IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tin/wpaper/20090023.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Residents' Benefits Evaluation of Urban Development Plans - A Willingnes-To-Accept Model for a Multi-functional Land Use Project in Amsterdam

Author

Listed:
  • Caroline A. Rodenburg

    (VU University Amsterdam)

  • Peter Nijkamp

    (VU University Amsterdam)

  • Henri L.F. de Groot

    (VU University Amsterdam)

  • Erik T. Verhoef

    (VU University Amsterdam)

Abstract

Urban re-development projects may generate various positive as well as negative spatial externalities to the existing population in a given area. This study aims to assess the order of magnitude of the expected net benefits for incumbent residents from a large scale project in the Southern part of Amsterdam (the Netherlands), which is planned to transform the area into a large multi-functional urban centre. We employ a specific stated preference method (viz. a willingness-to-accept method) to assess the net socio-economic benefits for the population in the area concerned. Our approach explicitly considers perceived costs and benefits in the foreseen „end-states‟ as well as those incurred during the transitional (construction) phase towards such end-states. It is concluded that the multi-functional urban re-development project under consideration is not supported by the residents in the area, as the long-run benefits are perceived to be overshadowed by the short-run environmental nuisances.

Suggested Citation

  • Caroline A. Rodenburg & Peter Nijkamp & Henri L.F. de Groot & Erik T. Verhoef, 2009. "Residents' Benefits Evaluation of Urban Development Plans - A Willingnes-To-Accept Model for a Multi-functional Land Use Project in Amsterdam," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 09-023/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20090023
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://papers.tinbergen.nl/09023.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Catherine M. Chambers & Paul E. Chambers & John C. Whitehead, 1998. "Contingent Valuation of Quasi-Public Goods: Validity, Reliability, and Application To Valuing a Historic Site," Public Finance Review, , vol. 26(2), pages 137-154, March.
    2. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1991. "Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(4), pages 1039-1061.
    3. Bruce K. Johnson & Peter A. Groothuis & John C. Whitehead, 2000. "“The Value of Public Goods Generated by a Major League Sports Team: The CVM Approach,”," Working Papers 0014, East Carolina University, Department of Economics.
    4. Hanemann, W Michael, 1991. "Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept: How Much Can They Differ?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(3), pages 635-647, June.
    5. Randall, Alan & Stoll, John R, 1980. "Consumer's Surplus in Commodity Space," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 449-455, June.
    6. Ron Vreeker, 2004. "Urban Multifunctional Land Use and Externalities," ERSA conference papers ersa04p346, European Regional Science Association.
    7. Willig, Robert D, 1976. "Consumer's Surplus without Apology," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(4), pages 589-597, September.
    8. Gregory, Robin, 1986. "Interpreting measures of economic loss: Evidence from contingent valuation and experimental studies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 325-337, 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. José L Oviedo & Pablo Campos & Alejandro Caparrós, 2022. "Contingent valuation of landowner demand for forest amenities: application in Andalusia, Spain," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(3), pages 615-643.
    2. Beja Jr, Edsel, 2012. "Two explanations to the willingness to accept and willingness to pay gap plus an alternative," MPRA Paper 36239, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Carol Mansfield, 1999. "Despairing Over Disparities: Explaining the Difference Between Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(2), pages 219-234, March.
    4. Horowitz, John K. & McConnell, Kenneth E., 2002. "A Review of WTA/WTP Studies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 426-447, November.
    5. Robert W. Kling & Charles F. Revier & Karin Sable, 2004. "Estimating the Public Good Value of Preserving a Local Historic Landmark: The Role of Non-substitutability and Citizen Information," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 41(10), pages 2025-2041, September.
    6. Brown, Thomas C. & Gregory, Robin, 1999. "Why the WTA-WTP disparity matters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 323-335, March.
    7. AKA, Bedia François, 2016. "Quantitative Impacts Of Basic Income Grant On Income Distribution In Cote D’Ivoire: Time To Change Our Societies," Revista Galega de Economía, University of Santiago de Compostela. Faculty of Economics and Business., vol. 25(1), pages 159-170.
    8. Bergstrom, John C. & Taylor, Laura O., 2006. "Using meta-analysis for benefits transfer: Theory and practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 351-360, December.
    9. Veisten, Knut, 2007. "Contingent valuation controversies: Philosophic debates about economic theory," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 204-232, April.
    10. Shogren, Jason F. & Cho, Sungwon & Koo, Cannon & List, John & Park, Changwon & Polo, Pablo & Wilhelmi, Robert, 2001. "Auction mechanisms and the measurement of WTP and WTA," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 97-109, April.
    11. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    12. Banzhaf, H. Spencer, 2016. "Constructing markets: environmental economics and the contingent valuation controversy," MPRA Paper 78814, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. John Lourenze Poquiz, 2024. "Measuring the value of free digital goods," Working Papers 044, The Productivity Institute.
    14. Darla Hatton MacDonald & Mark Morrison & Mary Barnes, 2010. "Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept Compensation for Changes in Urban Water Customer Service Standards," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 24(12), pages 3145-3158, September.
    15. Tunçel, Tuba & Hammitt, James K., 2014. "A new meta-analysis on the WTP/WTA disparity," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 175-187.
    16. Park, Hoanjae, 1997. "Randall and Stoll's bound in an inverse demand system," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 281-286, November.
    17. Biel, Anders & Johansson-Stenman, Olof & Nilsson, Andreas, 2011. "The willingness to pay–willingness to accept gap revisited: The role of emotions and moral satisfaction," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 908-917.
    18. Achilleas Vassilopoulos & Niki Avgeraki & Stathis Klonaris, 2020. "Social desirability and the WTP–WTA disparity in common goods," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(7), pages 6425-6444, October.
    19. Kolstad, Charles D. & Guzman, Rolando M., 1999. "Information and the Divergence between Willingness to Accept and Willingness to Pay," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 66-80, July.
    20. Loomis, John & Peterson, George & Champ, Patricia & Brown, Thomas & Lucero, Beatrice, 1998. "Paired comparison estimates of willingness to accept versus contingent valuation estimates of willingness to pay," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 501-515, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    multi-functional land use; stated preference; urban development;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q15 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Land Ownership and Tenure; Land Reform; Land Use; Irrigation; Agriculture and Environment
    • R52 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - Land Use and Other Regulations
    • O18 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Urban, Rural, Regional, and Transportation Analysis; Housing; Infrastructure

    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:tin:wpaper:20090023. 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: Tinbergen Office +31 (0)10-4088900 (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tinbenl.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.