The Dynamic Impacts of Employment Subcenters on Residential Land Price in Transitional China: An Examination of the Beijing Metropolitan Area
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Research Area, Data, and Methods
3.1. Research Area
3.2. Research Data
3.3 Methods
3.3.1. Determination of Employment Subcenters
3.3.2. The Hedonic Model
- Model 1: Only consider the distance from each land parcel to Tiananmen (Monocentric city model).
- Model 2: Consider the distance from each land parcel to the nearest employment subcenter (Polycentric city model).
- Model 3: Consider the distance from each land parcel to each employment subcenter (Polycentric city model).
- Model 4: Consider the limited impact of the employment subcenters, which is improved in model 3 by establishing a virtual variable, “whether the distance from the employment subcenters is within 10 km.”
4. Temporal and Spatial Variation Characteristics of the Residential Land Market
4.1. Temporal Variation Characteristics of Residential Land Market
4.2. The Spatial Variation Characteristics of Residential Land Market
5. Determination of Employment Subcenters
5.1. Selection of Potential Employment Subcenters
5.2. The Identified Employment Subcenters
6. The Impact of the Evolution of the Employment Subcenters on the Price of Residential Land
6.1. Results from the Models
6.2. Changes in Tiananmen’s Impact on Residential Land Price
6.3. The Influence of the Nearest Neighboring Sub-Centers
6.4. The Impact of Various employment Subcenters and the Scope of the Impact
7. Conclusions and Discussion
Acknowledgments
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Anas, A.; Arnott, R.; Small, K.A. Urban spatial structure. J. Econ. Lit. 1998, 36, 1426–1464. [Google Scholar]
- McMillen, D.P.; Smith, S.C. The number of subcenters in large urban areas. J. Urban Econ. 2003, 53, 321–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davoudi, S. European briefing: Polycentricity in European spatial planning: From an analytical tool to a normative agenda. Eur. Plan. Stud. 2003, 11, 979–999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Angel, S.; Blei, A.M. The spatial structure of American cities: The great majority of workplaces are no longer in CBDs, employment sub-centers, or live-work communities. Cities 2016, 51, 21–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dong, H. Concentration or Dispersion? Location Choice of Commercial Developers in the Portland Metropolitan Area, 2000–2007. Urban Geogr. 2013, 34, 989–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garcia-López, M.-À.; Muñiz, I. Employment decentralisation: Polycentricity or scatteration? The case of Barcelona. Urban Stud. 2010, 47, 3035–3056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, D.; Liu, Z.; Zhao, X.; Zhao, P. Emerging polycentric megacity in China: An examination of employment subcenters and their influence on population distribution in Beijing. Cities 2017, 69, 36–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aguilar, A.G.; Hernandez, J. Metropolitan Change and Uneven Distribution of Urban Sub-Centres in Mexico City, 1989–2009. Bull. Latin Am. Res. 2016, 35, 191–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fernandez-Maldonado, A.M.; Romein, A.; Verkoren, O.; Paula Pessoa, R.P. Polycentric Structures in Latin American Metropolitan Areas: Identifying Employment Sub-centres. Reg. Stud. 2014, 48, 1954–1971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suarez, M.; Delgado, J. Is Mexico City Polycentric? A Trip Attraction Capacity Approach. Urban Stud. 2009, 46, 