In this paper some of the problems of constructing a spatial model of the housing market from an economic standpoint are reviewed. These include the fragmentation of the market, the durability and heterogeneity of housing as an economic good, and the influence of preference variations. The authors go on to consider examples of two broad categories of model, the economic and the ‘social physics’, and conclude that for the purposes of urban planning there is merit in the deterministic approach of the economic model.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlonsoW., 1964, Location and Land Use (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.).
2.
ClarkC., 1951, “Urban population densities”, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 114, 490–496.
3.
EcheniqueM.CrowtherD.LindsayW., 1969, “A structural comparison of three generations of New Towns”, Centre for Land Use and Built Form Studies, Working Paper number 25, University of Cambridge.
4.
HarrisB., 1968, “Quantitative models of urban development”, in Issues in Urban Economics, Eds. PerloffH.WingoL. (Resources for the Future Inc., Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore), pp.363–412.
5.
HerbertJ.StevensB. J., 1960, “A model for the distribution of residential activities in urban areas”, Journal of Regional Science, 2, 21–36.
6.
HymanG. M.WilsonA. G., 1969, “The effects of changes in travel costs on top distribution and model split”, CES-WP-21, Centre for Environmental Studies, London.
7.
LowryI. S., 1964, “A model of metropolis”, Memorandum RM-4035-RC (Rand Corporation, Santa Monica).
8.
MillsE. S., 1969, “The value of urban land”, in The Quality of the Urban Environment, Ed. PerloffH. (Resources for the Future Inc., Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore), pp.231–253.
9.
MillsE. S., 1970, “Urban density function”, Urban Studies, 7, 5–20.
10.
MuthR. F., 1968, “Urban residential land and housing markets”, in Issues in Urban Economics, Eds. PerloffH.WingoL. (Resources for the Future Inc., Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore), pp.285–330.
11.
MuthR. F., 1969, Cities and Housing (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).
12.
NevittA. A., 1970, “The nature of rent controlling legislation in the UK”, Environment and Planning, 2, 127–136.
13.
SwerdloffC. N.StowersJ. R., 1966, “A test of some first generation residential land use models”, Highway Research Record, 126 (Highway Research Board, Washington, D.C.), pp.38–59.
14.
TorresH., 1970, “Accessibility and residential location”, Centre for Land Use and Built Form Studies, Working Paper number 38, University of Cambridge.
15.
WilsonA. G., 1967, “A statistical theory of spatial distribution models”, Transportation Research, 1, 253–269.
