Tree cover and property values in the United States: A national meta-analysis

Abstract

[A meta-analysis by Kent Kovacs, Grant West, David J. Nowak and Robert G. Haight] uses 21 hedonic property value studies and 157 unique observations to study the influence of tree cover on the value of homes in the United States. The authors construct elasticity estimates of the percentage change in home value for a 1% change in the percentage of tree cover around a home. Cluster weighted averages of the elasticities account for the housing market and the precision of the property price effects for tree cover on and off property and for three categories of tree cover density. Meta-regression models further control for the housing market and tree cover heterogeneity, the methodological techniques of the primary study, and publication bias. The Mundlak meta-regression model with controls for US regions has the lowest out-of-sample transfer error. The larger elasticity for off property tree cover than on property tree cover (unless tree density is 10% or lower) suggests that the property value of homes rises more if tree cover is not on land that homeowners are responsible for maintaining. The elasticity in neighborhoods with greater than 25% tree cover (0.013) is four times larger than the elasticity in neighborhoods with 0 to 10% tree cover (0.003).

...

Their Mundlak model 2 predicts an $8.88 increase in the value of a single-family home in the Midwest for an on-property increase in tree cover of 0.18%.6 Assuming that the single-family home is on a half-acre lot (21,780 ft2) with an average tree cover of 18% (3920 ft2) (Table 2), they find that a 1% increase in the percentage tree cover amounts to an increase of 39 ft2. Suppose that a 24-in. dbh green ash tree has a crown radius of 35 ft. and a crown area of 962 ft2. A 1% increase in tree cover is equivalent to 0.04 additional 24-in. green ash trees on the property (39/962 = 0.04). The increase in property value for one green ash tree on the property is $8.88/0.04 = $222. Their Mundlak model 2 also predicts a $76.2 increase in the value of a single-family home in the Midwest for a 0.18% increase in tree cover within a mile of the home. A circular area with 1-mile radius has 87.6 million ft2. Using the average tree cover of 18% (Table 2), they find that trees cover 15.8 million ft2, and a 1% increase in the percentage tree cover amounts to an increase of 158,000 ft2. Suppose again a 24-in. dbh green ash tree has a crown radius of 35 ft. and a crown area of 962 ft2. A 1% increase in tree cover is equivalent to 164 additional 24-in. dbh green ash trees within a mile of the home (158,000/962 = 164).

https://www.nature.org/en-us/what-we-do/our-priorities/build-healthy-cities/cities-stories/benefits-of-trees-forests/

What is the total value of a 1% increase in tree cover in a neighborhood? Here, [they] need to calculate the increase in value of all the homes in the neighborhood, and so [they] need an estimate of housing density. According to the 2019 US Census, there are 2,176 households per square mile in St. Paul, MN. If we assume the neighborhood is a circular mile in size, then there are 2176 * 3.14 = 6833 homes in the neighborhood (there are 3.14 mile2 in a circular mile). If each home benefits from the 1% increase in tree cover in the circular area, then the aggregate increase in property value is 6833 * $76.2 = $520,675, for the off-property component of the tree cover. In addition, the aggregate increase in property value is 164 * $222 = $36,408 for the on-property component of tree cover, again assuming the 1% increase in tree cover is composed of 164 24-in. dbh ash trees. Adding those two components, the total value of a 1% increase in tree cover in the circular mile area is $557,083 or $277 per acre of land.

by Kent Kovacs, Grant West, David J. Nowak and Robert G. Haight

Ecological Economics via Elsevier Science Direct www.Sciencedirect.com

Volume 197, July 2022, 107424

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2022.107424

Urban trees, house price, and redevelopment pressure in Tampa, Florida

Abstract

We examined the relationship between urban trees and the sales price of single-family homes in Tampa, Florida. We chose Tampa, because the city is facing major redevelopment pressure that may impact the association between trees and house price. In particular, a frequently voiced view in Tampa’s development community is that trees adversely affect the value of houses that are being sold for redevelopment. We estimated hedonic models of sales price controlling for house and neighborhood characteristics and correcting for spatial autocorrelation (n = 1,924). We found that trees within 152m (500 feet) of a house’s lot were significantly associated with higher sales prices. Specifically, a 1-percentage point increase in tree-canopy cover was associated with a total increase in sales price of $9,271 to $9,836 (results were largely insensitive to correction for spatial autocorrelation). Our results demonstrate that, even in a city facing major redevelopment pressure, trees are associated with higher sales prices.

Highlights

• Trees on or right next to a house’s lot are not associated with higher sales price.

• In contrast, houses with more neighborhood trees sell for a price premium.

• Despite redevelopment pressure, trees are a neighborhood amenity.

