Voting with their (left and right) feet: Are homebuyers’ values of neighborhood environmental amenities consistent with their politics?

IF 5.5 3区 经济学 Q1 BUSINESS
Corey Lang, Jarron VanCeylon
{"title":"Voting with their (left and right) feet: Are homebuyers’ values of neighborhood environmental amenities consistent with their politics?","authors":"Corey Lang,&nbsp;Jarron VanCeylon","doi":"10.1016/j.jeem.2025.103157","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>There exists a consistent partisan gap in preferences for public spending on the environment, with approval being 20 to 40 percentage points higher for Democrats than Republicans. In this paper, we investigate whether there is a similar partisan gap present in residential preferences for environmental amenities. We link housing data, land use, and household characteristics, including voter registration, for three distinct housing markets, and we develop a residential sorting model to estimate marginal willingness-to-pay (MWTP) for residential proximity to conserved land, allowing for preference heterogeneity by partisanship as well as other household characteristics. For all households combined, we estimate average annual household MWTP for locations proximate to open space to range from $426 to $1061 across the three markets. In our model that allows for heterogeneous preferences across groups, we find no evidence that Republicans' MWTP is less than Democrats’ MWTP, and we statistically reject the magnitude of preference disparity found in voting studies. These findings establish a difference in relative preferences across venues that has implications for valuation research and political economy. To assess why relative preferences may differ across venues, we develop a simple theoretical model that applies to both housing and voting decisions and incorporates parameters for parochial altruism and tax aversion. Using prior estimates on partisan differences in key parameters, we find both intuitive and, to some extent, numerical support for the observed difference in relative preferences.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15763,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Economics and Management","volume":"131 ","pages":"Article 103157"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environmental Economics and Management","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0095069625000415","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There exists a consistent partisan gap in preferences for public spending on the environment, with approval being 20 to 40 percentage points higher for Democrats than Republicans. In this paper, we investigate whether there is a similar partisan gap present in residential preferences for environmental amenities. We link housing data, land use, and household characteristics, including voter registration, for three distinct housing markets, and we develop a residential sorting model to estimate marginal willingness-to-pay (MWTP) for residential proximity to conserved land, allowing for preference heterogeneity by partisanship as well as other household characteristics. For all households combined, we estimate average annual household MWTP for locations proximate to open space to range from $426 to $1061 across the three markets. In our model that allows for heterogeneous preferences across groups, we find no evidence that Republicans' MWTP is less than Democrats’ MWTP, and we statistically reject the magnitude of preference disparity found in voting studies. These findings establish a difference in relative preferences across venues that has implications for valuation research and political economy. To assess why relative preferences may differ across venues, we develop a simple theoretical model that applies to both housing and voting decisions and incorporates parameters for parochial altruism and tax aversion. Using prior estimates on partisan differences in key parameters, we find both intuitive and, to some extent, numerical support for the observed difference in relative preferences.
用(左脚和右脚)投票:购房者对社区环境便利设施的价值观是否与其政治立场一致?
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
4.30%
发文量
91
期刊介绍: The Journal of Environmental Economics and Management publishes theoretical and empirical papers devoted to specific natural resources and environmental issues. For consideration, papers should (1) contain a substantial element embodying the linkage between economic systems and environmental and natural resources systems or (2) be of substantial importance in understanding the management and/or social control of the economy in its relations with the natural environment. Although the general orientation of the journal is toward economics, interdisciplinary papers by researchers in other fields of interest to resource and environmental economists will be welcomed.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信