Author
Listed:
- Philip W. Koppels
- Hilde Remy
Abstract
There is a sound theoretical base and intuitive expectation that urban office markets are too segmented to be accurately described by unitary market models. Nevertheless, previous studies of office market dynamics tend to concentrate on either national or metropolitan markets and assume a unitary market in equilibrium. In spite of the fact that the value of office property attributes may vary across urban submarkets.Office submarkets can be understood as comprising offices that, although not exactly alike in their combination of characteristics, are considered a reasonable substitute for each other. In general, two types of segmentation can be distinguished; spatial segmentation and structural segmentation. Spatial segmentation refers to geographical delineated submarkets due to dissimilar location features. Structural segmentation relates to market segmentation due to building dissimilarities such as building size, building quality and year of development. The study examines the spatial and structural segmentation of the Amsterdam office market. Amsterdam, the study area of this research, has a dispersed office location pattern. Amsterdam is by far the largest office centre in The Netherlands and has an office stock of approximately 6.7 million square meters. Real estate agents identify several distinct office locations; spatial submarkets. Furthermore, distinct building stock segments, relating to building size and building period, are distinguished. In this paper, the Amsterdam submarket structure is examined in a hedonic framework, over the period 1995 – 2011. Prior defined submarkets, as perceived by real estate agents, are tested on consistency and submarkets are statistically derived. For this purpose a standard city-wide hedonic model is formulated and compared with models that take various submarket delineation schemes in consideration. The derived utility for building and location attributes in each model is compared and provides an indication of the submarket structure of Amsterdam.
Suggested Citation
Philip W. Koppels & Hilde Remy, 2013.
"The Segmentation of the Amsterdam Office Market,"
ERES
eres2013_227, European Real Estate Society (ERES).
Handle:
RePEc:arz:wpaper:eres2013_227
Download full text from publisher
More about this item
JEL classification:
- R3 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Real Estate Markets, Spatial Production Analysis, and Firm Location
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:arz:wpaper:eres2013_227. 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: Architexturez Imprints (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eressea.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.