Advertisement

Using Life Satisfaction Data to Identify Urban Problems, Prioritize Local Public Expenditures and Monitor the Quality of Urban Life

  • Eduardo LoraEmail author
Chapter
Part of the International Handbooks of Quality-of-Life book series (IHQL)

Abstract

Combined with housing price data, life satisfaction data can be used to assess the implicit value that individuals attach to all types of urban amenities and features, and to compute to what extent those values are reflected in housing market prices. This chapter explains the theoretical underpinnings of the methodology and reviews the results obtained when applying it to a handful of Latin American cities. It also describes how the results can illuminate public investment and finance decisions oriented towards maximizing the life satisfaction or urban dwellers. The methodology proposed can be easily integrated into the urban monitoring systems in place in a growing number of cities.

Keywords

Hedonic pricing Life satisfaction approach Quality of urban life Urban monitoring Valuation of public goods Cost-benefit analysis Property taxes Urban planning Latin American cities 

Bibliography

  1. Alcázar, L., & Andrade, R. (2010). Influence of individual, urban, and civil society spheres on quality of life in metropolitan Lima, Peru. In E. Lora, A. Powell, B. M. S. van Praag, & P. Sanguinetti (Eds.), The quality of life in Latin American cities. Markets and perception. Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank and the World Bank.Google Scholar
  2. Amemiya, T. (1981). Qualitative response models: A survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 19, 483–536.Google Scholar
  3. Baranzini, A., Ramírez, J., Schaerer, C., and Thalmann, P. (editors). (2008). Hedonic methods in housing markets: Pricing environmental amenities and segregation. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  4. Bhattacharjee, A., de Castro, E. A. and Marques, J. L. (2011). Spatial Interactions in Hedonic Pricing Models: The Urban Housing Market of Aveiro, Portugal, Dundee Discussion Papers in Economics. 253, Economic Studies, University of Dundee. Google Scholar
  5. Bartlett, E., II, Kotrlik, W., & Higgins, C. (2001). Organizational research: Determining appropriate sample size for survey research. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 19(1), 43–50.Google Scholar
  6. Bayer, P., McMillan, R., & Ferreira, F. (2003). A unified framework for measuring preferences for schools and neighborhoods (Economic Growth Center Discussion Paper 872). New Haven: Yale University.Google Scholar
  7. Black, S. E. (1999). "Do Better Schools Matter? Parental Valuation of Elementary Education." Quarterly Journal of Economics 114(2): 577–99.Google Scholar
  8. Bouillom, C. (Ed.). (2012). Room for development: Housing markets in Latin America and the Caribbean (Development in the Americas). Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Report.Google Scholar
  9. Chay, K. Y., and Greenstone, M. (2005). "Does Air Quality Matter? Evidence from the Housing Market." Journal of Political Economy 113 (2): 376–424. Google Scholar
  10. Clapp J., & Ross S. (2002). Schools and housing markets: An examination of school segregation and performance in Connecticut (Working Paper 2002–08). Storrs: Department of Economics, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
  11. Cruces, G., Ham, A., & Tetaz, M. (2010). Well-being at the sub-city level: The Buenos Aires neighborhood quality of life survey. In E. Lora, A. Powell, B. M. S. van Praag, & P. Sanguinetti (Eds.), The quality of life in Latin American cities. Markets and perception. Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank and the World Bank.Google Scholar
  12. Day, B., Bateman, I., & Lake, I. (2003). What price peace? Comprehensive approach to the specification and estimation of hedonic housing price models (CSERGE Working Paper EDM 03–08): http://www.cserge.ac.uk/sites/default/files/edm_2003_08.pdf
  13. Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (2000). The ‘What’ and ‘Why’ of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.Google Scholar
  14. Dolan, P. and Metcalfe, R. (2007). "Valuing non-market goods: A comparison of preference-based and experimental-based approaches". Unpublished manuscript, Tanaka Business School, Imperial College, London.Google Scholar
  15. Ellis, P. (2010). The essential guide to effect sizes: An introduction to statistical power, meta-analysis and the interpretation of research results. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Feldman, B. (2008). The urban audit – Measuring the quality of life in European cities. Eurostat, Statistics in Focus, 82/2008. Available at http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-08-082/EN/KS-SF-08-082-EN.PDF
  17. Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A., & Frijters, P. (2004). How important is methodology for the estimates of the determinants of happiness? The Economic Journal, 114, 641–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Frey, B. (2008). Happiness. A revolution in economics (Munich Lectures in Economics). Cambridge, MA/London: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Galiani, S., Seira, E., & Magaloni, B. (2012). Impacto Del Crimen en el Precio De Las Viviendas. Research report. Inter-American Development Bank.Google Scholar
  20. Gandelman, N., Piani, G., & Ferre, Z. (2012). Neighborhood determinants of quality of life. Journal of Happiness Studies, 13(3), 547–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gaviria, A., Medina, C., Morales, L., & Núñez, J. (2010). The cost of avoiding crime: The case of Bogotá. In R. Di Tella, E. Sebastian, & S. Ernesto (Eds.), The economics of crime: Lessons for and from Latin America. Chicago: University of Chicago and National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
  22. Gyourko, J., Kahn, M. and Tracy, J. (1999). "Quality of life and environmental comparisons". In Handbook of regional and urban economics, Volume 3: Applied urban economics, ed. Cheshire, P. and E. S. Mills, 1413-54. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