2187–2211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ding, C.R. Urban spatial development in the land policy reform era: Evidence from Beijing. Urban Stud. 2004, 41, 1889–1907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zheng, S.; Kahn, M.E. Land and residential property markets in a booming economy: New evidence from Beijing. J. Urban Econ. 2008, 63, 743–757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bertaud, A.; Renaud, B. Socialist cities without land markets. J. Urban Econ. 1997, 41, 137–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hsing, Y.-T. Land and territorial politics in urban China. China Q. 2006, 187, 575–591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qin, B.; Han, S.S. Emerging Polycentricity in Beijing: Evidence from Housing Price Variations, 2001–05. Urban Stud. 2013, 50, 2006–2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deng, F.F.; Huang, Y.Q. Uneven land reform and urban sprawl in China: The case of Beijing. Prog. Plan. 2004, 61, 211–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, D.; Liu, Z.; Zhao, X. Monocentric or Polycentric? The Urban Spatial Structure of Employment in Beijing. Sustainability 2015, 7, 11632–11656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, T.; Wang, L.; Li, G. Distributions of Population and Employment and Evolution of Spatial Structures in the Beijing Metropolitan Area. Acta Geogr. Sin. 2012, 67, 829–840. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Sun, T.; Wang, L.; Li, G. Characteristics and formation mechanisms of polycentril spatial structure in Beijing metropolitan area. City Plan. Rev. 2013, 37, 28–32. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Veneri, P. The identification of sub-centres in two Italian metropolitan areas: A functional approach. Cities 2013, 31, 177–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, X.; Wang, M. How polycentric is urban China and why? A case study of 318 cities. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2016, 151, 10–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garcia-Lopez, M.-A. Population suburbanization in Barcelona, 1991–2005: Is its spatial structure changing? J. Hous. Econ. 2010, 19, 131–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giuliano, G.; Small, K.A. Subcenters in the Los Angeles region. Reg. Sci. Urban Econ. 1991, 21, 163–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alonso, W. Location and Land Use: Toward a General Theory of Land Rent; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1964. [Google Scholar]
- Mills, E.S. An aggregative model of resource allocation in a metropolitan area. Am. Econ. Rev. 1967, 57, 197–210. [Google Scholar]
- Muth, R. Cities and Housing: The Spatial Patterns of Urban Residential Land Use; University of Chicago: Chicago, IL, USA, 1969. [Google Scholar]
- McDonald, J.F.; McMillen, D.P. Employment subcenters and land values in a polycentric urban area: The case of Chicago. Environ. Plan. A 1990, 22, 1561–1574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heikkila, E.; Gordon, P.; Kim, J.I.; Peiser, R.B.; Richardson, H.W.; Dale-Johnson, D. What happened to the CBD-distance gradient? Land values in a policentric city. Environ. Plan. A 1989, 21, 221–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muniz, I.; Garcia-Lopez, M.A.; Galindo, A. The effect of employment sub-centres on population density in Barcelona. Urban Stud. 2008, 45, 627–649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parr, J.B. The polycentric urban region: A closer inspection. Reg. Stud. 2004, 38, 231–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ding, C.; Bethka, K. Employment Concentration and Urban Economic Growth. Urban Plan. Overseas 2005, 4, 11–18. [Google Scholar]
