Download presentation

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Published byAndrea Sainsbury Modified about 1 year ago

1
A Conditionally Parametric Probit Model of Micro-Data Land Use in Chicago Daniel McMillen Maria Soppelsa

2
Overview Residential v. Commercial/Industrial Land Use in Chicago, 2010 A conditionally parametric (CPAR) approach produces smooth estimates over space Target points chosen using an adaptive decision tree approach (Loader, 1999) Interpolation from 182 target points to all 583,063 individual parcels in the data set

3
Estimation Procedures Case (1992). Special From for W McMillen (1992). EM Algorithm Pinkse and Slade (1998). GMM for spatial error model. LeSage (2000). Bayesian approach Klier and McMillen (2007). Linearized version of GMM probit/logit for spatial AR model.

4
GMM Probit

5
Linearized GMM Probit

6
CPAR Probit

7
Spatial AR v. LWR

8
Data Individual parcels in Chicago, 2010 Major Classes: 1.Vacant Land (33,139) 2.Residential, 6 units or fewer (728,541, 539,975 after geocoding) 3.Multi-Family Residential (11,529) 4.Non-Profit (316) 5.Commercial and Industrial (50,508, 43,088 after geocoding) 6.“Incentive Classes” (1,487)

9
Explanatory Variables Distance from parcel centroid to: 1.CBD 2.Lake Michigan 3.EL line 4.EL stop 5.Rail line 6.Major street 7.Park 8.Highway

10
Rogers Park

11
Descriptive Statistics VariableMeanStd. Dev.MinMax Residential Lot Distance from CBD Distance from Lake Michigan Distance from EL Line Distance from EL Stop Distance from Rail Line Distance from Major Street Distance from Park Distance from Highway

12
Probit Models, Probability Residential Standard ProbitCPAR Probit VariableCoef.Std. ErrorMeanStd. Dev. Intercept Distance from CBD Distance from Lake Michigan Distance from EL Line Distance from EL Stop Distance from Rail Line Distance from Major Street Distance from Park Distance from Highway Log-likelihood Pseudo-R

13
Probability of Residential Land Use: Standard Probit

14
Probability of Residential Land Use: CPAR Probit, 10% Window Size

15
Difference, CPAR Probability – Standard Probit Probability

16
Kernel Density Estimates for CPAR Coefficients

17
LWR Estimates of CPAR Coefficients

18
Marginal Probabilities

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26
Rogers Park

27
Rogers Park, n = 3,193 StandardGMMCPAR CoefStd. Err.CoefStd. Err.MeanStd. dev. Intercept CBD Lake Michigan EL Line EL Stop Rail Line Major Street Park Highway Metra Stop ρ pseudo-R

28
Correlations, Predicted Probabilities StandardGMMCPAR Standard GMM0.571 CPAR

29
Standard Probit Probabilities

30
CPAR Probit Probabilities

31

32
Standard Probit: Southwest

33
CPAR – Standard: Southwest

34
Standard Probit: Southeast

35
CPAR – Standard: Southeast

36
Standard Probit: Northwest

37
CPAR – Standard: Northwest

38
Standard Probit: Northeast

39
CPAR – Standard: Southeast

Similar presentations

© 2016 SlidePlayer.com Inc.

All rights reserved.

Ads by Google