Premium
Relative Economic Values of Open Space Provided by National Forest and Military Lands to Surrounding Communities
Author(s) -
Ham Charlotte,
Loomis John B.,
Champ Patricia A.
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
growth and change
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.657
H-Index - 55
eISSN - 1468-2257
pISSN - 0017-4815
DOI - 10.1111/grow.12072
Subject(s) - space (punctuation) , government (linguistics) , business , quality (philosophy) , agricultural economics , geography , public economics , economics , philosophy , linguistics , epistemology
Open space lands are provided by a variety of entities from private individuals to the federal government and these entities make management decisions based on a very broad range of priorities. The net benefits of additional open space depend on the number, quality, and composition of existing open space in the vicinity. In areas where open space is abundant and there is a significant proportion that is federally owned, the net benefits are not well understood. In this study, the marginal willingness to pay for proximity to public open space is estimated using the hedonic property method and home sales transactions in 2007 for E l P aso C ounty C olorado, a location that boasts of having over 150,000 acres of open space. Results from a generalized spatial two‐stage least squares regression indicate that homes in close proximity to open space provided locally by city, county, and state governments sell for a premium, but larger premiums are associated with proximity to the P ike N ational F orest and C heyenne M ountain A ir F orce S tation likely at least partially due to the natural amenities of the R ocky M ountains. In contrast, proximity to F ort C arson A rmy I nstallation is found to negatively affect house sales prices likely due to undesirable activities that occur on and around the installation. As for the other area of federal lands, proximity to the U . S . A ir F orce A cademy and to P eterson A ir F orce B ase was found to negatively affect house prices; however, these effects were not statistically significant.