- Cervero, R.; Wu, K.L. Sub-centring and commuting: Evidence from the San Francisco Bay Area, 1980–90. Urban Stud. 1998, 35, 1059–1076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tao, R.; Su, F.B.; Liu, M.X.; Cao, G.Z. Land Leasing and Local Public Finance in China’s Regional Development: Evidence from Prefecture-level Cities. Urban Stud. 2010, 47, 2217–2236. [Google Scholar]
- Man, J.Y. Local Public Finance in China: An Overview; China’s Local Public Finance in Transition; Lincoln Institute of Land Policy: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2011; pp. 3–20. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, T.W. Land market forces and government’s role in sprawl—The case of China. Cities 2000, 17, 123–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zou, Y.; Mason, R.; Zhong, R. Modeling the polycentric evolution of post-Olympic Beijing: An empirical analysis of land prices and development intensity. Urban Geogr. 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dong, G. Sixty years and twenty years—Review and Prospect of the modernization development process in Beijing(2). Beijing Plan. Rev. 2010, 2010, 168–171. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Dong, G. Sixty years and twenty years—Review and Prospect of the modernization development process in Beijing(1). Beijing Plan. Rev. 2010, 6, 177–180. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Zhou, Y.X.; Ma, L.J.C. Economic restructuring and suburbanization in China. Urban Geogr. 2000, 21, 205–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, F.; Zhou, Y. Modelling urban population densities in Beijing 1982–90: Suburbanisation and its causes. Urban Stud. 1999, 36, 271–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feng, J.; Wang, F.; Zhou, Y. The spatial restructuring of population in metropolitan Beijing: Toward polycentricity in the post-reform era. Urban Geogr. 2009, 30, 779–802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, X.; Sun, T.; Li, G. Research on the spatial structure of employment distribution in Beijing. Geogr. Res. 2011, 30, 1262–1270. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Wang, D.; Chai, Y. The jobs–housing relationship and commuting in Beijing, China: The legacy of Danwei. J. Transp. Geogr. 2009, 17, 30–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, L.-H. Land price changes in the evolving land market in Beijing. Prop. Manag. 2009, 27, 91–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Cui, C. Identifying Commuting Pattern of Beijing Using Bus Smart Card Data. Acta Geogr. Sin. 2012, 67, 1339–1352. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Rosen, S. Hedonic prices and implicit markets: Product differentiation in pure competition. J. Polit. Econ. 1974, 82, 34–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sopranzetti, B.J. Hedonic Regression Models. In Handbook of Financial Econometrics and Statistics; Lee, C.F., Lee, J., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Sheppard, S. Hedonic analysis of housing markets. In Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1999; Volume 3, pp. 1595–1635. [Google Scholar]