 

https://www.tampagov.net/sites/default/files/parks-and-recreation/files/purple_tab_bg.pdf

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1618866718306733

by Geoffrey H. Donovan 1, Shawn Landry 2 and Cody Winter 3

1. USDA Forest Service, PNW Research Station, 620 SW Main, Suite 502, Portland, OR, 97205, USA

2. University of South Florida, School of Geosciences, 4202 E Fowler Ave., NES107, Tampa, FL, 33620, USA

3. Environmental Protection Commission, 3629 Queen Palm Drive, Tampa, FL, 33619, USA

Urban Forestry & Urban Greening via Elsevier Science Direct www.ScienceDirect.com

Volume 38; February, 2019; Pages 330-336

Good parks – bad parks: the influence of perceptions of location on WTP and preference motives for urban parks

Abstract:

Urban parks generate substantial public benefits, yet explicit economic assessments of such values remain relatively rare. Surveys of willingness to pay (WTP) were undertaken to assess such values for proposed new parks. The analysis assessed how preference motives and values varied according to the location of parks. Results revealed greater altruistic motivation and higher overall values for the creation of inner city as opposed to suburban parks. Spatial decomposition revealed that, after controlling for other determinants such as incomes, values generally increase for households closer to proposed parks, but that a significant downturn in values is evident for households located very close to a proposed inner city park; a finding which echoes concerns regarding the potential for such sites to provide a focus for antisocial behaviour. While these findings provide strong overall support for provision of public parks they highlight, the importance of perceptions of location and the potential for localised dis-benefits.

...

Suveys were administered face to face at participant’s homes. This enabled us to remind respondents of their budgetary constraints as well as the existence of potential substitute sites. Participants were informed that “we are researching the value of parks to the people of Norwich” and wished to interview people about their experiences and views.... Participants were shown stock photos of a verdant English park and informed that the park once complete would look like the photograph.... They were asked in an open ended format to explain their choice and to categorise their expected usage of the park into one of four categories.... Interviewers explained that the significant costs of creating the new parks would be met through an increase in their annual council tax bill.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parks,_gardens_and_open_spaces_in_Norwich

Key results are in the table below:

 

...

The Tobit models produce very similar aggregate values for park A (Mean based = £1,130,674, Tobit based = £1,297,970) when protestors are ignored.  The inclusion of a lower bound to account for protestors in the Tobit model also resulted in similar values to the equivalent measure based aggregation (mean based = £933,302 Tobit based = 1,140,256). 

...

Results of the CV survey presented in this paper confirm previous findings that parks are highly valued public goods, with the creation of new parks in the city of Norwich having the potential to generate substantial value to residents. The low protest bid rate in the sample suggests that not only do residents have strong preferences towards the creation of new parks but that, at least in principle, they are willing to pay for increased provisioning through a familiar and realistic payment vehicle. Using an ex ante valuation allowed values and preference motives to be compared for two locations revealing significant differences in both mean WTP and its determinants.

California 'street tree' benefits valued at $1 billion

Streets lined with gold? Not exactly, but a new report from the U.S. Forest Service's Pacific Southwest Research Station estimates trees lining Californian streets and boulevards provide benefits to municipalities and residents worth $1 billion. 

"Structure, Function and Value of Street Trees in California, USA," published in this month's issue of "Urban Forestry and Urban Greening," is the most up-to-date and comprehensive inventory of "street trees" within California. Using municipal inventories analyzed in i-Tree, a computerized tree inventory and management suite, researchers were able to create a composite picture of not only the number of California's street trees, but also their species, size, location and associated benefits.

With an estimated 9.1 million trees lining California's streets and boulevards, it averages to about one street tree for every four residents. But according to the recently published study, room remains for another 16 million street trees to be planted, if resources allowed.

"Sometimes it’s easy to think of trees along city streets as mere aesthetics, or worse, a nuisance with falling leaves and limbs or uprooting sidewalks," said research forester and lead author Greg McPherson. "But what our study shows is that these trees have a real monetary benefit to the municipalities and residents who care for them."

From carbon storage ($10.32 million) and removal of air pollutants ($18.15 million) to interception of rainfall ($41.5 million) and energy savings from both heating and cooling ($101.15 million), California's street trees are paying big dividends. They even bolster property values and home sale prices to the tune of $838.94 million.

"We've calculated for every $1 spent on planting or maintaining a street tree, that tree returns, on average, $5.82 in benefits," McPherson said. "These trees are benefiting their communities 24 hours a day, 365 days a year."

The report also highlights trends and tree demographics McPherson and his colleagues say they hope will guide urban foresters in future decisions regarding what trees to plant and where.

For example, while the number of street trees have increased from 5.9 million in 1988, tree density has actually fallen from 105 to 75 trees per mile, nearly a 30 percent drop. And while statewide species diversification appears respectable with only one species claiming more than 10 percent relative abundance (London planetree at 10.5 percent), individually, 39 of the 49 studied communities were over-reliant on a single species, potentially making their urban forest susceptible to a species-specific disturbance or pathogen.

"Municipal foresters can use data from this study to see how their trees compare to other cities in their climate zone or in the state," McPherson said. "It might help allocate resources, whether it be to increase planting to address low density or species diversification, increase pruning to manage predominately younger trees for structure and form, control pests and disease or intensively manage older trees so as to not lose them prematurely."

Co-authors on the study include Natalie van Doorn, research urban ecologist with the Pacific Southwest Research Station, and John de Goede, research assistant with the University of California Davis' Information Center for the Environment. CAL FIRE also contributed tree inventory data for the study.

http://www.fs.fed.us/psw/news/2016/20160614_streettrees.shtml

United States Forest Service Pacific Southwest Research Station http://www.fs.fed.us/psw

Press release dated June 14, 2016