Identifying priority target areas for the Knoxville–Knox County hillside and ridgetop protection plan: using the value of visual amenity during the real estate boom of 2002–2007 and the recession of 2008
In support of the Joint City–County Taskforce on Ridge, Slope, and Hillside Development and Protection, the goal of this research was to identify areas within Knox County, Tennessee, where views of hillsides and ridges were most valued and how those values were affected by different economic climate...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Annals of regional science 2013-06, Vol.50 (3), p.911-934 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 934 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 911 |
container_title | The Annals of regional science |
container_volume | 50 |
creator | Chadourne, Matthew Cho, Seong-Hoon Roberts, Roland K. |
description | In support of the Joint City–County Taskforce on Ridge, Slope, and Hillside Development and Protection, the goal of this research was to identify areas within Knox County, Tennessee, where views of hillsides and ridges were most valued and how those values were affected by different economic climates. The amenity values added to houses by their views were quantified for houses sold during a housing boom and again during a recession. The results of this study show that forest views add significant value to homes during both periods. However, the amenity value added to houses decreased 13 % from the boom period to the recession period, implying that forest views decrease in value when there is an economic recession. Additionally, the value of the view of barren/scrub land, which was not significant in the boom period, became significant during the recession, reducing house value almost $112 per visible acre and showing that while consumers are less inclined to pay more for views of forest, they are also less willing to endure disamenity views during a recession. When the forest land values were mapped to highlight planned areas with consistently high visual amenity values across both periods, some areas exhibited amenity values in excess of $100 per visible acre of forest land. The areas with the highest amenity values of forest land views roughly correspond to the areas with the highest disamenity values of barren/scrub view. These results imply that these areas represent the highest potential return on investment for preservation and reforestation efforts. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00168-012-0519-z |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1429655097</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1418121303</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c509t-804826d30a3bffc2e83d67f56212946cce164e3d6fce949463406a9e020f90e13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNks2KFDEQxxtRcBx9AG8BEby0Vj463fEmix-LC1703GTTld0sPZ0x6R6cPfkOPpjv4JNYsVcRQfRUSfGr_7-Kqqp6yOEpB2ifZQCuuxq4qKHhpr6-VW24kuVnxO1qA00LNe-0ulvdy_kKqEZyvqm-ng44zcEfw3TB9inEFOYjm226wJnZhDYzHxObL5G9neKnQxhH_Pb5S3mzk7hMBF9SLocBmZ0GlsJAlXFPWnFGN4c4sf1op-dsycWiCB3suCCLnh1CXuzI7A6n4jos6SdCxiPDPNsZ2XmMu0ILAEHWFNofVivnMOdisgLd_eqOt2PGBzdxW3149fL9yZv67N3r05MXZ7VrwMx1B6oTepBg5bn3TmAnB936RgsujNLOIdcKKecdGkUZqUBbgyDAG0Aut9WTVZfm_LhQp_0uZIcjjYpxyT1XwuiGvNr_QHnHBZcg_41K3SrDC7utHv2BXsUlTTQzUY0UujOytMlXyqWYc0Lf0453Nh17Dn05nH49nJ4Opy-H019TzeMbZZudHX2ykwv5V6FotVDUBHFi5fK-7A3Tbx38Vfw7qY3VSQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1353268931</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Identifying priority target areas for the Knoxville–Knox County hillside and ridgetop protection plan: using the value of visual amenity during the real estate boom of 2002–2007 and the recession of 2008</title><source>PAIS Index</source><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><source>Business Source Complete</source><creator>Chadourne, Matthew ; Cho, Seong-Hoon ; Roberts, Roland K.</creator><creatorcontrib>Chadourne, Matthew ; Cho, Seong-Hoon ; Roberts, Roland K.</creatorcontrib><description>In support of the Joint City–County Taskforce on Ridge, Slope, and Hillside Development and Protection, the goal of this research was to identify areas within Knox County, Tennessee, where views of hillsides and ridges were most valued and how those values were affected by different economic climates. The amenity values added to houses by their views were quantified for houses sold during a housing boom and again during a recession. The results of this study show that forest views add significant value to homes during both periods. However, the amenity value added to houses decreased 13 % from the boom period to the recession period, implying that forest views decrease in value when there is an economic recession. Additionally, the value of the view of barren/scrub land, which was not significant in the boom period, became significant during the recession, reducing house value almost $112 per visible acre and showing that while consumers are less inclined to pay more for views of forest, they are also less willing to endure disamenity views during a recession. When the forest land values were mapped to highlight planned areas with consistently high visual amenity values across both periods, some areas exhibited amenity values in excess of $100 per visible acre of forest land. The areas with the highest amenity values of forest land views roughly correspond to the areas with the highest disamenity values of barren/scrub view. These results imply that these areas represent the highest potential return on investment for preservation and reforestation efforts.