- Qu, B. Ins and outs of the house price, land price and land supply. China Land Sci. 2005, 5, 7–9. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Huang, H.; Lv, C. The Influence of “Four Trillion Investment” Policy on Firm Investment Efficiency. J. Account. Res. 2016, 2, 51–57. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Gu, Y.; Zheng, S.; Cao, Y. The Identification of Employment Centers in Beijing. Urban Stud. 2009, 16, 118–124. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Wang, W. Studies on the Employment Spatial Structure in Beijing City Based on GIS; China University of Geosciences: Beijing, China, 2009. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Zhou, H. Study on Spatial Structure of Planning World City in Beijng; China University of Geosciences: Beijing, China, 2012. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Xiao, Y. The characteristics of urban spatial structure evolution and dynamic analysis in Beijing. Beijing Plan. Rev. 2011, 6, 107–110. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Lv, Y. The Employment Spatial Structure and Its Evolution in Beijing; China University of Geosciences: Beijing, China, 2010. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Yu, H. Reseach on Spatial Structure of Employment and Spatial Structure Adjustment in Beijing and the Affect to Residential and Employment; Capital Normal University: Beijing, China, 2012. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Wen, H.; Tao, Y. Polycentric urban structure and housing price in the transitional China: Evidence from Hangzhou. Habitat Int. 2015, 46, 138–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Period | Number of Residential Land Parcels | Area of Residential Land Parcels |
---|---|---|
2001–2004 | 76.93 | 70.03 |
2005–2008 | 81.60 | 73.58 |
2009–2013 | 83.55 | 78.95 |
Residential Land Transaction Period | Corresponding Subway Opening Date | Corresponding Subway Lines Opened |
---|---|---|
2001, 2002 | Before 2001 | Lines 1 and 2 |
2003—2006 | 2003 | Line 13 and Batong Line |
2007 | 2007 | Line 5 |
2008 | 2008 | Line 8 (Beitucheng—South Gate of Forest Park) |
Phase one of Line 10 | ||
Airport line | ||
2009 | 2009 | Line 4 |
2010 | 2010 | Changping line, Daxing line, Fangshan line, Yizhuang line |
Line 10 (Wangjing west station to Sha Yu station) | ||
2011 | 2011 | Line 8 (Beitucheng—Huilongguan East Street) |
Line 9 (Guogongzhuang—Beijing West Railway Station) | ||
2012 | 2012 | Line 8 (Gulou Street-Beitucheng) |
Line 9: the whole line opening | ||
2013 | 2013 | Line 8: the whole line opening |
Line 10: the whole line opening |
Dependent Variable | Express | Type | Description | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Unit price of residential land | Price | Successive | Ratio of land transaction price to parcel land area | |
Variable Classification | Independent Variable | Variable | Type | Description |
Constant | Constant | |||
X1 | Parcel area | SIZE | successive | Area size of parcels |
floor area ratio | FAR | successive | Plot ratio of the parcel | |
The auction approach | AUC | dummy | The auction is for auction | |
Mixed-use | MIXED | dummy | Mix commercial facilities or public construction facilities | |
The degree of land development | FIV-DEV | dummy | Above five links and one leveling | |
X2 | Distance to the nearest subway station | 𝐷subway | successive | Shortest distance from the parcel to the nearest subway station |
Distance to the nearest park | 𝐷𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑘 | successive | Comprehensive parks and exclusive parks with green spaces | |
Distance to the nearest key primary or secondary school | 𝐷school | successive | Public key primary or secondary schools | |
X3 | Distance to Tiananmen | 𝐷TAM | successive | Shortest distance between the parcel and Tiananmen |
