Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Monetary, Subjective and Quantitative Approaches to Assess Urban Quality of Life and Pleasantness in Cities (Hedonic Price, Willingness-to-Pay, Positional Value, Life Satisfaction, Isobenefit Lines)

  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The magnitude increase of Urban Quality of Life studies is directly connected with the increase of the urban population in the world. Urban Quality of Life is a hierarchical multi-attribute concept whose attributes can be defined and evaluated by several kinds of methods such as Monetary (Hedonic Price, Willingness-to-pay, Cost-Benefit, Positional Value), Subjective (life satisfaction, subjective wellbeing, ranking/rating evaluation) and Quantitative (how many urban attractions there are in the city, and how they are distributed on its planimetry). As real examples of monetary approaches, 107 empirical literature results are briefly shown, quantifying the increase of property value in relation to urban factors such as green, open space, noise, public transport, pleasant view, etc. The result of a Willingness-to-Pay survey, and the definition of Positional Value are also shown; it is the part of property value coming from the characteristics of the area in which the property is. An analysis of Turin illustrated that the quality of the area (the Positional Value) can change the value of a property up to 143 %. This value is, in a certain way, a monetary mirror of the quality of life of the areas. As a concrete example of subjective approaches two rating method surveys on Turin are rapidly exposed, as well as a recent subjective wellbeing study comparing the life satisfaction in cities and in the countryside. As quantitative approaches are proposed the concepts of Isobenefit Lines and the Isobenefit Orography, both from the spatial urban amenities distribution and quantity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21
Fig. 22
Fig. 23
Fig. 24

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Part of a research conducted by the author in Turin in 2010 (Politecnico di Torino), and currently under writing process.

  2. The survey was built by the author in 2010 when he researched at Politecnico di Torino.

  3. Age: ‘18–30’ 162, ‘31–50’ 281, ‘51–70’ 66, ‘>70’ 3. Without degree 53, graduated 214, pos-graduated 245.

  4. D’Acci (2012a).

  5. Data from D’Acci (2007).

  6. Personal Isobenefit Lines (D’Acci 2012d, e, f).

  7. They were introduced by D'Acci (2012d, e, f) and underlined by the MIT Technology Review as: "Isobenefit Lines rewrite rules for understanding city life. A new way of mapping cities according to the benefit they give residents has the potential to change the way planners think about city design. […] In recent years, city planners have begun to place more emphasis on developing additional centers within cities. So it's increasingly common for a city to have several centers performing different functions. D'Acci's new model is designed to cope with this increased complexity. […] D'Acci's approach is clearly a step forward. He points out that there is a strong correlation between isobenefit lines and property prices. That's a good indication that the model captures some important elements of human behavior" (MIT Technology Review 2012). MIT Technology Review was founded at MIT in 1899.

  8. If we want to consider also the disamenities, U will give some problems. Therefore, for U, we should separately consider amenities and disamenities.

  9. For the next simulation of the social benefit orography of Turin, the non-attractiveness, being constant during the analysed years, will not be considered because, as constant, they will not change the result of the comparison.

  10. We should numerically judge how much an attraction can satisfy its pretension to be an ‘Attraction’ for the majority of citizens. It could be sensible to judge A by referring to the usual, average number of citizens (not tourists) using the attraction and by then comparing each amenity with the best place/s in the city and with the neutral ones. In a similar way, but in different contest and aim, urban economists have often been interested in using population levels as a measure of urban success. High levels of population “tell us that people are voting with their feet to move to a particular place” (Glaeser 2008). There is no doubt about the relativity, and then the validity, of our own preferences also if divergent from other people, or even from the average peoples preferences: that which for a person can be a wonderful attraction, i.e. a shopping mall, for another can be a boring, consumerist place. Idem for the judgment of amenities such as parks, historical areas, and so forth. For this is also proposed another kind of Isobenefit Analysis by the Personal Isobenefit Lines (D’Acci 2012d, e, f).

  11. We can visualize the Breaking point of equal attraction among amenities (which can be personal) as the point at which a marble placed in the Isobenefit surface settles (D’Acci 2012d).