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0570-1864</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-0592</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00168-012-0519-z</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag</publisher><subject>America ; Bgi / Prodig ; Climate ; Consumers ; Counties ; East south Central ; Economic conditions ; Economic models ; Economic statistics ; Economics ; Economics and Finance ; Environmental Economics ; Forests ; Geography ; Housing ; Housing conditions ; Housing prices ; Investments ; Land ; Land appraisals ; Land use ; Land values ; Landscape/Regional and Urban Planning ; Microeconomics ; Original Paper ; Property values ; Real estate ; Real estate business ; Recession ; Recessions ; Reforestation ; Regional economics ; Regional/Spatial Science ; Residential areas ; Return on investment ; Studies ; Tennessee ; United States of America ; Value added ; Water quality</subject><ispartof>The Annals of regional science, 2013-06, Vol.50 (3), p.911-934</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag 2012</rights><rights>Tous droits réservés © Prodig - Bibliographie Géographique Internationale (BGI), 2013</rights><rights>Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c509t-804826d30a3bffc2e83d67f56212946cce164e3d6fce949463406a9e020f90e13</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c509t-804826d30a3bffc2e83d67f56212946cce164e3d6fce949463406a9e020f90e13</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00168-012-0519-z$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00168-012-0519-z$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27844,27845,27903,27904,41467,42536,51298</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=27624491$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chadourne, Matthew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cho, Seong-Hoon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roberts, Roland K.</creatorcontrib><title>Identifying priority target areas for the Knoxville–Knox County hillside and ridgetop protection plan: using the value of visual amenity during the real estate boom of 2002–2007 and the recession of 2008</title><title>The Annals of regional science</title><addtitle>Ann Reg Sci</addtitle><description>In support of the Joint City–County Taskforce on Ridge, Slope, and Hillside Development and Protection, the goal of this research was to identify areas within Knox County, Tennessee, where views of hillsides and ridges were most valued and how those values were affected by different economic climates. The amenity values added to houses by their views were quantified for houses sold during a housing boom and again during a recession. The results of this study show that forest views add significant value to homes during both periods. However, the amenity value added to houses decreased 13 % from the boom period to the recession period, implying that forest views decrease in value when there is an economic recession. Additionally, the value of the view of barren/scrub land, which was not significant in the boom period, became significant during the recession, reducing house value almost $112 per visible acre and showing that while consumers are less inclined to pay more for views of forest, they are also less willing to endure disamenity views during a recession. When the forest land values were mapped to highlight planned areas with consistently high visual amenity values across both periods, some areas exhibited amenity values in excess of $100 per visible acre of forest land. The areas with the highest amenity values of forest land views roughly correspond to the areas with the highest disamenity values of barren/scrub view. These results imply that these areas represent the highest potential return on investment for preservation and reforestation efforts.</description><subject>America</subject><subject>Bgi / Prodig</subject><subject>Climate</subject><subject>Consumers</subject><subject>Counties</subject><subject>East south Central</subject><subject>Economic conditions</subject><subject>Economic models</subject><subject>Economic statistics</subject><subject>Economics</subject><subject>Economics and Finance</subject><subject>Environmental Economics</subject><subject>Forests</subject><subject>Geography</subject><subject>Housing</subject><subject>Housing conditions</subject><subject>Housing prices</subject><subject>Investments</subject><subject>Land</subject><subject>Land appraisals</subject><subject>Land use</subject><subject>Land values</subject><subject>Landscape/Regional and Urban Planning</subject><subject>Microeconomics</subject><subject>Original Paper</subject><subject>Property values</subject><subject>Real estate</subject><subject>Real estate business</subject><subject>Recession</subject><subject>Recessions</subject><subject>Reforestation</subject><subject>Regional economics</subject><subject>Regional/Spatial Science</subject><subject>Residential areas</subject><subject>Return on investment</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Tennessee</subject><subject>United States of America</subject><subject>Value added</subject><subject>Water quality</subject><issn>0570-1864</issn><issn>1432-0592</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqNks2KFDEQxxtRcBx9AG8BEby0Vj463fEmix-LC1703GTTld0sPZ0x6R6cPfkOPpjv4JNYsVcRQfRUSfGr_7-Kqqp6yOEpB2ifZQCuuxq4qKHhpr6-VW24kuVnxO1qA00LNe-0ulvdy_kKqEZyvqm-ng44zcEfw3TB9inEFOYjm226wJnZhDYzHxObL5G9neKnQxhH_Pb5S3mzk7hMBF9SLocBmZ0GlsJAlXFPWnFGN4c4sf1op-dsycWiCB3suCCLnh1CXuzI7A6n4jos6SdCxiPDPNsZ2XmMu0ILAEHWFNofVivnMOdisgLd_eqOt2PGBzdxW3149fL9yZv67N3r05MXZ7VrwMx1B6oTepBg5bn3TmAnB936RgsujNLOIdcKKecdGkUZqUBbgyDAG0Aut9WTVZfm_LhQp_0uZIcjjYpxyT1XwuiGvNr_QHnHBZcg_41K3SrDC7utHv2BXsUlTTQzUY0UujOytMlXyqWYc0Lf0453Nh17Dn05nH49nJ4Opy-H019TzeMbZZudHX2ykwv5V6FotVDUBHFi5fK-7A3Tbx38Vfw7qY3VSQ</recordid><startdate>20130601</startdate><enddate>20130601</enddate><creator>Chadourne, Matthew</creator><creator>Cho, Seong-Hoon</creator><creator>Roberts, Roland K.</creator><general>Springer-Verlag</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>C1K</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20130601</creationdate><title>Identifying priority target areas for the Knoxville–Knox County hillside and ridgetop protection plan: using the value of visual amenity during the real estate boom of 2002–2007 and the recession of 2008</title><author>Chadourne, Matthew ; Cho, Seong-Hoon ; Roberts, Roland K.