IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v91y2009i5p1312-1318.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Sorting and Heterogeneity Matter for Open Space Policy Analysis? An Empirical Comparison of Hedonic and Sorting Models

Author

Listed:
  • H. Allen Klaiber
  • Daniel J. Phaneuf

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • H. Allen Klaiber & Daniel J. Phaneuf, 2009. "Do Sorting and Heterogeneity Matter for Open Space Policy Analysis? An Empirical Comparison of Hedonic and Sorting Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1312-1318.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:91:y:2009:i:5:p:1312-1318
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1467-8276.2009.01303.x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kento Komatsubara & Alexander Ryota Keeley & Shunsuke Managi, 2023. "Revisiting the Value of Various Ecosystems: Considering Spatiality and Disaster Concern," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-27, February.
    2. Howard, Peter H., 2012. "Climate Change, Vegetation, and Welfare: Estimating the Welfare Loss to Landowners of Marginal Shifts in Blue Oak Habitat," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124744, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Meyerhoff, Jürgen, 2013. "Do turbines in the vicinity of respondents' residences influence choices among programmes for future wind power generation?," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 58-71.
    4. Juan Soto & Milena Vargas & Julio A. Berdegué, 2018. "How Large Are the Contributions of Cities to the Development of Rural Communities? A Market Access Approach for a Quarter Century of Evidence from Chile," Documentos de Trabajo 17060, The Latin American and Caribbean Economic Association (LACEA).
    5. Sinha, Paramita & Caulkins, Martha & Cropper, Maureen L., 2018. "Do Discrete Choice Approaches to Valuing Urban Amenities Yield Different Results Than Hedonic Models?," RFF Working Paper Series 18-02, Resources for the Future.
    6. Abildtrup, Jens & Garcia, Serge & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Stenger, Anne, 2013. "Spatial preference heterogeneity in forest recreation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 67-77.
    7. 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.
    8. Villegas, Laura, 2019. "Integrating Econometric Models of Land Use Change with Models of Ecosystem Services and Landscape Simulations to Guide Coastal Management and Planning for Flood Control," EfD Discussion Paper 19-13, Environment for Development, University of Gothenburg.
    9. Richard J. Vyn, 2015. "The Effect of Agricultural Zoning on Rural Residential Property Values: An Application to Ontario's Greenbelt," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 63(3), pages 281-307, September.
    10. Sinha, Paramita & Caulkins, Martha & Cropper, Maureen, 2021. "The value of climate amenities: A comparison of hedonic and discrete choice approaches," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    11. Binner, Amy & Day, Brett, 2015. "Exploring mortgage interest deduction reforms: An equilibrium sorting model with endogenous tenure choice," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 40-54.
    12. Jørgensen, Sisse Liv & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Ladenburg, Jacob & Martinsen, Louise & Svenningsen, Stig Roar & Hasler, Berit, 2013. "Spatially induced disparities in users' and non-users' WTP for water quality improvements—Testing the effect of multiple substitutes and distance decay," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 58-66.

    More about this item

    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:oup:ajagec:v:91:y:2009:i:5:p:1312-1318. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.