Addressing Growth and Sprawl:
Review of Current
Research
Prepared for the:
National Public Policy Education Conference
September 21-24, 2003
Salt Lake City, Utah
Stephan J. Goetz, Ph.D.
Director, The Northeast Regional Center for Rural
Development and Professor of Agricultural and
Regional Economics, Penn State University
Presentation Outline
1.
2.
3.
Land Use Trends and Issues
Determinants (consumer choices)
Consequences (how do we draw attention to
the issues?)
4.
5.
Possible Solutions to Land Use
Problems
On-Going Research
The Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development
1.
Some Key Land Use Trends and
Issues…




Land on the urban fringe is cheaper, valued
highly by homebuyers (a private benefit)
Farmers sell land when the amount offered
exceeds profits from agriculture plus nonpecuniary benefits (this raises many questions)
Current residential development is widely
perceived to have negative public impacts
Major concern over irreversibility
The Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development
Developed Land: Top Ten States
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Acres of
Developed
Land in 1997
Texas
California
Florida
Pennsylvania
Georgia
North Carolina
Ohio
Michigan
New York
Illinois
Pct Non-Federal
Land that was
Developed Land
in 1997
New Jersey
Rhode Island
Massachusetts
Connecticut
Puerto Rico
Maryland
Delaware
Florida
Pennsylvania
Ohio
Total Acres of
Land Developed,
1992-97
Texas
Georgia
Florida
California
Pennsylvania
North Carolina
Tennessee
Ohio
Michigan
South Carolina
Source: Jill Schwartz, 2003, AFT
Another key land use trend…




Second or seasonal homes are an
increasingly important rural land use
In some areas long-time residents are
being driven out by newcomers, as local
property values escalate (gentrification)
Trend driven by baby boomers, who are
retiring into non-traditional areas?
Accelerating since 9/11 and stock
market retraction?
The Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development
The Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development
2.
Determinants or drivers of
current land use patterns…
• Household/population numbers, growing
incomes
• Changing tastes and preferences (open space)
• Societal trends (single-person households)
• Technological change
• Farm profitability, niche markets
• Urban decay
• Community planning (lack thereof)
• Federal, state and local laws; home rule
The Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development
Determinants of new home construction,
1990-2002
Population growth*
Falling HH size*
Direct sales/farm*
Income growth*
Farm profits
Gov. payments
Pop. Density*
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Bars show standardized estimates from a linear regression equation.
Northeast US counties only.
*Statistically different from zero
The Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development
3.
Consequences of current land
uses/lifestyle choices (hypotheses)





Growing traffic congestion
Population health
Environmental effects
Social and economic effects
Housing values
The Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development
3750
Mobility Data for Washington DC-MD-VA,
1982-2000
700
3700
600
3600
Population Density
Density
500
3550
400
3500
3450
300
3400
200
3350
Congestion Cost
3300
100
3250
3200
0
1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Congestion Cost per Capita
3650
Possible health consequences of
current land use patterns
• Increasing levels of pollution (EPA) –
suspended particles (soot)
• Growing incidence of asthma in small
children
• Atlanta Olympics – natural experiment
• Cancer risk rate map
• Growing incidence of obesity, diabetes
The Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development
Reduction in selected variables during the
1996 Olympics, Atlanta, GA, in percent
Traffic
reduction
-25
Peak ozone
levels
Asthma
emergencies
-50
-29
-43
-40
-30
Source: Friedman et al., 2001 (CDC/JAMA)
-20
-10
0
Impact of residential choice on
mode of transport of school
children
Percent of school age children walking
to school as a function of distance
between home and school
1 mile or less
1-2 miles
0
10
20
30
40
Impact of residential choice on
weight (obesity)

Residents of “most sprawling”
community weigh 6.3 lbs more than
residents of Manhattan, NY (the most
dense or least-sprawling place); Reid
Ewing
Economic impacts of agriculture
(as a type of land use)


Underestimated?
Source: The Northeast Center/E. Tavernier, 2002
State
Agriculture Sector Multipliers
EmployValue
ment
Output Added
CT
1.49
1.52
1.24
NJ
1.52
1.58
1.25
NY
1.57
1.99
1.33
PA
1.75
2.34
1.46
How land use affects housing
values

R. Ready and C. Abdalla, Berks
County,PA Study (funded by The
Northeast Center), June 2003
– Examines impacts of alternative land uses
on housing values (incl. open space)

Elena Irwin, Land Economics, Nov. 2002
– Permanent preservation of open space
yields a premium on home values
…but, is housing development
also economic development?
Do counties that issue building permits at faster rates
relative to the existing stock of homes also experience
faster per capita income growth over time?
The Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development
Per Capita Income Growth vs. Building Permit
Rate (1990-1999): All Northeast Counties
80%
New York, NY
Income Growth
70%
60%
50%
40%
Calvert, MD
30%
20%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Permit Rate
The Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development
Per Capita Income Growth vs. Building Permit
Rate: Suburbs (Non-Metro Adjacent Counties)
70%
St. Mary's, MD
Income Growth
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Permit Rate
The Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development
Per Capita Income Growth vs. Building Permit
Rate: Remote Rural Counties (non-metro nonadjacent)
70%
Potter, PA
Income Growth
60%
50%
Nantucket, MA
40%
30%
20%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Permit Rate
The Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development
4. Possible “solutions” to sprawl






Outlaw sprawl; enforce “smart growth”
Use European model of property rights
Raise gas taxes, stop new highway
construction
Eliminate home rule
Use incentive payments and/or regulations
Multi-functionality: Make green payments
…in practice, the first four options may not be feasible
The Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development
5.
On-Going Research




Determinants of new home
construction (nation-wide)
Second home locations and their
impacts
Trade, land use and the environment
workshop (2004)
The future viability of agriculture

What are Society’s Objectives for How
Land is Used?
– Protect acres of farmland, food supply?
– Protect farm families?
– Provide rural employment?
– Provide environmental benefits, scenic vistas?
– Maintain/improve health of the population?
– Encourage/support home ownership?
Confusion abounds with regard
to … what, where, and how to
save or to use land resources.
Paul W. Barkley


What are homebuyers’ residential
preferences and how do they
compare with actual residential
choices available?
What is driving suburbanization?
– Search for better schools?
– Desire for green space?
– Low-maintenance, newer, bigger homes?
– Urban decay, crime, poverty?
– Desire to drive more (SUVs)?


What are the full benefits and
costs of alternative patterns of
development? Who benefits, who
loses from land preservation
programs?
Which public policy objectives can
be met by different portfolios of
land use policies?
Summary
Determinants
of Land Use
Households
Preferences
Incomes
Numbers
Technological
change
Niche markets
Farm profitability
Economic vitality
Urban decay
Federal subsidies
Institutions/laws
Geography
Other
Benefits and Costs of Alternative Patterns of Development
Pattern of
Development
Fiscal
Impacts
1
Environmental
Consequences
(air, land, water)
Ecosystem
Impacts
2
3
4
Changing
Land Use
Traffic
Patterns/
Congestion
6
Health
Impacts
Social
Impacts
7
8
9
Economic
Impacts (consumer
well-being)
Data sets
Determinants and Impacts of Alternative Land Uses
The Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development
Other Resources from The
Northeast Center

Land Use Annual Research Workshop
Proceedings
– 2001: Orlando, Fl
– 2002: Camp Hill, PA
– 2003: Manchester, NH

Special Issue of Agricultural and
Resource Economics Review (April 2003)