Distance to employment subcenter | 𝐷sub | successive | Straight-line distance between the parcel and the nearest employment subcenter | |
X3’ | Distance to employment sub center is less than 10 km | 𝐷sub10 km | dummy | The parcel is within the range of 10 km of the employment subcenter |
N | Express | Unit | Average | Standard Deviation | Minimum Value | Maximum Value | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1694 | Price | yuan/m2 | 1040.22 | 4777.24 | 200.74 | 65,774.65 | |
N | Express | ||||||
X1 | 1694 | SIZE | m2 | 26,642.63 | 49,074.05 | 54.00 | 657,487.00 |
1694 | FAR | —— | 3.73 | 2.52 | 0.19 | 19.00 | |
1694 | AUC | —— | —— | —— | —— | —— | |
1694 | MIXED | —— | —— | —— | —— | —— | |
1694 | FIV-DEV | —— | —— | —— | —— | —— | |
X2 | 1694 | 𝐷subway | km | 4.60 | 4.18 | 0.02 | 30.38 |
1694 | 𝐷𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑘 | km | 5.11 | 4.70 | 0.01 | 26.21 | |
1694 | 𝐷school | km | 3.21 | 3.57 | 0.02 | 23.60 | |
X3 | 1694 | 𝐷TAM | km | 12.22 | 6.34 | 1.09 | 38.18 |
1694 | 𝐷sub | km | 8.41 | 5.47 | 0.46 | 33.77 | |
X3’ | 1694 | 𝐷sub10 km | —— | —— | —— | —— | —— |
N | Express | Unit | Average | Standard Deviation | Minimum Value | Maximum Value | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
164 | Price | yuan/m2 | 7090.36 | 7296.02 | 967.76 | 40,558.33 | |
N | Express | ||||||
X1 | 164 | SIZE | m2 | 97,167.79 | 93,523.95 | 1724.00 | 638,002.50 |
164 | FAR | —— | 2.16 | 0.79 | 0.01 | 5.77 | |
164 | AUC | —— | —— | —— | —— | —— | |
164 | MIXED | —— | —— | —— | —— | —— | |
164 | FIV-DEV | —— | —— | —— | —— | —— | |
X2 | 164 | 𝐷subway | km | 9.02 | 8.13 | 0.24 | 29.20 |
164 | 𝐷𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑘 | km | 1.33 | 0.99 | 0.07 | 5.76 | |
164 | 𝐷school | km | 8.44 | 6.90 | 0.14 | 26.41 | |
X3 | 164 | 𝐷TAM | km | 20.15 | 10.01 | 1.70 | 43.42 |
164 | 𝐷sub | km | 15.92 | 9.19 | 0.80 | 42.89 | |
X3’ | 164 | 𝐷sub10km | —— | —— | —— | —— | —— |
N | Express | Unit | Average | Standard Deviation | Minimum Value | Maximum Value | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
259 | Price | yuan/m2 | 15,200.68 | 15,687.07 | 845.33 | 96,440.87 | |
N | Express | ||||||
X1 | 259 | SIZE | m2 | 82,285.16 | 58,531.27 | 3983.00 | 330,159.00 |
259 | FAR | —— | 2.13 | 0.67 | 0.62 | 5.00 | |
259 | AUC | —— | —— | —— | —— | —— | |
259 | MIXED | —— | —— | —— | —— | —— | |
259 | FIV-DEV | —— | —— | —— | —— | —— | |
X2 | 259 | 𝐷subway | km | 2.97 | 2.76 | 0.11 | 14.72 |
259 | 𝐷𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑘 | km | 1.11 | 1.01 | 0.05 | 4.44 | |
259 | 𝐷school | km | 4.30 | 4.84 | 0.02 | 26.41 | |
X3 | 259 | 𝐷TAM | km | 21.90 | 9.19 | 2.86 | 46.08 |
259 | 𝐷sub | km | 12.79 | 6.58 | 0.51 | 31.79 | |
X3’ | 259 | 𝐷sub10 km | —— | —— | —— | —— | —— |
Period | 2001–2004 | 2005–2008 | 2009–2013 |
---|---|---|---|
Total number of parcels (blocks) | 1694 | 164 | 259 |
Parcel total area (km2) | 44.9 | 15.6 | 21 |
Planning gross floor area (km2) | 106.1 | 29.5 | 40.9 |
Total transaction price (100 million yuan) | 467 | 1095 | 3192 |
Average unit price (yuan/m2) | 1040 | 7090 | 15,200 |
Year | Employment Sub-Centers | Scholars | Number of Studies |
---|---|---|---|
2001 | CBD | GuYizhen [51], Qin Bo [15], ZouYonghua [36] | 3 |
Financial Street | Null | 0 | |
Zhongguancun (including Haidian Street and Shangdi Street) | GuYizhen [51], Qin Bo [15], ZouYonghua [36], Wang Wei [52] | 4 | |
Olympic Park | Qin Bo [15] | 1 | |
2004 | CBD | GuYizhen [51], Wang Wei [52], Zhou Haiyan [53], Xiao Yizhuo [54], ZouYonghua [36], Qin Bo [15] | 6 |
Financial Street | Xiao Yizhuo [54], Wang Wei [52] | 2 | |