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c509t-804826d30a3bffc2e83d67f56212946cce164e3d6fce949463406a9e020f90e13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>America</topic><topic>Bgi / Prodig</topic><topic>Climate</topic><topic>Consumers</topic><topic>Counties</topic><topic>East south Central</topic><topic>Economic conditions</topic><topic>Economic models</topic><topic>Economic statistics</topic><topic>Economics</topic><topic>Economics and Finance</topic><topic>Environmental Economics</topic><topic>Forests</topic><topic>Geography</topic><topic>Housing</topic><topic>Housing conditions</topic><topic>Housing prices</topic><topic>Investments</topic><topic>Land</topic><topic>Land appraisals</topic><topic>Land use</topic><topic>Land values</topic><topic>Landscape/Regional and Urban Planning</topic><topic>Microeconomics</topic><topic>Original Paper</topic><topic>Property values</topic><topic>Real estate</topic><topic>Real estate business</topic><topic>Recession</topic><topic>Recessions</topic><topic>Reforestation</topic><topic>Regional economics</topic><topic>Regional/Spatial Science</topic><topic>Residential areas</topic><topic>Return on investment</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Tennessee</topic><topic>United States of America</topic><topic>Value added</topic><topic>Water quality</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chadourne, Matthew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cho, Seong-Hoon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roberts, Roland K.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>Global News & ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><jtitle>The Annals of regional science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chadourne, Matthew</au><au>Cho, Seong-Hoon</au><au>Roberts, Roland K.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Identifying priority target areas for the Knoxville–Knox County hillside and ridgetop protection plan: using the value of visual amenity during the real estate boom of 2002–2007 and the recession of 2008</atitle><jtitle>The Annals of regional science</jtitle><stitle>Ann Reg Sci</stitle><date>2013-06-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>50</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>911</spage><epage>934</epage><pages>911-934</pages><issn>0570-1864</issn><eissn>1432-0592</eissn><abstract>In support of the Joint City–County Taskforce on Ridge, Slope, and Hillside Development and Protection, the goal of this research was to identify areas within Knox County, Tennessee, where views of hillsides and ridges were most valued and how those values were affected by different economic climates. The amenity values added to houses by their views were quantified for houses sold during a housing boom and again during a recession. The results of this study show that forest views add significant value to homes during both periods. However, the amenity value added to houses decreased 13 % from the boom period to the recession period, implying that forest views decrease in value when there is an economic recession. Additionally, the value of the view of barren/scrub land, which was not significant in the boom period, became significant during the recession, reducing house value almost $112 per visible acre and showing that while consumers are less inclined to pay more for views of forest, they are also less willing to endure disamenity views during a recession. When the forest land values were mapped to highlight planned areas with consistently high visual amenity values across both periods, some areas exhibited amenity values in excess of $100 per visible acre of forest land. The areas with the highest amenity values of forest land views roughly correspond to the areas with the highest disamenity values of barren/scrub view. These results imply that these areas represent the highest potential return on investment for preservation and reforestation efforts.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer-Verlag</pub><doi>10.1007/s00168-012-0519-z</doi><tpages>24</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0570-1864 |
ispartof | The Annals of regional science, 2013-06, Vol.50 (3), p.911-934 |
issn | 0570-1864 1432-0592 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1429655097 |
source | PAIS Index; SpringerLink Journals; Business Source Complete |
subjects | America Bgi / Prodig Climate Consumers Counties East south Central Economic conditions Economic models Economic statistics Economics Economics and Finance Environmental Economics Forests Geography Housing Housing conditions Housing prices Investments Land Land appraisals Land use Land values Landscape/Regional and Urban Planning Microeconomics Original Paper Property values Real estate Real estate business Recession Recessions Reforestation Regional economics Regional/Spatial Science Residential areas Return on investment Studies Tennessee United States of America Value added Water quality |
title | Identifying priority target areas for the Knoxville–Knox County hillside and ridgetop protection plan: using the value of visual amenity during the real estate boom of 2002–2007 and the recession of 2008 |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-23T11%3A20%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Identifying%20priority%20target%20areas%20for%20the%20Knoxville%E2%80%93Knox%20County%20hillside%20and%20ridgetop%20protection%20plan:%20using%20the%20value%20of%20visual%20amenity%20during%20the%20real%20estate%20boom%20of%202002%E2%80%932007%20and%20the%20recession%20of%202008&rft.jtitle=The%20Annals%20of%20regional%20science&rft.au=Chadourne,%20Matthew&rft.date=2013-06-01&rft.volume=50&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=911&rft.epage=934&rft.pages=911-934&rft.issn=0570-1864&rft.eissn=1432-0592&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00168-012-0519-z&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1418121303%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1353268931&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |