In this paper we demonstrate the use of a probit model to evaluate whether two classes of apparently similar/dissimilar zones with identical uses, that may be carried out with planning permissions, are in fact similar (and hence ‘inseparable’) or otherwise. Four empirical hypotheses about comprehensive development area, commercial/residential, and community-use zones in Hong Kong are tested by using nonaggregate planning application statistics of 793 observations. Acknowledgements. We wish to thank Professor Wing Suen of the School of Economics and Finance, The University of Hong Kong for his useful comments. We are also indebted to three anonymous referees who deserve our special thanks for their careful review and thoughtful suggestions. All faults are ours. This paper is partially sponsored by a CRCG grant (Number 10203311) of the University of Hong Kong.
BlissC I, 1935, “The calculation of the dosage–mortality curve”Annals of Applied Biology22134–167
3.
BourassaS C, 1995, “A housing model of tenure choice in Australia”Journal of Urban Economics37161–175
4.
BrothertonD I, 1982, “Development pressures and control in the national park 1966–1981”Town Planning Review53439–459
5.
BrothertonD I, 1984, “A response to McNamara and Healey”Town Planning Review5597–101
6.
BrothertonD I, 1992a, “On the quantity and quality of planning applications”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design19337–357
7.
BrothertonD I, 1992b, “On the control of development by planning authorities”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design19465–478
8.
BrothertonD I, 1993, “The interpretation of refusal and appeal rates”The Planner7924–25
9.
BurnJ H, 1930, “The errors of biololgical assay”Physiological Review10146–169
10.
ChanT S F, 1999, “Residential construction and credit market imperfection”Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics18125–139
11.
DobryG, 1977Review of Development Control System: Final Report (HMSO, London)
12.
FarrellM J, 1954, “The demand for motor cars in the United States”Journal of the Royal Statistical Association A117171–193
13.
FinneyD J, 1944, “The application of the probit method to toxicity test data adjusted for mortality in the control”Annals of Applied Biology3168–74
14.
FinneyD J, 1947, “The principles of biological assays”Journal of the Royal Statistical Association B946–91
15.
FinneyD J, 1977Probit Analysis (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
16.
GoodmanA C, 1988, “An econometric model of housing price, permanent income, tenure choice, and housing demand”Journal of Urban Economics23327–353
17.
HoriokaY, 1988, “Tenure choice and housing demand in Japan”Journal of Urban Economics24289–309
18.
HsuehL MChenH L, 1999, “An analysis of homeownership rate changes in Taiwan in the 1980s”Asian Economic Journal13367–388
19.
LaffertyR NFrechH EIII, 1978, “Community environment and the market value of single-family homes: the effects of the dispersion of land uses”Journal of Law and Economics21381–394
20.
LaiL W C, 1994, “The economics of land-use zoning: a literature review and analysis of the work of Coase”Town Planning Review6577–98
21.
LaiL W C, 1998, “The leasehold system as a means of planning by contract: the case of Hong Kong”Town Planning Review69249–275
22.
LaiL W CFongK, 2000Town Planning Practice: Context, Procedures and Statistics (Hong Kong University Press, Hong Kong)
23.
LaiL W CHoW K O, 2001, “Small is beautiful: a probit analysis of planning applications for small houses in Hong Kong”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design28611–622
24.
LarkhamP J, 1990, “Development control information and planning research”Local Government Studies161–17
25.
LeeL FTrostR P, 1978, “Estimation of some limited dependent variable models with application to housing demand”Journal of Econometrics8357–382
26.
McNamaraPHealeyP, 1984, “The limitations of development control data in planning research: a comment on Ian Brotherton's recent study”Town Planning Review5591–97
27.
MonkSWhiteheadC M E, 1996, “Land supply and housing: a case study”Housing Studies13201–224
28.
PainterG, 2000, “Tenure with sample selection: differences among alternative samples”Journal of Housing Economics9197–213
29.
PreeceR, 1990, “Development control studies: scientific method and policy analysis”Town Planning Review6159–74
30.
SellgrenJ, 1990, “Development-control data for planning research: the use of aggregated development-control records”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design1723–37
31.
StaleyS R, 2001, “Ballot-box zoning, transaction costs, and urban growth”Journal of the American Planning Association6725–37
32.
TheilH, 1971Principles of Econometrics (John Wiley, New York)
33.
TrevanJ W, 1927, “The error of determination of toxicity”Proceedings of the Royal Statistical Association101483–514
34.
WillisK G, 1995, “Judging development control decisions”Urban Studies321065–1079
