Does the Difference in Urban Public Facility Allocation Cause Spatial Inequality in Housing Prices? Evidence from Chongqing, China

Abstract

The current study argues that the capitalisation effect of urban public facilities on housing will be considerable when the accessibility or availability of facilities has a serious stake in the location or property rights of houses. The supply level and supply quantity of urban public facilities determine whether there is a significant difference in the accessibility or availability of facilities amongst neighbourhoods, and subsequently determines whether the capitalisation effect of facilities on surrounding houses is considerable, which ultimately affects the spatial inequality in housing prices (i.e. spatial dispersion of housing prices). However, previous studies have rarely considered the fact that the supply and demand of urban public facilities vary with the type of facilities. Thus, according to the law of diminishing marginal utility, the current study proposes a theoretical framework for the impact of the allocation of urban public facilities at different supply levels on the spatial inequity in housing prices and verifies this through a case study. Results indicate that the difference in urban public facility allocation caused by the unequal supply quantity or unbalanced spatial distribution has a notable impact on the spatial inequality in housing prices. There are three states of allocation of urban public facilities available according to different supply levels, namely, disequilibrium, quantitative equilibrium and spatial equilibrium:(І) Scarce and high-quality public resources that may always be in the disequilibrium state create a substantial capitalisation effect on nearby housing, and their presence will aggravate spatial inequality in housing prices; (П) Public facilities that can only reach the quantitative equilibrium state have a considerable capitalisation effect on nearby housing, and their supply densities have a positive impact on the spatial inequality in housing prices; (Ш) Public facilities in the spatial equilibrium state have a negligible capitalisation effect on nearby housing, and their supply densities have a negative impact on the spatial inequality in housing prices. Therefore, it is reasonable to argue that urban public facilities at different supply levels have a diversified impact on the housing market. This study can contribute to having a comprehensive and in-depth understanding of the diversified impact of urban public facilities on the housing market.

An Exploration of Spatial and Social Inequalities of Urban Sports Facilities in Nanning City, China

“…A growing number of studies have investigated the spatial and social inequality of urban facilities [ [10,11]. This paper addresses a gap in the research, presenting an analysis of the spatial and social inequality of sports facilities at the urban scale in China.…”

Public Housing Allocation Model in the Guangdong‐Hong Kong‐Macao Greater Bay Area under Clustering Algorithm

“…e eligible low-income and middle-income families with housing difficulties can rent the public rental housing at the price slightly lower than the market rent. After the merger of public rental housing and low-cost housing, the two are collectively referred to as public rental housing [18,19]. e guarantee objects of public rental housing include migrant workers, fresh graduates, entrepreneurs, and other low-income and middle-income families with housing difficulties.…”

Tipologi Penyediaan Infrastruktur Perumahan di Kawasan Peri-urban Utara-Selatan Metropolitan Bandung Raya

“…Eksternalitas yang timbul akibat ketidakteraturan dan ketidakmerataan ketersedian infrastruktur dalam skala makro sering berdampak pada munculnya permasalahan lingkungan dan sosial (Zhao, 2013;Zhang, Zhou, & Mao, 2019…”