  23. Hall, L., Robalino, J., & Madrigal, R. (2010). Pricing amenities in urban neighborhoods of Costa Rica. In E. Lora, A. Powell, B. M. S. van Praag, & P. Sanguinetti (Eds.), The quality of life in Latin American cities. Markets and perception. Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank and the World Bank.Google Scholar
  24. Igliori, D., Comune A., Haddad, E. and Pereda, P. (2011). Monitoring the Quality of Urban Life in São Paulo, Brazil. Fundaçao Instituto de Pesquisas Econômicas. Report prepared for the Inter-American Development Bank.  Google Scholar
  25. Kain, J., & Quigley, M. (1975). Housing markets and racial discrimination: A microeconomic analysis. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
  26. Kenneth, Y., & Greenstone, M. (2005). Does air quality matter? Evidence from the housing market. Journal of Political Economy, 113(2), 376–424.Google Scholar
  27. Li, M., and Brown, J. (1980). "Micro-Neighborhood Externalities and Hedonic Prices." Land Economics 56 (2):125–41. Google Scholar
  28. Lora, E. (Ed.). (2008). Beyond facts: Understanding quality of life (Development in the Americas). Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank.Google Scholar
  29. Lora, E., Powell, A., van Praag, B., & Sanguinetti, P. (Eds.). (2010). The quality of life in Latin American cities. Markets and perception. Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank and the World Bank.Google Scholar
  30. Lourenço, J., et al. (2011). Spatial interactions in hedonic pricing models: The urban housing market of Aveiro, Portugal (Dundee Discussion Papers in Economics. 253). Economic Studies, University of Dundee.Google Scholar
  31. Malpezzi, S. (2002). Hedonic pricing models: A selective and applied review. Prepared for: Housing economics and public policy, In K. Gibb & A. O’Sullivan (Eds.). See: http://www.omega-analytics.com/download/Hedonistic%20Model.pdf
  32. Medina, C., & Tamayo, J. (2012). An assessment of how urban crime and victimization affects life satisfaction. In Eduardo & D. Webb (Eds.), Subjective well-being and security (Social Indicators Research Series, Vol. 46, pp. 91–147). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Medina, C., Morales, L., & Núñez, J. (2010). Quality of life in urban neighborhoods of Bogotá and Medellín, Colombia. In E. Lora, A. Powell, B. M. S. van Praag, & P. Sanguinetti (Eds.), The quality of life in Latin American cities. Markets and perception. Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank and the World Bank.Google Scholar
  34. MESEP (Misión para el Empalme de las Series de Empleo, Pobreza y Desigualdad) – DANE (Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística, Colombia). (2013). Gran Encuesta Integrada de Hogares, 2008–2010. http://www.dane.gov.co/files/investigaciones/condiciones_vida/pobreza/cp_pobreza_2011.pdf
  35. Mingche, L., & Brown, J. (1980). Micro-neighborhood externalities and hedonic prices. Land Economics, 56(2), 125–141.Google Scholar
  36. Moulton, D. (1986). "Random groups effects and the precision of regression estimates". Journal of econometrics 32(3): 385-97.Google Scholar
  37. Powell, A., & Sanguinetti, P. (2010). Measuring quality of life in Latin America’s urban neighborhoods: A summary of results from the city case studies. In E. Lora, A. Powell, B. M. S. van Praag, & P. Sanguinetti (Eds.), The quality of life in Latin American cities. Markets and perception. Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank and the World Bank.Google Scholar
  38. Quality of Life Project (New Zealand). (2009). Quality of life’ 07 in 12 of New Zealand’s Cities. Available at http://www.bigcities.govt.nz/pdfs/2007/Quality_of_Life_2007.pdf
  39. Ridker, R. (1967). Economic costs of air pollution, studies in measurement. New York: Frederick A. Praeger.Google Scholar
  40. Ridker, R., & Henning, J. (1967). The determinants of residential property values with special reference to air pollution. Review of Economics and Statistics, 49(2), 246–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Robalino, J., & Larios, J. (2012). A quality of life analysis for the city of Guatemala: Distribution and public good pricing. Research report. Inter-American Development Bank.Google Scholar
  42. Sandra, E. (1999). Do better schools matter? Parental valuation of elementary education. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(2), 577–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sheppard, S. (1999). Hedonic analysis of housing markets. In Handbook of regional and urban economics (Vol. 3, pp. 1595–1635).Google Scholar
  44. Stutzer, A., & Frey, B. (2007). Stress that doesn’t pay: The commuting paradox (Working Paper 151, IEW (Institute for Empirical Research in Economics)). University of Zurich.Google Scholar
  45. Van Praag, B., & Baarsma, E. (2005). Using happiness surveys to value intangibles: The case of airport noise. The Economic Journal, 115, 224–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Van Praag, B., & Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A. (2010). Towards an urban quality of life index: Basic theory and econometric methods. In E. Lora, A. Powell, B. M. S. van Praag, & P. Sanguinetti (Eds.), The quality of life in Latin American cities. Markets and perception. Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank and the World Bank.Google Scholar
  47. Velásquez, L. (2011). “La importancia de los bienes públicos en la calidad de vida local: El caso de Manizales, Colombia”. Documentos de Trabajo del BID – IDB WP 255. Junio. Google Scholar
  48. Vetter, D., Beltrão, M., & Massena, R. (2012). The impact of the sense of security from crime on residential property values in Brazilian metropolitan areas. Research report. Inter-American Development Bank.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for International DevelopmentHarvard UniversityCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations