IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea14/170602.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Welfare and Biodiversity Tradeoffs in Urban Open Space Protection

Author

Listed:
  • Tajibaeva, Liaila
  • Haight, Robert
  • Stephen, Polasky

Abstract

In this paper, we analyze the optimal spatial pattern of open space and residential development in an urban model that includes provision of both local and global public goods. In our model, households choose where to live based on land prices, proximity to employment, and amenity values that include access to open space (local public good). Open space also provides habitat for biodiversity (global public good). We applied the model in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area and include endogenous land prices, land taxes that finance the purchase of open space, heterogeneous land quality, multiple employment locations, and pre-existing spatial features, such as institutional and environmental amenities. Based on this application we develop an efficiency frontier that shows tradeoffs between maximum welfare of households, which includes provision of local public goods, and provision of habitat for biodiversity, which is assumed to not affect household welfare. We show there is the potential for a large increase in biodiversity conservation with only modest reductions in welfare when starting from a spatial pattern of development that maximizes household welfare. Biodiversity conservation can be improved by changing the spatial configuration of open space towards higher quality habitat and aggregating protected areas to increase contiguity.

Suggested Citation

  • Tajibaeva, Liaila & Haight, Robert & Stephen, Polasky, 2014. "Welfare and Biodiversity Tradeoffs in Urban Open Space Protection," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170602, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea14:170602
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.170602
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/170602/files/welfare%20and%20biodiversity%205-24-2014.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.170602?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. Robert Innes & Stephen Polasky & John Tschirhart, 1998. "Takings, Compensation and Endangered Species Protection on Private Lands," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 35-52, Summer.
    2. Paul Thorsnes, 2002. "The Value of a Suburban Forest Preserve: Estimates from Sales of Vacant Residential Building Lots," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(3), pages 426-441.
    3. Dissanayake, Sahan T.M. & Önal, Hayri, 2011. "Amenity driven price effects and conservation reserve site selection: A dynamic linear integer programming approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2225-2235.
    4. Kent F. Kovacs & Douglas M. Larson, 2007. "The Influence of Recreation and Amenity Benefits of Open Space on Residential Development Patterns," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 83(4), pages 475-496.
    5. 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.
    6. Kotchen, Matthew J. & Powers, Shawn M., 2006. "Explaining the appearance and success of voter referenda for open-space conservation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 373-390, July.
    7. Elena G. Irwin, 2010. "New Directions For Urban Economic Models Of Land Use Change: Incorporating Spatial Dynamics And Heterogeneity," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(1), pages 65-91, February.
    8. Elena G. Irwin, 2002. "The Effects of Open Space on Residential Property Values," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(4), pages 465-480.
    9. Magliocca, Nicholas & McConnell, Virginia & Walls, Margaret & Safirova, Elena, 2012. "Zoning on the urban fringe: Results from a new approach to modeling land and housing markets," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 198-210.
    10. Allen Klaiber, H. & Phaneuf, Daniel J., 2010. "Valuing open space in a residential sorting model of the Twin Cities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 57-77, September.
    11. 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.
    12. Sándor F. Tóth & Robert G. Haight & Luke W. Rogers, 2011. "Dynamic Reserve Selection: Optimal Land Retention with Land-Price Feedbacks," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 59(5), pages 1059-1078, October.
    13. C. R. Margules & R. L. Pressey, 2000. "Systematic conservation planning," Nature, Nature, vol. 405(6783), pages 243-253, May.
    14. Robert G. Haight & Charles S. Revelle & Stephanie A. Snyder, 2000. "An Integer Optimization Approach to a Probabilistic Reserve Site Selection Problem," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 48(5), pages 697-708, October.
    15. Doss, Cheryl R. & Taff, Steven J., 1996. "The Influence Of Wetland Type And Wetland Proximity On Residential Property Values," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 21(1), pages 1-10, July.
    16. Tyrvainen, Liisa & Miettinen, Antti, 2000. "Property Prices and Urban Forest Amenities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 205-223, March.
    17. Jeffrey D. Camm & Susan K. Norman & Stephen Polasky & Andrew R. Solow, 2002. "Nature Reserve Site Selection to Maximize Expected Species Covered," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 50(6), pages 946-955, December.
    18. Elena G. Irwin & Kathleen P. Bell & Nancy E. Bockstael & David A. Newburn & Mark D. Partridge & JunJie Wu, 2009. "The Economics of Urban-Rural Space," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 435-459, September.
    19. John A. List & Michael Margolis & Daniel E. Osgood, 2006. "Is the Endangered Species Act Endangering Species?," NBER Working Papers 12777, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Sándor F. Tóth & Robert G. Haight & Luke W. Rogers, 2011. "Dynamic Reserve Selection: Optimal Land Retention with Land-Price Feedbacks," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 59(5), pages 1059-1078, October.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Billionnet, Alain, 2013. "Mathematical optimization ideas for biodiversity conservation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(3), pages 514-534.
    7. Kriesel, Warren & Mullen, Jeffrey D., 2009. "Alternative Housing Development Strategies in Georgia's Coastal Marshlands," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49514, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. Zipp, Katherine Y. & Lewis, David J. & Provencher, Bill, 2017. "Does the conservation of land reduce development? An econometric-based landscape simulation with land market feedbacks," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 19-37.
    9. Kolbe, Jens & Wüstemann, Henry, 2014. "Estimating the value of Urban Green Space: A hedonic pricing analysis of the housing market in Cologne, Germany," SFB 649 Discussion Papers 2015-002, Humboldt University Berlin, Collaborative Research Center 649: Economic Risk.
    10. Reeves, Tyler & Mei, Bin & Siry, Jacek & Bettinger, Pete & Ferreira, Susana, 2020. "Effect of working forest conservation easements on surrounding property values," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    11. Belcher, Richard N. & Chisholm, Ryan A., 2018. "Tropical Vegetation and Residential Property Value: A Hedonic Pricing Analysis in Singapore," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 149-159.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. repec:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2015-002 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. vom Hofe, Rainer & Mihaescu, Oana & Boorn, Mary Lynne, 2017. "Do urban parks really benefit homeowners economically? Evidence from a spatial hedonic study of the Cincinnati park system," HUI Working Papers 122, HUI Research.
    16. Marisa J. Mazzotta & Elena Besedin & Ann E. Speers, 2014. "A Meta-Analysis of Hedonic Studies to Assess the Property Value Effects of Low Impact Development," Resources, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-31, January.
    17. 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).
    18. Mansfield, Carol & Pattanayak, Subhrendu K. & McDow, William & McDonald, Robert & Halpin, Patrick, 2005. "Shades of Green: Measuring the value of urban forests in the housing market," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 177-199, December.
    19. Caruso, Geoffrey & Peeters, Dominique & Cavailhes, Jean & Rounsevell, Mark, 2007. "Spatial configurations in a periurban city. A cellular automata-based microeconomic model," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 542-567, September.
    20. H. Allen Klaiber & Joshua K. Abbott & V. Kerry Smith, 2017. "Some Like It (Less) Hot: Extracting Trade-Off Measures for Physically Coupled Amenities," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(4), pages 1053-1079.
    21. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Poudyal, Neelam C. & Roberts, Roland K., 2008. "Spatial analysis of the amenity value of green open space," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 403-416, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy; Land Economics/Use;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:aaea14:170602. 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: AgEcon Search (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.