Abstract
While urban renewal programs have become widely-used policy measures to target urban development, the reasons why certain areas are more responsive to policy interventions than others are less known. With this study, we address some of these issues by analyzing an urban renewal program in Berlin, Germany, with 22 designated renewal zones between 1990 and 2012. We separately estimate the effects of the renewal policy on property prices for each respective redevelopment area by comparing price developments in these areas to a series of runner-up areas and to geographically close transactions. We find a considerable amount of heterogeneity. While some areas profit from the renewal policies, there are several areas which develop quite differently and end up with a decrease in property prices due to the urban renewal policy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Generally, modernization costs for own use or renting can be deducted from taxable income over a runtime of 10–12 years. A detailed explanation is provided in § 154 and 177 in the code of building law (BauGB), and § 7h, 10f, and 11a of the code of income tax law (EStG).
- 2.
Compare (Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung Berlin,2010), where the local administration (Senatsverwaltung Berlin) provides detailed budget accounting information for the different time periods. More up-to-date figures are not yet available to the best of our knowledge.
- 3.
Traffic Cells (Verkehrszellen) are statistical areas originally used by the local administration to analyze traffic. There exist 323 traffic cells in Berlin, the average size is 2.7 km2 (105 mi2).
- 4.
References
Ahlfeldt, G. M., & Maennig, W. (2010). Substitutability and complementarity of urban amenities: External effects of built heritage in Berlin.Real Estate Economics, 38(2), 285–323.
Ahlfeldt, G. M., Maennig, W., & Richter, F. J. (2016). Urban renewal after the Berlin Wall: A place-based policy evaluation.Journal of Economic Geography, 17(1), 129–156.
Card, D., & Krueger, B. (1994). Minimum wages and employment: A case study of the fast-food industry in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.The American Economic Review, 84(4), 772–793.
Ding, C., Simons, R., & Baku, E. (2000). The effect of residential investment on nearby property values: Evidence from Cleveland, Ohio.Journal of Real Estate Research, 19(1), 23–48.
DiPasquale, D., & Glaeser, E. L. (1999). Incentives and social capital: Are homeowners better citizens?Journal of Urban Economics, 45(2), 354–384.
Galster, G., Tatian, P., & Accordino, J. (2006). Targeting Investments for Neighborhood Revitalization.Journal of the American Planning Association, 72(4), 457–474.
Galster, G. C. (1983). Empirical evidence on cross-tenure differences in home maintenance and conditions.Land Economics, 59(1), 107–113.
Hilber, C. A. L. (2010). New housing supply and the dilution of social capital.Journal of Urban Economics, 67(3), 419–437.
Larsen, H. G., & Hansen, A. L. (2008). Gentrification—Gentle or traumatic? Urban renewal policies and socioeconomic transformations in Copenhagen.Urban Studies, 45(12), 2429–2448.
Lazrak, F., Nijkamp, P., Rietveld, P., & Rouwendal, J. (2010).The market value of listed heritage: An urban economic application of spatial hedonic pricing. VU University Amsterdam Working Paper.
Leather, P., & Nevin, B. (2013). The housing market renewal Programme: Origins, outcomes and the effectiveness of public policy interventions in a volatile market.Urban Studies, 50(5), 856–875.
Maennig, W. (2012). Monument protection and zoning: Regulations and public support from an international perspective. In T. Just & W. Maennig (Eds.),Understanding German real estate markets (pp. 181–192). Berlin: Springer.
Rosen, S. (1974). Hedonic prices and implicit markets: Product differentiation in pure competition.Journal of Political Economy, 82(1), 34–55.
Rossi-Hansberg, E., Sarte, P. D., & Owens, R. (2010). Housing externalities.Journal of Political Economy, 118(3), 485–535.
Santiago, A. M., Galster, G. C., & Tatian, P. (2001). Assessing the property value impacts of the dispersed housing subsidy program in Denver.Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 20(1), 65–88.
Schwartz, A. E., Ellen, I. G., Voicu, I., & Schill, M. H. (2006). The external effects of place-based subsidized housing.Regional Science and Urban Economics, 36(6), 679–707.
Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung Berlin. (2001).22. Bericht über Stadterneuerung.
Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung Berlin. (2005).Leitsätze zur Stadterneuerung.
Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung Berlin. (2006).Urban and environmental information system. Berlin: CityWare.
Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung Berlin. (2010).27. Bericht über Stadterneuerung.
Silverman, B. W. (1986). Density estimation for statistics and data analysis.Monographs on Statistics and Applied Probability.
Towe, C., & Lawley, C. (2013). The contagion effect of neighboring foreclosures.American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 5(2), 313–335.
Acknowledgments
We thank the Berlin Committee of Valuation Experts and the Senate Department for Urban Development and the Environment for data provision.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ahlfeldt, G.M., Maennig, W., Richter, F.J. (2018). Zoning in Reunified Berlin. In: Lehavi, A. (eds) One Hundred Years of Zoning and the Future of Cities . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66869-7_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66869-7_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-66868-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-66869-7
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)