Zhongguancun | GuYizhen [51], Sun Tieshan [18], Wang Wei [52], Zhou Haiyan [53], LvYongqiang [55], Xiao Yizhuo [54], ZouYonghua [36], Qin Bo [15] | 8 | |
Olympic Park | ZouYonghua [36], Qin Bo [15], LvYongqiang [55] | 3 | |
Gucheng Street in Shijingshan | GuYizhen [51], Sun Tieshan [18] | 2 | |
Tongzhou New Town (Xinhua Street) | GuYizhen [51], Sun Tieshan [18], Wang Wei [52], LvYongqiang [55] | 4 | |
Shunyi New Town (Capital Airport) | GuYizhen [51], Sun Tieshan [18], Wang Wei [55], ZouYonghua [36], LvYongqiang [55] | 5 | |
Fangshan New Town | Sun Tieshan [18] | 1 | |
Yihuang, Da Xing District | Wang Wei [52] | 1 | |
2008 | CBD | Liu Xiaoquan [42], LvYongqiang [55], Yu Huili [54] | 3 |
Financial Street | Liu Xiaoquan [42], Yu Huili [56] | 2 | |
Zhongguancun | Liu Xiaoquan [42], Sun Tieshan [18], Zhou Haiyan [53], Huang Daquan [17], LvYongqiang [55], Yu Huili [56] | 6 | |
Olympic Park | Liu Xiaoquan [42], LvYongqiang [55], Yu Huili [56] | 3 | |
Jiuxianqiao | Liu Xiaoquan [42], Zhou Haiyan [53] | 2 | |
Changping New Town | Liu Xiaoquan [42], Huang Daquan [17], LvYongqiang [55] | 3 | |
Shunyi New Town | Liu Xiaoquan [42], Sun Tieshan [18], Huang Daquan [17], LvYongqiang [55] | 4 | |
Tongzhou New Town | Huang Daquan [17], Sun Tieshan [18], LvYongqiang [55] | 3 | |
Yizhuang | Liu Xiaooquan [42], Yu Huili [56] | 2 | |
Gucheng Street | Liu Xiaoquan [42], LvYongqiang [55] | 2 | |
Fangshan New Town | Liu Xiaoquan [42], Sun Tieshan [18], Huang Daquan [17], LvYongqiang [55] | 4 |
Model 1 | Collinearity Statistics | Model 2 | Collinearity Statistics | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Tolerance | VIF | Tolerance | VIF | ||
ln𝐷TAM | 0.061 | 16.393 | ln𝐷TAM | 0.073 | 13.699 |
ln𝐷JRJ | 0.061 | 16.393 | ln𝐷JRJ | 0.073 | 13.699 |
Variable Classification | Independent Variable | Model 1 (Single Center) | Model 2 (Nearest Sub Center) | Model 3 (All Subcenters) | Model 4 (10 km within Subcenters) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Constant | 10.107 *** (75.557) | 10.178 *** (74.674) | 10.556 *** (58.832) | 9.856 *** (55.417) | |
X1 | SIZE | −0.087 *** (−5.485) | −0.090 *** (−5.688) | −0.090 *** (−5.733) | −0.088 *** (−5.582) |
FAR | 0.332 *** (19.937) | 0.331 *** (19.937) | 0.328 *** (19.733) | 0.330 *** (19.727) | |
MIXED | 0.310 *** (20.347) | 0.311 *** (20.029) | 0.303 *** (19.476) | 0.314 *** (20.325) | |
X2 | ln𝐷subway | −0.022 (−1.319) | −0.013 (−0.772) | −0.023 (−1.388) | −0.025 (−1.499) |
ln𝐷𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑘 | −0.036 (−1.399) | −0.012 (−0.444) | −0.014 (−0.528) | −0.032 (−1.229) | |
ln𝐷school | −0.097 *** (−5.050) | −0.071 ** (−3.349) | −0.053 * (−2.477) | −0.088 *** (−4.428) | |
X3 | ln𝐷TAM | −0.296 *** (−10.678) | −0.264 *** (−9.529) | −0.212 *** (−6.720) | −0.252 *** (−8.136) |
ln𝐷sub | −0.083 ** (−3.078) | ||||
ln𝐷sub—ZGC | −0.188 *** (−5.337) | ||||
X3’ | 𝐷sub—ZGC10 km | 0.080 * (2.320) | |||
Adjust R2 | 0.648 | 0.650 | 0.653 | 0.651 | |
N | 1694 | 1694 | 1694 | 1694 |
Variable Classification | Independent Variable | Model 1 (Single Center) | Model 2 (Nearest Sub Center) | Model 3 (All Subcenters) | Model 4 (10 km within Subcenters) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Constant | 9.872 *** (25.752) | 9.827 *** (24.787) | 11.687 *** (16.637) | 8.945 *** (18.325) | |
X1 | SIZE | 0.031 (0.582) | 0.032 (0.625) | −0.002 (−0.040) | −0.017 (−0.326) |
FAR | 0.211 ** (3.310) | 0.229 *** (3.618) | 0.269 *** (4.260) | 0.203 ** (3.276) | |
AUC | 0.251 *** (4.703) | 0.244 *** (4.635) | 0.254 *** (4.599) | 0.237 *** (4.364) | |
MIXED | 0.047 (0.936) | 0.040 (0.807) | 0.028 (0.569) | 0.043 (0.899) | |
