IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/uwp/landec/v86y2010i2p281-293.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimating the Demand for Tree Canopy: A Second-Stage Hedonic Price Analysis in Portland, Oregon

Author

Listed:
  • Noelwah R. Netusil
  • Sudip Chattopadhyay
  • Kent F. Kovacs

Abstract

The benefits of large patches of tree canopy are estimated by applying a hedonic price model to the sale of single-family residential properties in Portland, Oregon. The first-stage analysis provides evidence of diminishing returns from increasing tree canopy past a certain level. The second-stage analysis uses a survey of property owners’ preferences and socioeconomic characteristics to overcome the problem of endogeneity. Average benefit estimates for the mean canopy cover within mile of properties in the study area, using the second-stage model, are between 0.75% and 2.52% of the mean sale price.

Suggested Citation

  • Noelwah R. Netusil & Sudip Chattopadhyay & Kent F. Kovacs, 2010. "Estimating the Demand for Tree Canopy: A Second-Stage Hedonic Price Analysis in Portland, Oregon," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 86(2), pages 281-293.
    • Handle: RePEc:uwp:landec:v:86:y:2010:i:2:p:281-293
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://le.uwpress.org/cgi/reprint/86/2/281
    Download Restriction: A subscripton is required to access pdf files. Pay per article is available.
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Margot Lutzenhiser & Noelwah R. Netusil, 2001. "The Effect Of Open Spaces On A Home'S Sale Price," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 19(3), pages 291-298, July.
    2. Noelwah R. Netusil, 2005. "The Effect of Environmental Zoning and Amenities on Property Values: Portland, Oregon," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(2).
    3. Mueller, Julie M. & Loomis, John B., 2008. "Spatial Dependence in Hedonic Property Models: Do Different Corrections For Spatial Dependence Result in Economically Significant Differences in Estimated Implicit Prices?," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(2), pages 1-20.
    4. 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..
    5. 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.
    6. Sudip Chattopadhyay, 1999. "Estimating the Demand for Air Quality: New Evidence Based on the Chicago Housing Market," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 75(1), pages 22-38.
    7. Kent F. Kovacs & Douglas M. Larson, 2008. "Identifying Individual Discount Rates and Valuing Public Open Space with Stated-Preference Models," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(2), pages 209-224.
    8. Geoghegan, Jacqueline & Wainger, Lisa A. & Bockstael, Nancy E., 1997. "Spatial landscape indices in a hedonic framework: an ecological economics analysis using GIS," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 251-264, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.
    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. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Beal-Hodges, Mary, 2012. "Conservation land acquisition lists and nearby property values: evidence from the Florida Forever programme," Studies in Agricultural Economics, Research Institute for Agricultural Economics, vol. 114(01), pages 1-8.
    6. Liu, Sezhu & Hite, Diane, 2013. "Measuring the Effect of Green Space on Property Value: An Application of the Hedonic Spatial Quantile Regression," 2013 Annual Meeting, February 2-5, 2013, Orlando, Florida 143045, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    7. Hansen, Winslow D. & Mueller, Julie M. & Naughton, Helen T., 2014. "Wildfire in Hedonic Property Value Studies," Western Economics Forum, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 13(01), pages 1-14.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Provencher, Bill & Sarakinos, Helen & Meyer, Tanya, 2006. "Does Small Dam Removal Affect Local Property Values? An Empirical Analysis," Staff Papers 10280, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    12. Fernandez, Mario Andres & Bucaram, Santiago, 2019. "The changing face of environmental amenities: Heterogeneity across housing submarkets and time," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 449-460.
    13. Brasington, David M. & Hite, Diane, 2005. "Demand for environmental quality: a spatial hedonic analysis," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 57-82, January.
    14. Toshihiro Okubo, 2013. "Energy-saving regulations and commodity prices," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 15(1), pages 93-132, January.
    15. Contreras, Víctor & Garay, Urbi & Santos, Miguel Angel & Betancourt, Cosme, 2014. "Expropriation risk and housing prices: Evidence from an emerging market," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(5), pages 935-942.
    16. Robert W. Paterson & Kevin J. Boyle, 2002. "Out of Sight, Out of Mind? Using GIS to Incorporate Visibility in Hedonic Property Value Models," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(3), pages 417-425.
    17. repec:rre:publsh:v:38:y:2008:i:1:p:29-44 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Palmquist, Raymond B., 2006. "Property Value Models," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 16, pages 763-819, Elsevier.
    19. Sengupta, Sanchita & Osgood, Daniel Edward, 2003. "The value of remoteness: a hedonic estimation of ranchette prices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 91-103, February.
    20. Stephen Gibbons & Susana Mourato & Guilherme Resende, 2014. "The Amenity Value of English Nature: A Hedonic Price Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 57(2), pages 175-196, February.
    21. Du, Xuejun & Huang, Zhonghua, 2018. "Spatial and temporal effects of urban wetlands on housing prices: Evidence from Hangzhou, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 290-298.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q21 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Demand and Supply; Prices
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects

    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:uwp:landec:v:86:y:2010:i:2:p:281-293. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://le.uwpress.org/ .

    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.