  12. The Positional Value colour legend has been inverted in order to allow a better visual comparison.

  13. For the coefficient of variation of the Property Value it was possible to use the values of a high number of areas for each city thanks to the Gabetti Agency data set. This allows us an excellent measurment of the value spatial distribution. For this coefficient we considered just the most important cities in Italy (Roma, Milano, Napoli, Torino, Genova, Bologna, Firenze, Bari), thinking it is more correct for a comparison with the urban dimension of Turin. The years used are 1997 and 2005 because there are some differences among the urban areas used in the data of 1997 and in 2008, and we would utilize the same values to get a more correct result. The increase for each city is: Roma = +9 %, Milano = −16 %, Napoli = −10 %, Torino = −30 %, Genova = −20 %, Bologna = +68 %, Firenze = −19 %, Bari = −21 %. The outlier considered is Bologna. I want to evidence that the data set of Roma does not give too much assurance because I had had to use just a few areas to have the same areas in 1997 and 2005, because some differences among the data set of Gabetti used during the considered years.

  14. www.comune.torino.it/rigenerazioneurbana/en/.

References

  • Allen, W. B., Chang, K., Marchetti, D., & Pokalski, J. (1986). Value capture in transit: The case of the lindenwold high speed line. The Wharton Transportation Program, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania.

  • American Planning Association (2002). City Parks Forum Briefing Papers.

  • Anderson, S. T., & West, S. E. (2006). Open space, residential property values and spatial context. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 36, 773–789.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bajic, V. (1983). The effects of a new subway line on housing prices in metropolitan Toronto. Urban Studies, 2, 147–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bateman, I., Day, B., Lake, I., & Lovett, A. (2001). The effect of road traffic on residential property values: A literature review and hedonic pricing study. Report to the Scottish Executive Development Department. School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich.

  • Benjamin, J. D., & Sirmansm, G. S. (1996). Mass transportation, apartment rent and property values. The Journal of Real Estate Research, 12, 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benson, E. D., Hansen, J. L., Schwartz, A. L., Jr, & Smersh, G. T. (1998). Pricing residential amenities: The value of a view. The Journal of Real Estate Finance Economics, 16, 55–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bianchini, F. (1990). The crisis of urban social life in Britain: Origins of the problems and possible responses. Planning Practice and Research, 5(3), 4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanco, J. C., & Flindell, I. (2011). Property prices in urban areas affected by road traffic noise. Applied Acoustics, 72, 133–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolitzer, B., & Netusil, N. R. (2000). The impact of open spaces on property values in Portland, Oregon. Journal of Environmental Management, 59(3), 185–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolund, P., & Hunhammar, S. (1999). Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecological Economics, 29, 293–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourassa, S. C., Hoesli, M., & Sun, J. (2004). What’s in a view? Environment and Planning D, 36, 1427–1450.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowes, D. R., & Ihlanfeldt, K. R. (2001). Identifying the impacts of rail transit stations on residential property values. Journal of Urban Economics, 50, 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brander, L. M., & Koetse, M. J. (2011). The Value of urban open space: Meta-analyses of contingent valuation and hedonic pricing results. Journal of Environmental Management, 92(10), 2763–2773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breffle, W., Morey, E., & Lodder, T. (1998). Use of contingent valuation to estimate a neighbourhood’s willingness to pay to preserve undeveloped urban land. Urban Studies, 35, 715–727.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, A., Philip E. C., & Willard L. R. (1976). The quality of American life: Perceptions, evaluations, and satisfactions. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

  • Cervero, R. (1996). Transit-based housing in the San Francisco Bay area: Market profiles and rent premiums. Transportation Quarterly, 50(3), 33–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cervero, K. R., & Kang, C. D. (2011). Bus rapid transit impacts on land uses and land values in Seoul. Transport Policy, 18(1), 102–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Z., & Davey, G. (2008). Subjective quality of life in Zhuhai City, South China: A public survey using the international wellbeing index. Social Indicator Research, 91, 243–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colliers Erdman Lewis. (1995). Colliers Erdman Lewis how to get pedestrian rental growth. London: Colliers Erdman Lewis Research and Consultancy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costanza, R., d’Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., et al. (1997). The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387(15), 253–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crompton, J. L. (2001). The impact of parks on property values: A review of the empirical evidence. Joumal of Leisure Research, 33, 1–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Acci, L. (2007). Formazione e simulazione dei valori immobiliari. Ph.D thesis, Politecnico di Torino.

