IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/umaesp/13407.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Hedonic Valuation Of Proximity To Natural Areas And Farmland In Dakota County, Minnesota

Author

Listed:
  • Lake, Mary Beth
  • Easter, K. William

Abstract

Open space may provide a variety of environmental services, such as flood control, prevention of soil erosion, storage and recycling of wastes, and scenic views, which do not have traditional market values. This study assesses the value of these amenities in Dakota County, Minnesota, by estimating the marginal price of open space proximity to housing, with the hedonic property price method. Utilizing residential housing and open space data, a property's structural, neighborhood, regional, and environmental characteristics are related to its sale price. Key environmental characteristics are distances between a property and particular types of natural areas and farmland. The marginal price of proximity to open space was estimated with three models that illustrate the relationship between open space proximity and property price. The estimation results suggest that Dakota County homeowners pay, ceteris paribus, a higher property price ($115) to live 100 feet closer to any type of open space. Upon categorization of open space into natural areas and farmland, an interesting distinction was discovered: homebuyers paid more ($111) to live 100 feet closer to natural areas and less (-$53) to live the same distance closer to farmland. Further classification of open space into public lands, forests, prairies, wetlands, and water bodies, yielded varying marginal prices for proximity to these features. Proximity to public lands and forests had a positive relationship with property price ($80 and $70 respectively), while the marginal price for proximity to farmland remained negative (-$66). Living marginally closer to prairies also had a negative association with property price (-$48), while nearness to wetlands and water did not have a statistically significant effect. These last three marginal prices are unreliable due to the presence of multicollinearity. Finally, splitting the observations into urban and rural-urban fringe zones showed regional distinctions in the relationship of open space proximity to property price. In urban areas, proximity to publicly owned natural spaces and forests yielded a positive marginal price ($127 and $62 respectively). In the rural-urban fringe, proximity to forests and water features yielded positive marginal prices ($91 and $66 respectively). While proximity to farmland, prairies and wetlands was considered undesirable in the urban zone (with marginal prices -$102, -$55, -$63), nearness to these same features in the rural-urban fringe has a statistically insignificant relationship to property price.

Suggested Citation

  • Lake, Mary Beth & Easter, K. William, 2002. "Hedonic Valuation Of Proximity To Natural Areas And Farmland In Dakota County, Minnesota," Staff Papers 13407, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:umaesp:13407
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.13407
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/13407/files/p02-12.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.13407?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. Espey, Molly & Owusu-Edusei, Kwame, 2001. "Neighborhood Parks And Residential Property Values In Greenville, South Carolina," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(3), pages 1-6, December.
    2. 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.
    3. 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..
    4. P B McLeod, 1984. "The Demand for Local Amenity: An Hedonic Price Analysis," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 16(3), pages 389-400, March.
    5. Leggett, Christopher G. & Bockstael, Nancy E., 2000. "Evidence of the Effects of Water Quality on Residential Land Prices," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 121-144, March.
    6. 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.
    7. McLeod, Donald M. & Bastian, Christopher T. & Germino, Matthew J. & Reiners, William A. & Blasko, Benedict J., 1999. "The Contribution Of Environmental Amenities To Agricultural Land Values: Hedonic Modelling Using Geographic Information Systems Data," 1999 Annual Meeting, July 11-14, 1999, Fargo, ND 35707, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Ma, Shan & Swinton, Scott M., 2011. "Valuation of ecosystem services from rural landscapes using agricultural land prices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(9), pages 1649-1659, July.
    2. John C. Bergstrom & Richard C. Ready, 2009. "What Have We Learned from Over 20 Years of Farmland Amenity Valuation Research in North America?," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 31(1), pages 21-49.
    3. Vinicio Vannucci & Loredana Torsello, 2006. "Economic assessment of odour emissions: an application of Hedonic Price Method," Department of Economics University of Siena 485, Department of Economics, University of Siena.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Ahlfeldt, Gabriel M. & Nitsch, Volker & Wendland, Nicolai, 2019. "Ease vs. noise: Long-run changes in the value of transport (dis)amenities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    8. Ida Ferrara & Stephen McComb & Paul Missios, 2007. "Local Willingness-to-Pay Estimates for the Remediation of the Sydney Tar Ponds in Nova Scotia," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 33(4), pages 441-458, December.
    9. 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.
    10. Kovacs, Kent F. & Larson, Douglas M., 2005. "Development Patterns and the Recreation Value of Amenities," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19149, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    11. 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.
    12. Jane Turpie & Gwyneth Letley & Robynne Chyrstal & Stefan Corbella & Derek Stretch, 2017. "A Spatial Valuation of the Natural and Semi-Natural Open Space Areas in eThekwini Municipality," World Bank Publications - Reports 26765, The World Bank Group.
    13. Katz, G. & Colby, Bonnie G. & Osgood, Daniel E. & Bark-Hodgins, Rosalind H. & Stromberg, J., 2005. "Do Homebuyers Care about the 'Quality' of Natural Habitats?," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19283, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    14. Delores Conway & Christina Li & Jennifer Wolch & Christopher Kahle & Michael Jerrett, 2010. "A Spatial Autocorrelation Approach for Examining the Effects of Urban Greenspace on Residential Property Values," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 150-169, August.
    15. Stephen Conroy & Jennifer Milosch, 2011. "An Estimation of the Coastal Premium for Residential Housing Prices in San Diego County," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 211-228, February.
    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. Irwin, Nicholas B. & Klaiber, H. Allen & Irwin, Elena G., 2017. "Do Stormwater Basins Generate co-Benefits? Evidence from Baltimore County, Maryland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 202-212.
    18. Monique DANTAS & Frédéric GASCHET & Guillaume POUYANNE, 2010. "Regulatory zoning and coastal housing prices: a bayesian hedonic approach (In French)," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2010-12, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    19. JunJie Wu & Richard M. Adams & Andrew J. Plantinga, 2004. "Amenities in an Urban Equilibrium Model: Residential Development in Portland, Oregon," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 80(1), pages 19-32.
    20. Bruno Lanz & Allan Provins, 2013. "Valuing Local Environmental Amenity with Discrete Choice Experiments: Spatial Scope Sensitivity and Heterogeneous Marginal Utility of Income," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(1), pages 105-130, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy;

    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:umaesp:13407. 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/daumnus.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.