Impact of bus rapid transit on residential property prices in Auckland, New Zealand

被引:9
|
作者
Filippova, Olga [1 ]
Sheng, Mingyue [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Auckland, Fac Business & Econ, Dept Property, Owen G Glen Bldg,12 Grafton Rd, Auckland 1010, New Zealand
[2] Univ Auckland, Fac Business & Econ, Energy Ctr, Owen G Glen Bldg,12 Grafton Rd, Auckland 1010, New Zealand
关键词
Bus rapid transit; Residential property values; Land use; Difference-in-differences; Spatio-temporal autoregressive (STAR); Spatial autoregressive error term hedonic model; LAND-VALUE UPLIFT; MASS-TRANSIT; TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE; VALUES; MODEL; VARIABLES; ACCESSIBILITY; DIFFERENCE; ESTIMATOR; PROXIMITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2020.102780
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Dubbed 'The City of Cars', congestion is a prominent issue in Auckland, New Zealand. Auckland's first Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system - the Northern Busway - was implemented in 2008. The 6.2-km (km) busway network services the northern suburbs and provides a link to the Central Business District (CBD). This research aims to assess the impact of the Northern Busway on nearby residential property values. Spatio-temporal autoregressive (STAR) modelling is used to examine the accessibility impacts of the BRT under the difference - in - differences (DID) framework alongside a typical OLS and a strictly spatial model. We have observed two main findings. Firstly, the average sale price for properties in the treatment group (within 800 m of the Northern Busway) increased by approximately 3.69% as a result of the opening of the Northern Busway. Second, consistent with previous literature, we find that OLS estimates suffer from high spatial autocorrelation bias, while co-integrating spatial and temporal dependencies within a STAR model improves the precision of estimation. While the models produced a relatively modest accessibility premium on house prices, given traditional importance of private cars coupled with high income levels in the case study area, it would take a generational shift to make a significant impact on house prices as the area becomes more desirable due to reduced traffic congestion/travel time.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Capitalisation of multiple ecosystems on property prices in Auckland, New Zealand
    Fernandez, Mario A.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2023, 341
  • [2] Measuring the impacts of Bus Rapid Transit on residential property values: The Beijing case
    Deng, Taotao
    Ma, Mulan
    Nelson, John D.
    [J]. RESEARCH IN TRANSPORTATION ECONOMICS, 2016, 60 : 54 - 61
  • [3] THE IMPACT OF A NEW MASS RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY VALUES - THE CASE OF KAOHSIUNG, TAIWAN
    Saphores, Jean-Daniel
    Yeh, Chung-Cheng
    [J]. TRANSPORTATION & LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT, 2012, : 89 - 96
  • [4] The effect of bus rapid transit on local home prices
    Beaudoin, Justin
    Tyndall, Justin
    [J]. RESEARCH IN TRANSPORTATION ECONOMICS, 2023, 102
  • [5] Impact of Bus Rapid Transit and Metro Rail on Property Values in Guangzhou, China
    Salon, Deborah
    Wu, Jingyan
    Shewmake, Sharon
    [J]. TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD, 2014, (2452) : 36 - 45
  • [6] Capitalization Effects of Rail Transit and Bus Rapid Transit on Residential Property Values in a Booming Economy Evidence from Beijing
    Ma, Liang
    Ye, Runing
    Titheridge, Helena
    [J]. TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD, 2014, (2451) : 139 - 148
  • [7] The impact of auctions on residential property prices
    Frino, Alex
    Peat, Maurice
    Wright, Danika
    [J]. ACCOUNTING AND FINANCE, 2012, 52 (03): : 815 - 830
  • [8] MIGRATION PATTERNS AND RESIDENTIAL SELECTION IN AUCKLAND NEW ZEALAND
    WHITELAW, JS
    [J]. AUSTRALIAN GEOGRAPHICAL STUDIES, 1971, 9 (01): : 61 - 76
  • [9] FORECASTING RESIDENTIAL RENTS: THE CASE OF AUCKLAND, NEW ZEALAND
    Farhi, Christopher
    Young, James
    [J]. PACIFIC RIM PROPERTY RESEARCH JOURNAL, 2010, 16 (02) : 207 - 220
  • [10] The impact of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) on land and property values: A meta-analysis
    Zhang, Min
    Yen, Barbara T. H.
    [J]. LAND USE POLICY, 2020, 96