  • D’Acci, L. (2009a). A mathematical aid for efficient distribution of social benefit in urban planning. In G. Rabino & F. Scarlatti (Eds.), Advances in models and methods for planning. Bologna: Pitagora.

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Acci, L. (2012a). The positional value: Influence of city area on the real estate value (Under review).

  • D’Acci, L. (2012b). Urban quality of life estimates, Encyclopedia of Quality of Life Research, Springer (in press).

  • D’Acci, L. (2012c). Hedonic inertia and underground happiness, Social Indicators Research. doi:10.1007/s11205-012-0137-2. ISSN 1573-0921.

  • D’Acci, L. (2012d). Isobenefit lines, breaking point of equal attraction, uniformity benefit, variety value and proximity value, preference gap gain. General Finance (q-fin.GN); Physics and Society (physics.soc-ph), Cornell University Library. http://arxiv.org/abs/1210.7510.

  • D’Acci, L. (2012e). Modeling spatial equilibrium in cities: The isobenefit lines. General Finance (q-fin.GN); Physics and Society (physics.soc-ph), Cornell University Library. http://arxiv.org/abs/1210.4461.

  • D’Acci, L. (2012f). Urban isobenefit lines. In A. C. Michalos (Ed.), Encyclopedia of quality of life research. Springer. ISBN 978-94-007-0752-8.

  • D’Acci, L. (2008). Grown, urban transformation, real estate value: Econometric cellular automata for the simulation of positional value. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, LNCS 5072.

  • D’Acci, L. (2009b). Spatial distribution of social benefit given by urban attractions. Lecture Notes in Computer Science LNCS, 5592, 237–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Acci, L. (2010a). Measuring well-being and progress. Social Indicators Research, 104(1), 47–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Acci, L. (2010b). A spatial multicriteria decision analysis to plan new urban poles in metropolies. In P. Pontrandolfi, B. Murgante, & G. Las Casas (Eds.), Informatica e Pianificazione Urbana e Territoriale, Vol. 1 (pp. 321–330). Melfi: Libria.

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Acci, L. & Lombardi, P. (2010). MuSIC—A new multi-scalar index for evaluating sustainability in cities. In S. Lehmann, H. Al Waer & J. Al-Qawasmi (Eds.). Sustainable architecture & urban development. CSAAR—Center for the Study of Architecture in Arab Region (JOR), Amman.

  • Damigos, D., & Anyfantis, F. (2011). The value of view through the eyes of real estate experts: A Fuzzy Delphi Approach. Landscape and Urban Planning, 101(2), 171–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Das, D. (2008). Urban quality of life: A case study of Guwahati. Social Indicators Research, 88, 297–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Debrezion, G., Pels, E., & Rietveld, P. (2007). The impact of railway stations on residential and commercial property value: A meta-analysis. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 35, 161–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewees, D. N. (1976). Congestion costs in urban motoring: Some Toronto estimates. Toronto: Centre for Urban and Community Studies, University of Toronto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamantini, C., & Zanon, B. (2000). Planning the urban sustainable development: The case of the plan for the province of Trento, Italy. Environmental Impact Assessment, 20, 299–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ding, C., Simons, R., & Baku, E. (2000). The effect of residential investment on nearby property values: Evidence from Cleveland, OH. The Journal of Real Estate Research, 19(1), 23–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doss, C. R., & Taff, S. J. (1996). The influence of wetland type and wetland proximity on residential property values. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 21, 120–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dueker, K. J., & Bianco, M. J. (1999). Light rail transit impacts in Portland: The first ten years. Presented at Transportation Research Board, 78th Annual Meeting.

  • Dunn, M.B., (1986). Property values and potentially hazardous production facilities: A case study of the Kanawha Valley, West Virginia. Ph.D. Dissertation, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida.

  • Dunning, H., Williams, A., Abonyi, S., & Crooks, V. (2008). A mixed method approach to quality of life research: A case study approach. Social Indicator Research, 85, 145–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easterlin, R. A., Angelescu, L., & Zweig, J. S. (2011). The impact of modern economic growth on urban-rural differences in subjective well-being. World Development, 39(12), 2187–2198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epley, D. R., & Menon, M. (2008). A method of assembling cross-sectional indicators into a community quality of life. Social Indicators Research, 88, 281–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Espey, M., & Lopez, H. (2000). The impact of airport noise and proximity on residential property values. Growth and Change, 31, 408–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Federation for Transport and Environment (EFTE). (2002). Transport and the economy: Myths and facts 2002. Transport, Infrastructure and the Economy: A TandE Fact-Sheet 2002.

  • Evans, R. (1997). Regenerating town centres. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fejarang, R. A. (1994). Impact on property values: A study of the Los Angeles metro rail. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board, preprint, Transportation Research Board, 73rd annual meeting, 9–13 Jan.

  • Fennema, A. T., Veeneklaas, F. R., & Vreke, J. (1996). Meerwaarde woningen door nabijheid van groen (Surplus value of dwellings in the vicinity of green areas). Stedebouw en Ruimtelijke Ordening, 3, 33–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frederick, R., Goo, R., (1996). Economic benefits of urban runoff controls. Urban Sources Section, Assessment and Watershed Protection Division. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.

  • Gehl, J., Gemzøe, L., (1999). Public spaces-public life. Copenhagen: Danish Architectural Press and the Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts. School of Architecture Publishers.

  • Glaeser, E. (2008). Cities, agglomeration, and spatial equilibrium. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grasso, M., & Canova, L. (2008). An assessment of the quality of life in the European Union based on the social indicators approach. Social Indicator Research, 87, 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graves, P., Murdoch, J. C., Thayer, M. A., & Waldman, D. (1988). The robustness of hedonic price estimation: Urban air quality. Land Economics, 64, 220–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hass-Klau, C. (1993). Impact of pedestrianization and traffic calming on retailing. A review of the evidence from Germany and the UK. Transport Policy, 1(1), 21–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hass-Klau, C., & Crampton, G. (2002). Future of urban transport, learning from success and weakness: Light rail. Brighton: ETP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, R. (2011). Hedonic price indexes for housing. OECD Statistics working papers, 2011/01, OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5kghzxpt6g6f-en.

  • Hui, E. C. M., Chau, C. K., Pun, L., & Law, M. Y. (2007). Measuring the neighboring and environmental effects on residential property value: Using spatial weighting matrix. Building and Environment, 42, 2333–2343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Husted, R. J. & Anker, N. O. (2004). Assessment of traffic noise impacts. International Journal of Environmental Studies. Sections A & B, 61(1), 19–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibeas, A., Cordera, R., dell’Olio, L., Coppola, P., & Dominguez, A. (2012). Modelling transport and real-estate values interactions in urban systems. Journal of Transport Geography, 24, 370–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenny, A., & Ericson, A. (2006). A participatory approach to conservation in the Calakmul Biosphere Reserve, Campeche, Mexico. Landscape Urban Planning, 74, 242–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jim, C. Y., & Chen, W. Y. (2006). Impacts of urban environmental elements on residential housing prices in Guangzhou (China). Landscape and Urban Planning, 78, 422–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jim, C. Y., & Chen, W. Y. (2007). Consumption preferences and environmental externalities: A hedonic analysis of the housing market in Guangzhou. Geoforum, 38, 414–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jim, C. Y., & Chen, W. Y. (2009). Value of scenic views: Hedonic assessment of private housing in Hong Kong. Landscape Urban Planning.

  • Johansson, S. (2002). Conceptualizing and measuring quality of life for national policy. Social Indicators Research, 58, 13–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joint Center for Urban Mobility Research (1987). Assessment of changes in property values in transit areas.

  • Kahneman, D., Deiner, D., & Schwarz, N. (Eds.) (1999). Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

  • Kask, S. B., & Maani, A. (1992). Uncertainty, information and hedonic pricing. Land Economics, 68, 170–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lake, I., Lovett, A. A., Bateman, I. J., & Langford, I. H. (1998). Modelling environmental influences on property prices in an urban environment. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 22(2), 121–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, F., Liu, X., Hu, D., Wang, R., Yang, W., Li, D., et al. (2009). Measurement indicators and an evaluation approach for assessing urban sustainable development: A case study for China’s Jining City. Landscape and Urban Planning, 90(2009), 134–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lopes, M.N., & Camanho, A.S. (2012). Public green space use and consequences on urban vitality: An assessment of European cities. Social Indicators Research.

  • Luttik, J. (2000). The value of trees, water and open space as reflected by house prices in the Netherlands. Landscape and Urban Planning, 48, 161–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lutzenhiser, M., & Netusil, N. R. (2001). The effect of open spaces on a home’s sales price. Contemporary Economic Policy, 19, 291–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marans, R. W., & Stimson, R. (2011). Investigating quality of urban life: Theory, methods, and empirical research. Social Indicators Research Series, 45, 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLeod, P. B. (1984). Thedemandfor local amenity: An hedonic price analysis. Environment and Planning A, 16, 389–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMillen, D. P. (2004). Airport expansions and property values: The case of Chicago O’Hare Airport. Journal of Urban Economics, 55, 627–640.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendelsohn, R., Hellerstein, D., Huguenin, M., Unsworth, R., & Brazee, R. (1992). Measuring hazardous waste damages with panel models. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 22(3), 259–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michaels, R. G., & Smith, V. K. (1990). Market segmentation and valuing amenities with hedonic models: the case of hazardous waste sites. Journal of Urban Economics, 28(2), 223–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MIT Technology Review. (2012). Isobenefit lines rewrite rules for understanding city life. http://www.technologyreview.com/view/429679/isobenefit-lines-rewrite-rules-for-understanding-city-life/.

  • Morancho, A. (2003). A hedonic valuation of urban green areas. Landscape Urban Planning, 66, 35–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morano, P. (2006). Analisi di regressione per le valutazioni di ordine estimativo. Torino: Celid.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, A. C. (1992). Effects of elevated heavy-rail transit stations on house prices with respect to neighborhood incomes. Transportation Research Record, 1359, 127–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neupane, A., & Gustavson, K. (2008). Urban property values and contaminated sites: A hedonic analysis of Sydney, Nova Scotia. Journal of Environmental Management, 88, 1212–1220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newby, L., (1992). Paved with gold-A study of the economic impact of pedestrianisation and its relevance to Leicester. Research report no. 7. Leicester Environment City Trust. December.

  • Okulicz-Kozaryn, A. (2011). City life: Rankings (livability) versus perceptions (satisfaction). Social Indicators Research. doi:10.1007/s11205-011-9939-x. ISSN 1573-0921.

  • Pacione, M. (2003). Introduction on urban environmental quality and human wellbeing. Landscape and Urban Planning, 65(2003), 1–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, C. A., (2000). Making good design pay off. Fourth annual business week/architectural records awards. Architectural Record 188(10), 84–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poudyal, N. C., Hodges, D. G., & Merrett, C. D. (2009). A hedonic analysis of the demand and benefits of urban recreation parks. Land Use Policy, 26(4), 975–983.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rezvani, M. R., Mansourian, H., & Sattari, M. H. (2012). Evaluating quality of life in urban areas. Social Indicators Research. doi:10.1007/s11205-012-0048-2. ISSN 1573-0921.

  • Rodriguez, D. A., & Mojica, C. H. (2009). Capitalization of BRT network expansions effects into prices of non-expansion areas. Transportation Research Part A, 43(5), 561–575.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romano, O., & Ercolano, S. (2012). Who makes the most? Measuring the “urban environmental virtuosity”. Social Indicators Research. doi:10.1007/s11205-012-0078-9. ISSN 1573-0921.

  • Rossouw, S., & Naude, W. (2008). The non-economic quality of life on a sub-national level in South Africa. Social Indicators Research, 86, 433–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saretzki, A., Wöhler, K. (1995). Verkehrsentwicklungsplan, Umsatzentwicklung und Kundenverhalten, Industrie-und Handelskammer Lüneburg. Transport Development Plan: Turnover and Customer Behaviour, Lüneburg (not officially published).

  • Schaerer, C., Baranzini, A., Ramirez, J. W., Thalmann, P. (2007). Using the hedonic approach to value natural land uses in an urban area: An application to Geneva and Zurich. Économie publique/Public economics 20 (2007/1).

  • Schell, L. M., & Ulijaszek, S. J. (1999). Urbanism, health and human biology in industrialized countries (pp. 59–60). London: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shearer, A. W., Mouat, D. A., Bassett, S. D., Binford, M. W., Johnson, C. W., & Saarinen, J. A. (2006). Examining development-related uncertainties for environmental management strategic planning scenarios in Southern California. Landscape Urban Planning, 77, 359–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simonotti, M. (1997). La stima immobiliare. Torino: Utet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simons, R. A., Quercia, R. G., & Levin, I. M. (1998). The value impact of new residential construction and neighborhood disinvestment on residential sales price. Journal of Real Estate Research, 15(2), 147–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, B. H. (1994). Coastal setback and the impact of water amenities. Geographical Analysis, 26, 364–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smolen, G. E., Moore, G., & Conway, L. V. (1991). Economic effects of hazardous waste landfills on surrounding real estate values in Toledo, Ohio. Research report no. 44, Center for Real Estate Education and Research, Ohio State University.

  • Tajima, K. (2003). New estimates of the demand for urban green space: Implications for valuing the environmental benefits of Boston’s big dig project. Journal of Urban Affairs, 25, 641–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Troy, A., & Grove, J. M. (2008). Property values, parks, and crime: A hedonic analysis in Baltimore, MD. Landscape and Urban Planning, 87(2008), 233–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tse, R. Y. C. (2002). Estimating neighborhood effects in house prices: Towards a new hedonic model approach. Urban Studies, 39, 1165–1180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyrvainen, L., & Miettinen, A. (2000). Property prices and urban forest amenities. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 39, 205–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulengin, B., Ulengin, F., & Guvenc, U. (2001). A multidimensional approach to urban quality of life: The case of Istanbul. European Journal of Operational Research, 130, 361–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Poll, R. (1997). The perceived quality of the urban residential environment. A multi-attribute evaluation. Roermond: Printing Westrom.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voith, R. (1991). Transportation, sorting and house values. Journal of the American Real Estate Urban Economics Association, 19, 117–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wachter, S., & Gillen, K. (2006). Public investment strategies: How they matter for neighborhoods in Philadelphia: Identification and analysis. Philadelphia: Pennsylvania Horticultural Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinberger, R. (2001). Light rail proximity: Benefit or detriment, the case of Santa Clara County, California. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board (presented at Transportation Research Board 80th annual meeting, 7–11 Jan).

  • Weinstein, B. L., & Clower, T. L. (1999). The initial economic impacts of the Dart Lrt system. Transportation Research Board, Center for Economic Development and Research, University of North Texas, Denton.

  • Wen, Z., & Chen, J. (2008). A cost-benefit analysis for the economic growth in China. Ecological Economics, 65, 356–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, J., Adams, R., & Plantinga, A. (2004). Amenities in an urban equilibrium model: Residential development in Portland, Oregon. Land Economics, 80, 19–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Urban Design Studies Unit, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK

    Luca D’Acci

  2. Faculdade de Engenharia Civil, Arquitetura e Urbanismo, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil

    Luca D’Acci

Authors
  1. Luca D’Acci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luca D’Acci.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

D’Acci, L. Monetary, Subjective and Quantitative Approaches to Assess Urban Quality of Life and Pleasantness in Cities (Hedonic Price, Willingness-to-Pay, Positional Value, Life Satisfaction, Isobenefit Lines). Soc Indic Res 115, 531–559 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-012-0221-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-012-0221-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation