IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/otamic/v11y2019i1p1925-1932n7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Market value of the view restriction

Author

Listed:
  • Hajnal István

    (Department of Construction, Technology and Management, Faculty of Architecture, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, P.O.B. 91, H-1521, Budapest, Hungary)

Abstract

Based on the international literature, the effect of an existing panoramic view on the market value of properties is positive and significant. This value-adding factor varies by location and by type of view. In Central Europe, no such evaluation study has been elaborated until now. New building construction may restrict the existing panorama, and this is the other side of the same phenomenon. View restriction may result in stigmatization, which is a negative effect on the property. There are two major methodologies to observe the effect: revealed preference method (RPM) and stated preference method (SPM). One SPM approach is contingent valuation (CV), wherein well-informed stakeholders give their opinion about the impact caused by the investigated effect. The CV methodology, using the Delphi approach, was employed to observe the market value decrease in the cases of several restricted panorama situations in Budapest. Based on the research, this effect in Budapest is in line with the published western results. The result of the study can be used to support real estate developers and architects in their development decisions. This is an extended version of the article titled “The impact of view-restriction: a Delphi case study from Budapest”, presented at Creative Construction Conference 2018, CCC 2017, 30 June to 3 July 2018, Ljubljana, Slovenia.

Suggested Citation

  • Hajnal István, 2019. "Market value of the view restriction," Organization, Technology and Management in Construction, Sciendo, vol. 11(1), pages 1925-1932, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:otamic:v:11:y:2019:i:1:p:1925-1932:n:7
    DOI: 10.2478/otmcj-2019-0002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/otmcj-2019-0002
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/otmcj-2019-0002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brown, Gardner M, Jr & Pollakowski, Henry O, 1977. "Economic Valuation of Shoreline," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 59(3), pages 272-278, August.
    2. Baranzini, Andrea & Schaerer, Caroline, 2011. "A sight for sore eyes: Assessing the value of view and land use in the housing market," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 191-199, September.
    3. 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.
    4. Qin Fan & J. Hansz & Xiaoming Yang, 2016. "The Pricing Effects of Open Space Amenities," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 244-271, April.
    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. Meri Davlasheridze & Qin Fan, 2019. "Valuing Seawall Protection in the Wake of Hurricane Ike," Economics of Disasters and Climate Change, Springer, vol. 3(3), pages 257-279, October.
    2. Matthew Gnagey & Therese Grijalva, 2018. "The impact of trails on property values: a spatial analysis," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 60(1), pages 73-97, January.
    3. Hyunki Hong & Hoyong Jung & Duol Kim, 2024. "The Value of an Apartment with Sunlight and a View: A Quasi-Experimental Analysis," Korean Economic Review, Korean Economic Association, vol. 40, pages 177-194.
    4. Margaret Walls & Carolyn Kousky & Ziyan Chu, 2015. "Is What You See What You Get? The Value of Natural Landscape Views," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 91(1), pages 1-19.
    5. Liv Osland & John Östh & Viggo Nordvik, 2022. "House price valuation of environmental amenities: An application of GIS‐derived data," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(4), pages 939-959, August.
    6. Pia Nilsson, 2011. "Cultural Landscape Characteristics and Heritage Values A Spatially Explicit Hedonic Approach," ERSA conference papers ersa10p397, European Regional Science Association.
    7. Alexandre Tangerini & Nils Soguel, 2005. "Evaluation monétaire de la qualité du paysage. Monetary valuation of the landscape quality," Urban/Regional 0507002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. E.V. Leontev & I.A. Mayburov, 2021. "Assessment of the Impact of Public Transport Accessibility on the Value of Urban Residential Real Estate," Journal of Applied Economic Research, Graduate School of Economics and Management, Ural Federal University, vol. 20(1), pages 62-83.
    9. Tom Gillespie & Stephen Hynes & Ronan C Lyons, 2018. "Picture or Playground: Valuing Coastal Amenities," Trinity Economics Papers tep0518, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics, revised Mar 2019.
    10. Alexandre Tangerini & Nils Soguel, 2005. "Evaluation monétaire de la qualité de paysage / Evaluation of the landscape quality," Urban/Regional 0507007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Hyejin Lee & Byoungkil Lee & Sangkyeong Lee, 2020. "The Unequal Impact of Natural Landscape Views on Housing Prices: Applying Visual Perception Model and Quantile Regression to Apartments in Seoul," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-19, October.
    12. Adam Nowak & Patrick Smith, 2015. "Textual Analysis in Real Estate," Working Papers 15-34, Department of Economics, West Virginia University.
    13. Corral, Leonardo R. & Schling, Maja, 2017. "The impact of shoreline stabilization on economic growth in small island developing states," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 210-228.
    14. Gopalakrishnan, Sathya & Smith, Martin D. & Slott, Jordan M. & Murray, A. Brad, 2011. "The value of disappearing beaches: A hedonic pricing model with endogenous beach width," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 297-310, May.
    15. Gianni Talamini & Ting Liu & Roula El-Khoury & Di Shao, 2023. "Visibility and symbolism of corporate architecture: A multi-method approach for visual impact assessment," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 50(9), pages 2407-2429, November.
    16. Fluvià, Modest & Rigall-I-Torrent, Ricard & Espinet, Josep Maria & Garriga, Anna & Saló, Albert, 2011. "Precios implícitos de los atributos de los productos turísticos: ¿Qué esconde el efecto de la localización?/Implicit Prices of the Attributes of Tourism Products: What is Hidden Behind Location?," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 29, pages 781-802, Diciembre.
    17. O. Ashton Morgan & Stuart E. Hamilton, 2009. "Disentangling Access and View Amenities in Access-restricted Coastal Residential Communities," Working Papers 09-10, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    18. 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).
    19. Edwards, Steven F., 1989. "On Estimating Household Demand For Outdoor Recreation From Property Values: An Exploration," Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 18(2), pages 1-9, October.
    20. Ambrey, Christopher L. & Fleming, Christopher M., 2011. "Valuing scenic amenity using life satisfaction data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 106-115.

    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:vrs:otamic:v:11:y:2019:i:1:p:1925-1932:n:7. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    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.