Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

An Empirical Model of Urban Spatial Development

2001, Review of Urban and Regional Development Studies

https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-940X.00039

Abstract

This paper examines land development patterns by using an integrated approach that combines Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and spatial econometric models. It presents evidence that land development sites are affected by each other, and that any attempt to analyze the land development process without consideration of spatial dependence will most likely yield biased parameter estimates, misleading significant levels, and insufficient estimates of the dependent variable. It is found that spatial lagged variables not only improve model performance substantially, but also reveal the presence of clustering land development. This paper demonstrates that incorporation of spatial statistics is made easier with the application of GIS.

References (24)

  1. Anselin, L. 1988. Spatial Econometrics: Methods and Model. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
  2. Anselin, L. and D. Griffith. 1988. Do Spatial Effects Really matter in Regional Analysis? Papers in Re- gional Science Association, 65.
  3. Brueckner, J. 1990. Growth Controls and Land Values in an Open City. Land Economics, 66: 237-48.
  4. Can, A. 1990. The Measurement of Neighborhood Dynamics in Urban House Prices. Economic Geogra- phy, 66: 254-72.
  5. Chicoine, D.L. 1981. Farmland Values at the Urban Fringe: An Analysis of Sale Prices. Land Econom- ics, 57: 353-63.
  6. Cliff, A. and J. Ord. 1973. Spatial Autocorrelation. London: Pion Limited.
  7. Clonts, H.A. 1970. Influence of Urbanization on Land Values at the Urban Periphery. Land Econonics, 46: 489-97.
  8. Ding, C.G. Knaap and L.D. Hopkins. 1999. Urban Growth Boundary Model: A Formal Analysis. Jour- nal of Urban Economics, 46: 53-68.
  9. Ding, C. and R. Bingham. 2000. Beyond Edge City: Job Decentralization and Urban Sprawl. Urban Affairs Review, Vol. 35, No. 6: 880-898.
  10. Du nford , R .W ., C.E . Marti an d R .C. M ittelh am mer. 1 98 5. A C ase S tud y of Rural Land Prices at the Urban Frin ge Inclu din g S ub jectiv e Buy ers E xpectations. La nd Econo mics. 11 -16 .
  11. Fotheringham, A.S. and P.A. Rogerson. 1993. GIS and Spatial Analytical Problems. International Jour- nal of Geographic Information Systems, Vol. 7, No. 1: 3-19.
  12. Fotheringham, A.S. and D.W.S. Wong. 1991. The Modifiable Areal Unit Problem in Multivariate Statis- tical Analysis. Environment and Planning A, 23: 1025-1044.
  13. Goodchild, M.F. 1986. Spatial Autocorrelation. Norwich: Geo Books, W. H. Hutchins & Sons.
  14. Hushak, L.J. 1975. The Urban Demand for Urban-Rural Fringe Land. Land Economics, 51: 112-23.
  15. Maddala, G.S. 1983. Limited-Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Economics. Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press.
  16. Marti, C.E. 1983. An Econometric Analysis of the Determinants of Rural Land Prices at the Urban Fringe. M.A. Thesis. Washington State University, Pullman.
  17. McMillen, D.P. 1989. An Empirical Model of Urban Fringe Land Use. Land Economics, Vol. 65, No. 2: 138-145.
  18. McMillen, D.P. and J.F. McDonald. 1991. Urban Land Value Functions with Endogenous Zoning. Jour- nal of Urban Economics, 29: 14-27.
  19. McMillen, D.P. and J.F. McDonald. 1993. Could Zoning Have Increased Land Values in Chicago? Journal of Urban Economics, 33: 167-188.
  20. Odland, J. 1976. The Conditions for Multi-Center Cities. Economic Geography, 54: 234-244.
  21. Peiser, R.B. 1987. The Determinants of Nonresidential Urban Land Values. Journal of Urban Econom- ics, 22: 340-360.
  22. Pindyck, R.S. and D.L. Rubinfeld. 1991. Econometric Models and Economic Forecasts, 3 rd edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  23. Ripley, B.D. 1981. Spatial Statistics. New York: Wiley.
  24. Upton, G.J.G. and B. Fingleton. 1985. Spatial Data Analysis by Example, Volume I: Point Pattern and Quantitative Data. Toronto: Wiley.