Eliciting preferences for urban parks

Panduro, Toke Emil; Jensen, Cathrine Ulla; Lundhede, Thomas Hedemark; Graevenitz, Kathrine von; Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark

doi:10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2018.09.001

Cited by 37 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…11 These studies also tend to suggest higher valuations for such amenities among high-skilled, high-income groups (e.g. Carlsson and Johansson-Stenman, 2000;Kim and Jin, 2018;Panduro et al, 2018) or directly link the share of highly educated people to city characteristics such as recreational areas (Backman and Nilsson, 2018). We hence include air quality, urban parks and the proximity to natural recreation areas as the factors that we associate with urban ecology in our experimental setting.…”

Section: Choice Of Urban Amenitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Preferences for Urban Amenities Really Differ by Skill?

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use:Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes.You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public.If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence.

show abstract

Section: Choice Of Urban Amenitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Preferences for Urban Amenities Really Differ by Skill?

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Political pressure led the Conservative government to grant significant funding to improve many historic parks and green spaces around the country (Elborough, 2016). This was continued by the New Labour government in 1997, bringing significant funding via neighbourhood improvement programmes, under its 'Cleaner, Safer, Greener' tagline (ODPM, 2002). Similar area-based initiatives were also happening in the Netherlands, Scandinavia and the US (Dempsey et al, 2014).…”

Section: A Brief History Of Funding Parks In Englandmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acceptability of income generation practices in 21st century urban park management: The case of city district parks

Nam

Dempsey

2020

Journal of Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is growing interest in understanding the benefits of parks and green space in financial terms, particularly from policymakers and decision-makers. Applying a financial value is an increasingly popular practice designed to communicate urban green space benefits to budget holders. This is pertinent for local governments who routinely struggle to secure funding for parks, given their nonstatutory status around the world. To address this, it is perhaps inevitable that the application of a wide range of funding models to parks is being explored. However, there is little empirical evidence that users and residents share this sentiment. This paper aims to address this gap in knowledge by exploring how feasible and acceptable such income generation practices are for stakeholders directly involved in using and managing parks. We asked local residents, parks managers, community groups and academics in one northern English city how feasible and acceptable they considered different income generation practices if applied to their local parks. The findings showed that overall, income generated by cafés and organised events were considered acceptable by residents but to a lesser extent by community groups and professionals. Voluntary donations, car parking and increased taxation were considered unacceptable by all stakeholders, while using the planning system to secure funding was considered acceptable. The findings suggest a variety of acceptable income-generating practices which may help stakeholders to address pragmatically the current challenges of managing urban parks.

show abstract

“…Trojanek et al ( 30 ) used the hedonic price approach, OLS, GLS and QR models to conclude that urban green space within 100 m of a home increases residential prices by 3–4%. Panduro et al ( 31 ) used the hedonic pricing approach to explore the implicit price of urban green space availability. They concluded that within a 1,000-m radius park implicit price is an annual rent increase of 0.33% per annum ( 31 ).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of the impact of urban parks and green spaces on residence prices in the environmental health context

Chen

Lin

You

et al. 2022

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urban parks have consistently played an important role in people's living environment, reflecting house prices and the extent of the people's attention. Although many studies have been conducted in this filed, the consolidated related research has not been discussed often. Therefore, related papers on the impact of urban park green spaces on housing prices in recent years should be sorted out. Different choices of urban parks and green areas will undoubtedly influence research methods, housing preferences and the nature of the effects. Consequently, a logical framework of previous studies must be constructed. This study will review the literature from four aspects: (i) review of research methods on how park green spaces affect home prices (i.e., Research techniques, such as hedonic price analysis methods, geographically weighted regression models and neural network models, are frequently used in studies, and methodological advancements have helped the field advance); (ii) examining the varying effects of the same or similar types of parkland on home values; (iii) review of studies on the subject, analyzing variations in the scope and degree of the effects of various parks on home values in terms of such factors as park size, accessibility and serving size and (iv) review of innovative research perspectives, translating the issue of impact of parklands on housing prices into a study of the capitalization and amenity of parklands.

show abstract

Eliciting preferences for urban parks

Cited by 37 publications

References 34 publications

Do Preferences for Urban Amenities Really Differ by Skill?

Do Preferences for Urban Amenities Really Differ by Skill?

Acceptability of income generation practices in 21st century urban park management: The case of city district parks

Review of the impact of urban parks and green spaces on residence prices in the environmental health context

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About