FIVE—DEV | 0.146 ** (2.886) | 0.149 ** (3.073) | 0.102 ** (3.227) | 0.129 ** (2.734) | |
X2 | ln𝐷subway | −0.192 ** (−2.651) | −0.024 (−0.229) | −0.071 (−0.692) | −0.066 (−0.787) |
ln𝐷𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑘 | 0.013 (0.233) | 0.022 (0.420) | 0.044 (0.832) | −0.004 (−0.074) | |
ln𝐷school | −0.089 (−0.998) | −0110 (−1.248) | 0.086 (0.836) | 0.030 (0.336) | |
X3 | ln𝐷TAM | −0.278 ** (−3.366) | −0.291 ** (−3.563) | −0.205 * (−2.358) | −0.283 ** (−2.696) |
ln𝐷sub | −0.180 * (−2.232) | ||||
ln𝐷sub—ZGC | −0.472 ** (−3.178) | ||||
ln𝐷sub—OLY | 0.130 (1.138) | ||||
ln𝐷sub—TZ | −0.073 (−0.829) | ||||
ln𝐷sub—SY | −0.103 * (−2.422) | ||||
X3’ | 𝐷sub—ZGC10 km | 0.174 *(2.359) | |||
𝐷sub—OLY10 km | 0.177 *(2.232) | ||||
𝐷sub—TZ10 km | 0.103 ** (2.594) | ||||
𝐷sub—SY10km | 0.141 ** (2.636) | ||||
Adjust R2 | 0.638 | 0.647 | 0.667 | 0.674 | |
N | 164 | 164 | 164 | 164 |
Variable Classification | Independent Variable | Model 1 (Single Center) | Model 2 (Nearest Subcenter) | Model 3 (All Subcenters) | Model 4 (10 km within Subcenters) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Constant | 9.678 *** (31.310) | 9.852 *** (31.198) | 12.275 *** (13.813) | 9.007 *** (25.686) | |
X1 | SIZE | −0.087 (−1.817) | −0.080 (−1.678) | −0.083 (−1.776) | −0.084 (−1.902) |
FAR | 0.211 *** (4.010) | 0.201 *** (3.846) | 0.221 *** (4.267) | 0.211 *** (4.191) | |
AUC | 0.169 ** (3.282) | 0.184 *** (3.585) | 0.143 *** (2.700) | 0.112 * (2.249) | |
MIXED | 0.366 *** (7.401) | 0.372 *** (7.570) | 0.377 *** (7.796) | 0.359 *** (7.817) | |
FIVE—DEV | 0.117 * (2.578) | 0.113 * (2.529) | 0.125 ** (2.808) | 0.100 ** (3.290) | |
X2 | ln𝐷subway | −0.010 (−0.190) | 0.003 (0.064) | 0.037 (0.677) | 0.035 (0.731) |
ln𝐷𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑘 | −0.031 (−0.662) | −0.016 (−0.326) | −0.030 (−0.614) | −0.082 (−1.716) | |
ln𝐷school | 0.005 (0.095) | −0.013 (−0.252) | 0.000 (0.003) | 0.011 (0.192) | |
X3 | ln𝐷TAM | −0.205 *** (−3.678) | −0.173 ** (−3.027) | −0.147 * (−2.139) | −0.144 * (−2.343) |
ln𝐷sub | −0.108 * (−2.279) | ||||
ln𝐷sub—ZGC | −0.202 * (−3.120) | ||||
ln𝐷sub—OLY | 0.194 (1.931) | ||||
ln𝐷sub—TZ | −0.116 (−1.585) | ||||
ln𝐷sub—SY | −0.143 * (−2.103) | ||||
ln𝐷sub—CP | −0.189 ** (−2.934) | ||||
ln𝐷sub—FS | −0.140 (−1.667) | ||||
X3’ | 𝐷sub—ZGC10 km | 0.196 ** (2.943) | |||
𝐷sub—OLY10 km | 0.160 *(2.077) | ||||
𝐷sub—TZ10 km | 0.165 ** (3.562) | ||||
ln𝐷sub—SY10 km | 0.168 ** (3.510) | ||||
ln𝐷sub—CP10 km | 0.100 ** (3.304) | ||||
ln𝐷sub—FS10 km | 0.123 * (2.162) | ||||
Adjust R2 | 0.621 | 0.656 | 0.647 | 0.689 | |
N | 259 | 259 | 259 | 259 |
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Huang, D.; Yang, X.; Liu, Z.; Zhao, X.; Kong, F. The Dynamic Impacts of Employment Subcenters on Residential Land Price in Transitional China: An Examination of the Beijing Metropolitan Area. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1016. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10041016
Huang D, Yang X, Liu Z, Zhao X, Kong F. The Dynamic Impacts of Employment Subcenters on Residential Land Price in Transitional China: An Examination of the Beijing Metropolitan Area. Sustainability. 2018; 10(4):1016. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10041016
Chicago/Turabian StyleHuang, Daquan, Xiaoqing Yang, Zhen Liu, Xingshuo Zhao, and Fanhao Kong. 2018. "The Dynamic Impacts of Employment Subcenters on Residential Land Price in Transitional China: An Examination of the Beijing Metropolitan Area" Sustainability 10, no. 4: 1016. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10041016