Various land use models are now available, but a market-based model with sufficient spatial resolution and defensible behavioral foundations remains elusive. The model system developed in the study described here emphasized the interactions of individual market agents (on both the demand and the supply sides) and enjoyed behavioral foundations for each of the key actors at the level of parcels. Auction (or competition between market agents) was used to simulate price adjustment, and market-clearing prices were endogenously determined by iterative adjustment of the bidding prices for residential and commercial properties. A series of models for households, firms, and land developers and owners was estimated with actual data from Austin, Texas. The estimation results revealed tangible behavioral foundations for the evolution of urban land uses. The model forecasts demonstrated the strengths and limitations of this market simulation approach. Although equilibrium prices in forecast years were generally lower than those that were observed or expected, the spatial distributions of property values, new development, and individual agents were reasonable.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
MillerE. J., KrigerD. S., and HuntJ. D.TCRP Report 48: Integrated Urban Models for Simulation of Transit and Land Use Polices: Guidelines for Implementation and Use.TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1999.
2.
WaddellP.UrbanSim: Modeling Urban Development for Land Use, Transportation and Environmental Planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 68, No. 3, 2002, pp. 297–314.
3.
WaddellP., BorningA., NothM., FreierN., BeckeM., and UlfarssonG.Microsimulation of Urban Development and Location Choices: Design and Implementation of UrbanSim. Networks and Spatial Economics, Vol. 3, No. 1, 2003, pp. 43–67.
4.
WaddellP., and UlfarssonG. F.Introduction to Urban Simulation: Design and Development of Operational Models. In Handbook in Transport, Vol. 5. Transport Geography and Spatial Systems (HaynesK., StopherP., ButtonK., and HensherD., eds.), Pergamon Press, Oxford, United Kingdom, 2004.
5.
BorningA., WaddellP., and FörsterR.UrbanSim: Using Simulation to Inform Public Deliberation and Decision-Making. In Digital Government: Advanced Research and Case Studies (ChenH., BrandtL., DawesS., GreggV., HovyE., MacintoshA., TraunmüllerR., and LarsonC. A., eds.), Springer-Verlag, New York, 2007, pp. 439–463.
6.
MartínezF. J., and DonosoP.MUSSA: A Land Use Equilibrium Model with Location Externalities, Planning Regulations and Pricing Policies. Presented at 7th International Conference on Computers in Urban Planning and Urban Management, Honolulu, Hawaii, 2001.
7.
MartínezF. J., and DonosoP. P.MUSSA II: A Land Use Equilibrium Model Based on Constrained Idiosyncratic Behavior of All Agents in an Auction Market. Presented at 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2007.
8.
MartínezF. J., and HenriquezR.A Random Bidding and Supply Land Use Equilibrium Model. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 41, 2007, pp. 632–651.
9.
HuntJ. D., and AbrahamJ. E.Design and Application of the PECAS Land Use Modelling System. Presented at 8th Computers in Urban Planning and Urban Management Conference, Sendai, Japan, 2003.
HuntJ. D., AbrahamJ. E., De SilvaD., ZhongM., BridgesJ., and MyskoJ.Developing and Applying a Parcel-Level Simulation of Developer Actions in Baltimore. Presented at 87th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2008.
12.
ArrowK. J.Toward a Theory of Price Adjustment. In The Allocation of Economic Resources, Stanford University Press, Stanford, Calif., 1959.
13.
McAfeeR. P., and McMillanJ.Auctions and Bidding. Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 25, No. 2, 1987, pp. 699–738.
14.
MilgramP. R., and WeberR. J.A Theory of Auctions and Competitive Bidding. Econometrica, Vol. 50, No. 5, 1982, pp. 1089–1122.
15.
KlempererP.Auction Theory: A Guide to the Literature. Journal of Economic Surveys, Vol. 13, No. 3, 2002, pp. 227–286.
16.
AxelrodR., and TesfatsionL.A Guide for Newcomers to Agent-Based Modeling in the Social Sciences. In Handbook of Computational Economics, Vol. 2. Agent-Based Computational Economics (TesfatsionL., and JuddK. L., eds.), North-Holland, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2006.
17.
GrimmV., and RailsbackS. F.Individual-Based Modeling and Ecology.Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J., 2005.
MansonS. M.Agent-Based Dynamic Spatial Simulation of Land-Use/ Cover Change in the Yucatán Peninsula, Mexico. Presented at 4th International Conference on Integrating GIS and Environmental Modeling GIS/EM4, Banff, Alberta, Canada, 2000.
20.
BergerT.Agent-Based Spatial Models Applied to Agriculture: A Simulation Tool for Technology Diffusion, Resource Use Changes and Policy Analysis. Agricultural Economics, Vol. 25, 2001, pp. 245–260.
21.
BergerT., and RinglerC.Tradeoffs, Efficiency Gains and Technical Change: Modeling Water Management and Land Use Within a Multiple-Agent Framework. Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture, Vol. 41, 2002, pp. 119–144.
22.
LimK., DeadmanP. J., MoranE., BrondízioE., and McCrackenS.Agent-Based Simulations of Household Decision Making and Land Use Change near Altamira, Brazil. In Integrating Geographic Information Systems and Agent-Based Modeling: Techniques for Simulating Social and Ecological Processes (GimblettR., ed.), Santa Fe Institute Studies in the Sciences of Complexity Series, Oxford University Press, New York, 2002.
23.
ParkerD. C., and FilatovaT.A Conceptual Design for a Bilateral Agent-Based Land Market with Heterogeneous Economic Agents. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, Vol. 32, No. 6, 2008, pp. 454–463.
24.
AlexanderI.Office Location and Public Policy.Longman, London, 1979.
25.
Van WissenL. J. G.A Micro-Simulation Model of Firms: Applications of Concepts of Demography of the Firm. Papers in Regional Science, Vol. 79, 2000, pp. 111–134.
26.
ZhouB.Land Use Change Through Market Dynamics: A Microsimulation of Land Development, the Bidding Process, and Location Choices of Households and Firms. PhD dissertation. Department of Civil, Architectural, and Environmental Engineering, University of Texas at Austin, 2009.
27.
DubinJ. A., and McFaddenD. L.An Econometric Analysis of Residential Electric Appliance Holdings and Consumption. Econometrica, Vol. 52, No. 2, 1984, pp. 345–362.
28.
WalesT. J., and WoodlandA. D.Estimation of Consumer Demand Systems with Binding Non-Negativity Constraints. Journal of Econometrics, Vol. 21, No. 3, 1983, pp. 263–285.
29.
KimJ., AllenbyG. M., and RossiP. E.Modeling Consumer Demand for Variety. Marketing Science, Vol. 21, 2002, pp. 229–250.
30.
BhatC. R.A Multiple Discrete–Continuous Extreme Value Model: Formulation and Application to Discretionary Time-Use Decisions. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 39, No. 8, 2005, pp. 679–707.
31.
YeX., and PendyalaR. M.A Probit-Based Joint Discrete–Continuous Model System: Analyzing Relationship Between Timing and Duration of Maintenance Activities. Presented at 88th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2009.
32.
TrainK.Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation.Cambridge University Press, New York, 2003.
33.
ZhouB., and KockelmanK. M.Lessons Learned in Developing and Applying Land Use Model Systems: Parcel-Based Example. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2133, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2009, pp. 75–82.
