Is Urban Decay Bad? Is Urban Revitalization Bad Too?
51 Pages Posted: 15 Mar 2007 Last revised: 26 Nov 2022
Date Written: March 2007
Abstract
Many observers argue that urban revitalization harms the poor, primarily by raising rents. Others argue that urban decline harms the poor by reducing job opportunities, the quality of local public services, and other neighborhood amenities. While both decay and revitalization can have negative effects if moving costs are sufficiently high, in general the impact of neighborhood change on utility depends on the strength of price responses to neighborhood quality changes. Data from the American Housing Survey are used to estimate a discrete choice model identifying households' willingness-to-pay for neighborhood quality. These willingness-to-pay estimates are then compared to the actual price changes that accompany observed changes in neighborhood quality. The results suggest that price increases associated with revitalization are smaller than most households' willingness to pay for neighborhood improvements. The results imply that, in general, neighborhood revitalization is more favorable than neighborhood decline.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
Productivity Gains from Geographic Concentration of Human Capital: Evidence from the Cities
-
By Edward L. Glaeser and David C. Maré
-
Micro-Foundations of Urban Agglomeration Economies
By Gilles Duranton and Diego Puga
-
Micro-Foundations of Urban Agglomeration Economies
By Gilles Duranton and Diego Puga
-
Cities, Skills, and Regional Change
By Edward L. Glaeser, Giacomo A. M. Ponzetto, ...
-
Cities, Skills, and Regional Change
By Edward L. Glaeser, Giacomo A. M. Ponzetto, ...
-
By Edward L. Glaeser, Jed Kolko, ...