Treating open space as an urban amenity

By V. Smith, C. Poulos, Hyun Kim. 2002

212 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6f329601b3b6f15e35ea02ace704145ea1d57344

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

Citations in the corpus

When Walmart comes to town: Always low housing prices? Always? (2015, unknown): “…(2008) and Pope (2008) have both recently shown that a discrete change in the risk of a localized crime can have a causal impact on housing prices, Smith et al. (2002) showed that freeway noise can have a negative impact on housing prices, Lin (2013) showed the negative impact of brownfields (and…”
Applying Geographical Information Systems (GIS) to Environmental and Resource Economics (2002, methodology): “Using a case study of Northern Wake County, North Carolina, Smith et al. (2001) combined a GIS database of the road network with information on land-cover, property parcel attributes, administrative boundaries, and housing sales.”
THE VALUE OF OPEN SPACE: EVIDENCE FROM STUDIES OF NONMARKET BENEFITS (2005, background): “Smith et al. (2002) include distance to open space categorized as “fixed” or “adjustable”; in the fixed open space category are golf courses, publicly accessible open space such as parks, and a corridor for a major highway, and in the adjustable category are agricultural, forested, and vacant lands.”
Landscape amenities and local development: a review of migration, regional economic and hedonic pricing studies (2010, background): “Ready and Abdalla, 2005), pasture (Bockstael, 1996) and unspecified agricultural land (Neumann et al., 2009; Paterson and Boyle, 2002; Smith et al. 2002).”
Shades of Green: Measuring the Value of Urban Forests in the Housing Market (2005, background): “A few studies have looked at distance to a variety of land uses and open space definitions (for example, Mahan et al., 2000; Lutzenhiser and Netusil, 2001; Smith et al., 2001) or the proportion of open space or other land uses in the neighborhood around a house (Irwin and Bockstael, 2000a and 2000b;”
Open Space, Residential Property Values, and Spatial Context (2006, background): “Several recent studies measure the distance to different types of nearby open areas and find that home value increases with proximity and that the effect varies by type (Bolitzer and Netusil, 2000; Lutzenhiser and Netusil, 2001; Smith et al., 2002).”
Measuring the Benefits of Neighbourhood Park Amenities: Application and Comparison of Spatial Hedonic Approaches (2010, background): “…that estimate the effect of open spaces (e.g., Acharya and Bennett 2001; Cheshire and Sheppard 1995; Cho et al. 2006; Geoghegan 2002; Geoghegan et al. 1997; Irwin 2002; Irwin and Bockstael 2001; Lutzenhiser and Netusil 2001; Shultz and King 2001; Smith et al. 2002; Tyrvainen and Miettinen 2000).”
Which hedonic models can we trust to recover the marginal willingness to pay for environmental amenities (2010, result): “While the eventual opening of the highway was not unexpected, some details of the planning and construction phases are consistent with a quasi-experimental design [31].”