Zoning, first-best, second-best, and third-best criteria for allocating land for roads
Zoning, first-best, second-best, and third-best criteria for allocating land for roads
复制标题
分区、道路用地分配的第一最佳、第二最佳和第三最佳标准
DOI：
10.1016/0094-1190(85)90044-0
复制
发表时间：
1985
影响因子：
6.3
通讯作者：
E. Sadka
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
D. Pinés;E. Sadka
本文阐述了城市土地使用的成本效益标准，以及在计算中使用市场数据而不是真正的影子价格所造成的偏差。这种偏见在城市经济学文献中得到了广泛的讨论，特别是在索洛和维克里[7]和索洛[6]的研究中。已经取得了进展，特别是卡内莫托[3]、阿诺特和麦金农[2]、阿莫特[L]和松树和萨克卡151。然而，由于基本假设的不同，很难评估和比较这些著作中报告的一些看似相互矛盾的结果。本文的目的是用系统的论述重新阐述这些问题，区分不同的成本效益计算和政策制度，并对主要结果进行一些有益的扩展，从而简明扼要地得出主要结果。本文评估的成本效益标准涉及三种类型的决策：(A)将土地从农业用途转变为住宅用途；(B)将土地从农业用途转变为道路用途；(C)将土地从住宅用途转变为道路用途。
This paper elaborates on the cost-benefit criteria for land uses in an urban setting and on the bias which results from use of market data rather than true shadow prices in the calculation. This bias has been discussed extensively in the urban economics literature, especially in response to the studies of Solow and Vickrey [7] and Solow [6]. Progress has been made, especially by Kanemoto [3], Arnott and Mackinnon [2], Amott [l], and Pines and Saclka 151. However, because of the different underlying assumptions, it is difficult to evaluate and compare some of the seemingly conflicting results reported in these works. The purpose of this paper is to reformulate the issues using a systematic exposition, to distinguish among various cost-benefit calculations and policy regimes, and to derive concisely the main results with some useful extensions. The cost-benefit criteria evaluated in this paper refer to three types of decision making:(a) Converting land from agricultural to residential use;(b) converting land from agricultural to road use;(c) converting land from residential to road use.