Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T09:25:22.905Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Growth Management Policies for Exurban and Suburban Development: Theory and an Application to Sonoma County, California

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2016

David A. Newburn  and
Peter Berck
David A. Newburn
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics at Texas A&M University in College Station, Texas
Peter Berck
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics at the University of California in Berkeley, California
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study examines the effectiveness of growth management policies on influencing future patterns of exurban and suburban development. We initially estimate a spatially explicit model of residential development with parcel data in Sonoma County, California. This estimated model is then used to simulate the effect of urban growth boundaries (UGBs) versus allowing municipal sewer service expansion. The UGB policy decreases the amount of suburban development but is less effective in managing exurban development. The downzoning policy in agricultural and resource areas reduces the amount of exurban development, but only partially due to the prevalence of grandfathered lots in rural areas.

Keywords

exurban developmenturban growth boundariessprawlspatial modelingurban fringe
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review , Volume 40 , Issue 3 , December 2011 , pp. 375 - 392
Copyright
Copyright © 2011 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Burchfield, M. Overman, H. Puga, D. and Turner, M. 2006. “Causes of Sprawl: A Portrait from Space.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 121(2): 587–633.Google Scholar
Cho, S. Chen, Z. Yen, S. and Eastwood, D. 2006. “Estimating Effects of an Urban Growth Boundary on Land Development.” Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 38(2): 287–298.Google Scholar
Cunningham, C. 2007. “Growth Controls, Real Options, and Land Development.” Review of Economics and Statistics 89(2): 343–358.Google Scholar
DeGrove, J. 2005. Planning Policy and Politics: Smart Growth and the States. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.Google Scholar
Heimlich, R.E. and Anderson, W.D. 2001. “Development at the Urban Fringe and Beyond: Impacts on Agriculture and Rural Land.” Agricultural Economic Report No. 803, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Irwin, E.G. Bell, K.P. Bockstael, N.E. Newburn, D.A. Partridge, M.D. and Wu, J.J. 2009. “The Economics of Urban-Rural Space.” Annual Review of Resource Economics 1: 435–459.Google Scholar
Irwin, E. Bell, K. and Geoghegan, J. 2003. “Modeling and Managing Urban Growth at the Rural-Urban Fringe: A Parcel-Level Model of Residential Land-Use Change.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 32(1): 83–102.Google Scholar
Irwin, E.G. and Bockstael, N.E. 2002. “Interacting Agents, Spatial Externalities, and the Endogenous Evolution of Residential Land Use Patterns.” Journal of Economic Geography 2(1): 31–54.Google Scholar
Jun, M. 2004. “The Effects of Portland's Urban Growth Boundary on Urban Development Patterns and Commuting.” Urban Studies 41(7): 1333–1348.Google Scholar
Levine, N. 1999. “The Effects of Local Growth Controls on Regional Housing Production and Population Redistribution in California.” Urban Studies 36(12): 2047–2068.Google Scholar
Lewis, R. Knaap, G. and Sohn, J. 2009. “Managing Growth with Priority Funding Areas: A Good Idea Whose Time Has Yet to Come.” Journal of the American Planning Association 75(4): 457–478.Google Scholar
Mayer, C. and Somerville, C. 2000. “Land Use Regulation and New Construction.” Regional Science and Urban Economics 30(6): 639–662.Google Scholar
Nechyba, T.J. and Walsh, R.P. 2004. “Urban Sprawl.” Journal of Economics Perspectives 18(4): 177–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newburn, D. and Berck, P. 2011. “Exurban Development.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 62(3): 323–336.Google Scholar
Pendall, R. 1999. “Do Land Use Controls Cause Sprawl?” Environment and Planning B 26: 555–571.Google Scholar
Pendali, R. Martin, J. and Fulton, W. 2002. “Holding the Line: Urban Containment in the United States.” Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Shen, Q. and Zhang, F. 2007. “Land-Use Change in a Pro-Smart Growth State: Maryland, USA.” Environment and Planning A 39: 1457–1477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutton, P. Cova, T. and Elvidge, C. 2006. “Mapping Exurbia in the Conterminous United States Using Nighttime Satellite Imagery.” Geocarto International 21(2): 39–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Train, K. 2009. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar