The impact on property values of distance to public parks and open spaces: findings from beyond North America

Abstract

ABSTRACT The review of 25 studies had two objectives. First, to identify whether results reported in other cultures confirm or rebut the generalizability of the magnitude and characteristics of parks’ impact on property values reported by studies undertaken in the U.S. Second, to identify methodological innovations by researchers from other cultures that could improve the accuracy of hedonic analyses. Results from 11 European studies were generally consistent with those reported in U.S. contexts. Among 11 Chinese studies, five revealed the expected relationship, four reported mixed results, and two showed parks had no impact. Three studies from Japan and Australia also showed mixed results. There were nuances among the results but, in aggregate, they suggested it is reasonable for stakeholders in countries outside the U.S. to draw managerial implications from the U.S. findings. Similarly, from a U.S. perspective, the consistencies in the findings from other cultures enables more confidence to be placed in the findings of U.S. studies. An important methodological innovation emerging from the review was empirical demonstration in two of the studies of the importance of incorporating a qualitative dimension into hedonic analyses. In response to this finding, a five-point scale is offered, ranging from “unusual excellence” to “dispirited, blighted”.