knight, and C. F. Sirmans. (1997). “Aggregation Bias in Repeat Sales Indexes,” Journal of Real Estate Economics and Finance 14(1), 75–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doss, C. R., and S. J. Taff. (1996). “The Influence of Wetland Type and Wetland Proximity on Residential Property Values,” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 21(1), 120–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, M. A. (1979). “Hedonic Prices, Property Values and Measuring Environmental Benefits: A Survey of the Issues,” Scandinavian Journal of Economics 81(2), 154–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geoghegan, J., L. A. Wainger, and N. E. Bockstael. (1997). “Spatial Landscape Indices Hedonic Framework: An Ecological Economics Analysis Using GIS,” Ecological Economics 23, 251–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, A. C. (1977). “A Comparison of Block Group and Census Tract Data in a Hedonic Housing Price Model,” Land Economics 53(4), 483–487.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halvorsen, R., and H. Pollakowski. (1981). “Choice of Functional Form for Hedonic Price Equations,” Journal of Urban Economics 10, 37–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Judd, D. G. (1980). “The Effects of Zoning On Single Family Residential Property Values: Charlotte, North Carolina,” Land Economics 56(2), 142–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, D. A., J. L. White, and W. W. Shaw. (1991). “Influence of Urban Wildlife Habitats on the Value of Residential Properties.” In L. W. Adams and D. L. Leedy (eds.), Wildlife Conservation in Metropolitan Environments: A National Symposium on Urban Wildlife. NIUW Symposium Series 2, National Institute for Urban Wildlife, Columbia, MD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, M., and J. Brown. (1980). “Micro-Neighborhood Externalities and Hedonic Housing Prices,” Land Economics 56(2), 125–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMillen, D. P., and J. F. McDonald. (1989). “Selectivity Bias in Urban Land Value Functions,” Land Economics 65(4), 34–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pace, K. R., R. Barry, and C. F. Sirmans. (1998). “Spatial Statistics and Real Estate,” Journal of Real Estate Economics and Finance 17(1) 5–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmquist, R. B. (1992). “Valuing Localized Externalities,” Journal Urban Economics 31(1), 59–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, W., J. Burns, and K. Stenberg. (1986). Wildlife Habitats in Tucson: A Strategy for Conservation. unpublished report, University of Arizona.

  • Speyrer, J. F. (1989). “The Effect of Land-Use Restrictions on Market Values of Single-Family Homes in Houston,” Journal of Real Estate Economics and Finance 2(2) 117–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, R. J. (1981). “The Value of Urban Open Space,” Research in Urban Economics 1, 103–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worden, M., and D. Dekok. (1991). Metropolitan Tucson Land Use Study (4th quarter, 1991). Report of the Drachman Institute, Tucson, AZ.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND, 58105

    Steven D. Shultz

  2. School of Renewable Natural Resources, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, 85701

    David A. King

Authors
  1. Steven D. Shultz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David A. King
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shultz, S.D., King, D.A. The Use of Census Data for Hedonic Price Estimates of Open-Space Amenities and Land Use. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics 22, 239–252 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007895631071

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007895631071

Search

Navigation