The Structure of Chinese Urban Land Prices: Estimates from Benchmark Land Price Data

  • Rui Wang


Taking the recent benchmark land prices published by the Chinese city governments, the paper estimates commercial and residential land price curves of Chinese cities using cross-sectional data, controlling for urban population size and income level. The urban land leasing price–distance relationship is estimated based on the argument that monocentric urban structure is representative for Chinese cities. Both population size and income level are found to positively affect urban land price and price–distance gradients. Commercial land prices are higher than residential land prices except in suburbs or outer central urban areas, where the land prices of different uses converge. In most situations, commercial use price gradients are larger than those of residential use.


Urban land price curve Benchmark land price Gradient China 



The author thanks Professor José A. Gómez-Ibáñez and an anonymous referee for their helpful comments and suggestions.


  1. Alonso W. (1964) Location and land use. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.Google Scholar
  2. Bertaud A., Renaud B. (1997) Socialist cities without land markets. Journal of Urban Economics 41(1):137–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. China National Standards (2001a) Urban land grading standards (GB/T 18507-2001). Standards Press of China, Beijing, China (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  4. China National Standards (2001b) Urban land appraisal standards (GB/T 18508-2001). Standards Press of China, Beijing, China (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  5. Colwell P., Munneke H. (1997) The structure of urban land prices. Journal of Urban Economics 41(3):321–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dale-Johnson, D., Brzeski, W. J. (2001). Spatial regression analysis of commercial land price gradients. Presented at the Asian Real Estate Society Sixth Annual Conference at Keio University, Mita Campus, Tokyo, Japan, July 31 to Aug. 2, 2001.Google Scholar
  7. Ding C. (2004) Urban spatial development in the land policy reform era: evidence from Beijing. Urban Studies 41(10):1889–1907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gaubatz P. R. (1995) Urban transformation in post-Mao China: impacts of the reform era on China’s urban form. In: D. S., Davis, R., Kraus, B., Naughton, & E. J., Perry (eds) Urban spaces in contemporary China: the potential for autonomy and community in post-Mao China. Woodrow Wilson Center Press and Cambridge University Press, Washington, DC, USA, pp 28–60.Google Scholar
  9. Ho S. P. S., Lin G. C. S. (2003) Emerging land markets in rural and urban China: policies and practices. China Quarterly 175:681–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kau J. B., Sirmans C. F. (1979) Urban land value functions and the price elasticity of demand for housing. Journal of Urban Economics 6:112–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Khan A. R., Riskin C. (2005) China’s household income and its distribution, 1995 and 2002. China Quarterly 182:356–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Li X., Prieler S., Liu S. (2002) Spatial patterns of urban land use growth in Beijing. Journal of Geographical Science 12(3):266–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mills E. S. (1971) The value of urban land. In: Perloff H. S. (ed) The quality of the urban environment. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, USA, pp 231–253.Google Scholar
  14. Mills E. S. (1972) Studies in the structure of the urban economy. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, USA.Google Scholar
  15. Muth R. F. (1969) Cities and housing. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, USA.Google Scholar
  16. Quan Y., Sun Z. (2003) Proper planning of urban rail transit network for increasing its social and economic benefits. Journal of Transportation Engineering and Information 1(1):6–30 (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  17. Yiu C. Y., Tam C. S. (2004) A review of recent empirical studies on property price gradients. Journal of Real Estate Literature 12(3):307–322.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.John F. Kennedy School of Government and Harvard University Center for the EnvironmentHarvard UniversityCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations