Presentation on theme: "LAND USE ECONOMICS : Land Rents, Accessibility and Urban Form."— Presentation transcript:
LAND USE ECONOMICS : Land Rents, Accessibility and Urban Form
.EKONOMI LAHAN Sumber: ……………….. 2/3/2013. In economics, land comprises all naturally occurring resources whose supply is inherently fixed. Examples are any and all particular geographical locations, mineral deposits, and even geostationary orbit locations and portions of the electromagnetic spectrum. Natural resources are fundamental to the production of all goods, including capital goods. Location values must not be confused with values imparted by fixed capital improvements. In classical economics, land is considered one of the three factors of production (along with capital, and labor). In some cases, land may be merged with capital due to the relatively small importance that land has in industrial and service sectors. Income derived from ownership or control of natural resources is referred to as rent. Land was sometimes defined in classical and neoclassical economics as the "original and indestructible powers of the soil. Georgists hold that this implies a perfectly inelastic supply curve (i.e., zero elasticity), suggesting that a land value tax that recovers the rent of land for public purposes would not affect the opportunity cost of using land, but would instead only decrease the value of owning it. This view is supported by evidence that although land can come on and off the market, market inventories of land show if anything an inverse relationship to price (i.e., negative elasticity). As a tangible asset land is represented in accounting as a fixed asset or a capital asset.
LAHAN: FAKTOR PRODUKSI Sumber: 2/3/2013 In economics, factors of production are the inputs to the production process. Finished goods are the output. Input determines the quantity of output i.e. output depends upon input. Input is the starting point and output is the end point of production process and such input-output relationship is called a production function. All factors of production like land, labor, capital and technology are required in combination at a time to produce a commodity. In economics, production means creation or an addition of utility. Factors of production (or productive 'inputs' or 'resources') are any commodities or services used to produce goods or services 'Factors of production' may also refer specifically to the 'primary factors', which are stocks including land, labor (the ability to work), and capital goods applied to production. Materials and energy are considered secondary factors in classical economics because they are obtained from land, labor and capital. The primary factors facilitate production but neither become part of the product (as with raw materials) nor become significantly transformed by the production process (as with fuel used to power machinery). 'Land' includes not only the site of production but natural resources above or below the soil. The factor land may, however, for simplification purposes be merged with capital in some cases (due to land being of little importance in the service sector and manufacturing).
RENTE EKONOMI = SEWA EKONOMI Sumber: 2/3/2013 In economics, Economic rent typically describes the difference between the amount paid for the inputs to a production process and the amount that would be paid for those inputs assuming a unitary (or greater) elasticity of supply. Economic rent (which in production analysis is always seen as a cost of inputs) is affected by any production only minimally, if at all. Economic rent is a fact of natural or contrived exclusivity. For labor, economic rent could be created by the existence of guilds or labor unions (e.g. higher pay for workers, where political action creates a scarcity of such workers); for a produced commodity, economic rent may also be due to the legal ownership of a patent (a politically enforced right to the use of a process or ingredient); for operating licenses, it is the cost of permits and licenses that are politically controlled as to their number of licenses regardless of competence and willingness of those who wish to compete in the area being licensed; for most other production including agriculture, economic rent is due to natural scarcity. When economic rent is privatized, the recipient of economic rent is referred to as a rentier.
Rente LAHAN Sumber: 2/3/2013 In political economy including physiocracy, classical economics, and other schools of economic thought excepting neoclassical economics, land is recognized as an inelastic factor of production. Rent is the distribution paid to freeholders for "allowing" production on the land they control. "As soon as the land of any country has all become private property, the landlords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed, and demand a rent even for its natural produce. The wood of the forest, the grass of the field, and all the natural fruits of the earth, which, when land was in common, cost the labourer only the trouble of gathering them, come, even to him, to have an additional price fixed upon them. He must then pay for the licence to gather them; and must give up to the landlord a portion of what his labour either collects or produces. This portion, or, what comes to the same thing, the price of this portion, constitutes the rent of land...." — Adam Smith: The Wealth of Nations
Rente LAHAN Sumber: 2/3/2013 David Ricardo is credited with the first clear and comprehensive analysis of differential land rent and the associated economic relationships (Law of Rent). Johann Heinrich von Thünen was especially influential in developing the spatial analysis of rents, which highlighted the importance of centrality and transport. Simply put, it was density of population increasing the profitability of commerce and providing for the division and specialization of labor that commanded higher municipal rents. And the high rents determined that land in a central city would not be allocated to farming, but would be allocated instead to more profitable residential or commercial uses. Observing that a tax on the unearned rent of land would not distort economic activities, Henry George proposed that publicly collected land rents (land value taxation) should be the primary (or only) source of public revenue; though he also advocated public ownership, taxation and regulation of natural monopolies and monopolies of scale that cannot be eliminated by regulation.
RENTE LAHAN Terminology relating to rent Gross rent Gross rent refers to the rent paid for the services of land and the capital invested on it. It consists of economic rent, interest on capital invested for improvement of land and reward for risk taken by the landlord in investing his capital. Scarcity rent Scarcity rent refers to the price paid for the use of the homogeneous land when its supply is limited in relation to demand. If all units of land are homogeneous, but demand exceeds supply, the entire land will earn economic rent by virtue of its scarcity. Differential rent Differential rent refers to that rent, which arises owing to differences in fertility of land. The surplus that arises due to difference between the marginal and intra-marginal land is the differential rent. It is accrued generally under extensive cultivation of land. The term was first stated by David Ricardo. Contract rent Contract rent refers to that rent which is mutually agreed upon between the land-owner and the user. It may be equal to the economic rent of the factor. Sumber: 2/3/2013
LAND RENT THEORY & RENT CURVE Sumber: 2/3/2013 Three concepts are at the core of the land rent theory: 1.Rent. A surplus (profit) resulting from some advantage such as capitalization and accessibility. The rent is the highest for retail because this activity is closely related to accessibility. 2.Rent gradient. A representation of the decline in rent with distance from a center. This gradient is related to the marginal cost of distance for each activity, which is how distance influences its bidding rent. The friction of distance has an important impact on the rent gradient because with no friction all locations would be perfect locations. Retailing is the activity having the highest marginal cost, while single family housing have the lowest marginal cost. 3.Bid rent curve function. A set of combinations of land prices and distances among which the individual (or firm) is indifferent. It describes prices that the household (firm) would be willing to pay at varying locations in order to achieve a given level of satisfaction (utility/ profits). The activity having the highest bid rent at one point is theoretically the activity that will occupy this location.
EKONOMI LAHAN Sumber: 2/3/2013 Approaches for Determining a Rental Rate Determining a fair rate is not easy. Cash rents are likely to be too low during periods of rising prices and high yields and too high during periods of declining prices and low yields. Rates often reflect the results of the past few years more than the upcoming year. 1.Estimating a cash rental rate for cropland can be based on: 2.what others are charging/paying 3.average yields 4.corn suitability ratings (CSR index) 5.share of gross crop value 6.return on investment 7.crop share equivalent 8.tenant’s residual. Renting, also known as hiring, is an agreement where a payment is made for the temporary use of a good, service or property owned by another.
Mengapa ada KOTA ? Mengapa sebaran penduduk tidak merata secara spatial ke seluruh lanskap? 1.Comparative advantage = Keunggulan komparatif 2.Sekala ekonomi internal 3.Aglomerasi ekonomi Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Keunggulan komparatif = Comparative advantage (CA) 1.Based not on absolute advantage but on opportunity cost (OC) 2.Wheat and wool example: west can make 6 cloth or 2 wheat in one hour; east can only make 1 of each in one hour. West has CA in cloth, east in wheat, because for west OC of cloth is 1/3 wheat unit, while OC of east for wheat is 1 cloth, which is better than 3 for west 3.CA leads to trade in this case based on OC 4.Trade is beneficial only if offsets transpo costs Output per labor hourOC of Production EastWestEastWest Wheat121 C3 C Cloth161 W1/3 W Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Keunggulan Komparatif dan Sekala Ekonomi dalam Transportasi 1.Scale econ in transpo means trans cost is not independent of volume shipped; cost per unit mile dec. with volume 2.Otherwise producers/consumers would engage only in direct trade 3.Cities develop if scale economies in transpo 4.Then makes sense for trading firms to operate as intermediaries, locating at central places for collection and distribution of goods 5.Leads to development of market cities 6.Occurs when: ag productivity is high enough to generate surplus, CA is large enough to offset transpo costs and scale economies in transpo Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Sekala Ekonomi Internal dalam Produksi As volume increases, productivity per laborer increases Arise because of: –Factor specialization: worker skill increases with repetition and spend less time switching between tasks –Indivisible inputs: when certain prod input has minimum indivisible scale; i.e. certain input facilities/equipment can’t be scaled down Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Area pasar karena sekala ekonomi 1.Defined as area where factory can underprice home production 2.Workers live near factory and bid up land price, causing higher density travel cost Factory cost Miles from factory (radius) Net cost Cost of homemade product Market area Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Aglomerasi Ekonomi dalam produksi (AEP) Why do most cities have more than one factory/production facility? AEP: positive externalities allow firms to produce at lower cost per unit because of –Localization economies –Urbanization economies Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
AEP: Lokalisasi ekonomi When production costs of firm in a certain industry decrease as total industry output increases. Due to: 1.Scale economies in intermediate inputs 2.Labor market pooling 3.Knowledge spillovers Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics Foto :smno.caruban.htjati.des2012
Lokalisasi ekonomi: Sekala ekonomi untuk input intermedier Firms often cluster because they share inputs from the same supplier if: –Input D of firm is not large enough to leverage the scale economies in input production alone –Transportation costs are relatively high; this is not only because it is costly to transport input but also design/specification of input requires frequent fact to face contact: Manhattan dressmaking and button makers—requires face to face because designs must be adaptable and producers must supervise input specifications Corporate headquarters and advertising/marketing firm: need lots of interaction; needs constantly changing High-tech firm: needs to locate near its suppliers of non-standard parts; interaction in testing and design of parts Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Lokalisasi ekonomi : Sekala ekonomi untuk input intermedier 1.Business firms often need many services (finance, banking, design, insurance, legal, etc.) so big business clusters develop to exploit scale economies provided by them 2.Public services also important: areas with good transportation infratructure, services, schools, will attract these clusters of firms Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Lokalisasi ekonomi: Labor market pooling 1.Clustering increases labor efficiency 2.Facilitates transfer of workers between firms in dynamic industries 3.Many industries have high mobility between firms, e.g. entertainment 4.Leads to more stable wage pool, which means wages can be lower in general 5.Labor pooling is net benefit to firms if wage at isolated site is variable (for good and bad economic times) and wage at cluster is average of those two wages; cluster firm can staff up or downsize more easily than isolated firm Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Lokalisasi ekonomi: knowledge spillovers 1.Rapid exchange of information /technology in cluster 2.Based partly on the shared pool of workers 3.Leads to many innovation “corridors” Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics Foto :smno.Malang.Veteran.Febr2013
Teori Siklus Produk 1.Incubator process: Often firms cluster when they are in earlier stage of development because production techniques unsettled 2.As production becomes standardized, often move to lower density areas where land and labor costs are lower Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
AEP: Ekonomi Urbanisasi 1.Production cost of a firm declines as total output of urban area increases 2.Occurs for same reasons as localization economies 3.Different from localization economies in: 1.Result from scale of entire urban economy 2.Generate benefits for all firms in city, not just in single industry 4.Rather than being in one industry, benefits cut across industries 5.More empirical evidence for localization economies than for urbanization, although Mills points to different results Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Teknologi dan Kota Telecom technology may reduce some advantages from agglomeration economies However, evidence suggests it is more complement than substitute—actually generates more demand for face to face contact and travel, partly because allows for greater specialization in design/production Business travel actually increase 50% from 1985 to 1995 Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics Foto :smno.nganjuk.Febr2013
Retail: Ekonomi Aglomeratif dalam pemasaran Shopping externalities occurs when sales of one store are affected by location of others in same product line The clustering of similar shops causes sales for all to be higher Two types of products lead to this: –Imperfect substitutes –Complementary goods Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Substitusi tidak sempurna Same product type, but subtle differences between product lines; clustering reduces shopping costs by facilitating comparison shopping, attracting more consumers Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics Substitusi tegakan jati dengan non-jati
BARANG KOMPLEMENTER 1.Items that complement each other and can be purchased on same trip 2.E.g. new TV and new TV cabinet Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics Foto :smno.malang.pasarminggu.Febr2013
Sewa Lahan vs. Nilai Pasar 1.Market value: the present value of the stream of rental income generated by land 2.Rental Income: the amount the landowner charges to use land; equal to income from land minus costs Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics Foto :smno.madiun.Febr2013
Apakah Nilai Kini (Present Value)? 1.It is the maximum amount an investor would be willing to pay for something, given that the investor could safely make i percent returns on an alternative investment (for instance, a savings account, or T-bills). 2.It equals, the stream of income, discounted over time Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Bagaimana PV di-diskonto ? 1.PV takes into account the fact that a dollar earned 5 years from now if worth less to us now than a dollar earned today 2.This is because income put off until later has opportunity cost associated with it. 3.A dollar invested in five years is worth less than a dollar invested today 4.PV takes into account lost opportunity from that alternative investment Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Bagaimana menghitung PV? For $20 yearly stream for 5 years at 10% PV= $20 +$ $ $ $13.70 = $83.45 For a constant stream of income into infinity, rule simplifies to PV= R/i = $20/.1= $200 Non-constant income example: PV= $20 + $24/1.1 + $29/ $34/1.33…etc. Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Nilai-Pasar bagi Lahan 1.Equals PV of annual maximum rental payments that the landowner can charge 2.For market value to equal PV: given yearly income R and alternative ROR of i, investor is indifferent between buying the land and investing that money elsewhere 3.From here out we talk of land rent in place of price, and assume users of land pay rent Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Seewa Lahan & Produktivitas Value of land, and hence land rent derives from productivity Earliest model of productivity comes from Ricardo (1821) who looked at land fertility Assumptions: fixed inputs/output prices (price takers), zero profit, 3 levels of fertility, land to highest bidder, location (transpo costs) can be ignored, owners are not farmers Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
MODEL RICARDO 1.On fertile land, a farmer can produce same amount of corn with fewer inputs 2.The price of this type of land is bid up 3.All profit accrues to the landowner in the form of rents 4.Payment to farmer is considered a cost Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
ATC MC Profit=rent>> to landowner ATC MC Profit=rent>> to landowner ATC MC $10 Q=amt of corn $ “A” land“B” land“C” land “A” land has lowest production costs= highest rents “C” land’s rent is 0 because costs are greater than revenue Price determined exogenously by supply and demand in market $8 $4 Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics MODEL RICARDO
1.Competition among farmers for good land bids up rents on that land until economic profits* =0 for farmer. All profits on land go to owner. 2.Economic profits: greater than “normal” profits required to pay for time of those doing the work 3.Rent for A land= TR-TC= $2200-$880=$1320 Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics MODEL RICARDO Foto :smno.malang.klandungan.juli2012
Prinsip “Leftover” In equilibrium, Rent= profits, or revenue over total nonland costs Rent eats up whatever is “left over” because competition for land bids away any excess That is, competition among farmers for land bids away excess profits until they are zero and landowner gets all surplus value Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Perkecualian dari Prinsip “leftover” If there is restrictions on entry or on competition –E.g. if farmer (non-owners) owns patent to farming techniques that reduce costs, landlord cannot charge additional rents reflecting those additional profits because noone else would be willing to pay such high rents Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Siapa mendapat manfaat dari “pembangunan”? 1.Contoh : Proyek Irigasi Pertanian 2.If price of corn is fixed (exogenous) the landlord benefits because competition among farmers for land will bid away profit 3.Pemenang: Pemilik lahan; “loser”: Petani 4.However, if the project affects the price of corn (price is endogenous), consumers gain with lower prices, while farmer pre rent profits are reduced, lowering land rents 5.Pemenang: Konsumen; “loser”: Pemilik Lahan Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Sekala Pembangunan 1.Who benefits is determined by scale of improvement 2.Smaller the area, the more the benefit goes to landowner; larger the area, more goes to consumers because of price endogeneity 3.Benefits from any improvement are capitalized into the value of land; a positive capitalization increases rents, which increases market value 4.Negative factors can be capitalized too Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
AKSESIBILITAS = Accessibility 1.Now replace fertility of land with location as the prime determinant of land value--Von Thunen model (1826) 2.No longer assume that transportation is costless 3.This model explains why more “central” locations command higher rents and have higher market values than fringe areas Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics Foto :smno.rumahkampus.Febr2013
TEORI BID-RENT (Tawaran Sewa) Sumber: ………. 2/3/2013 Bid Rent Theory says that the closer a property is to the center of the district, the more desireable it is. The further out a piece of land is, the smaller its value. The amount that the competing land users are willing to pay for these properties is called the bid rent. In agriculture, bid rent is the monetary return a farmer can receive for growing a particular crop on a unit of land after all costs of production (including transportation to the market) are taken into account. Crops with the highest production costs will be nearest to the market place. Those with low production costs will be farther away.
TEORI BID-RENT Sumber: ………. 2/3/2013 The bid rent theory is a geographical economic theory that refers to how the price and demand for real estate changes as the distance from the Central Business District (CBD) increases. It states that different land users will compete with one another for land close to the city center. This is based upon the idea that retail establishments wish to maximize their profitability, so they are much more willing to pay more money for land close to the CBD and less for land further away from this area. This theory is based upon the reasoning that the more accessible an area (i.e., the greater the concentration of customers), the more profitable.
TEORI BID-RENT Sumber: ………. 2/3/2013 Bid rent curve CBD= PUSAT KOTA
TEORI BID-RENT Sumber: ………. 2/3/2013 Agricultural analogy Though later used in the context of urban analysis, though not yet using this term, the bid rent theory was first developed in an agricultural context. One of the first theoreticians of bid rent effects was probably David Ricardo, according to whom the rent on the most productive land is based on its advantage over the least productive, the competition among farmers ensuring that the full advantages go to the landlords in the form of rent. Later, this theory was developed by J. H. von Thünen who combined it with the notion of transport costs. His model implies that rent at any location is equal to the value of its product minus production costs and transport costs. Admitting that transportation costs are constant for all activities, this will lead to a situation where activities with the highest production costs are located near to the market place. Those with low production costs will be farther away. David RicardoJ. H. von Thünen The concentric land-use structure thus generated closely resembles the urban model described above: CBD - high residential - low residential. This model, introduced by William Alonso, was inspired by von Thünen's model.William Alonso
Bid rent theory in the Central Business District (CBD) Sumber: 2/3/2013 Land users, whether they be retail; office; or residential, all compete for the most accessible land within the CBD. The amount they are willing to pay is called bid rent. This can generally be shown in a ‘bid rent curve’. Based upon the reasoning that the more accessible the land, generally in the centre, is the more expensive land. Commerce (in particular large department stores/chain stores) is willing to pay the greatest rent to be located in the inner core. The inner core is very valuable for them because it is traditionally the most accessible location for a large population. This large population is essential for department stores, which require a considerable turnover. As a result, they are willing and able to pay a very high land rent value. They maximise the potential of their site by building many stories. As one goes farther from the inner core, the amount commerce is willing to pay declines rapidly.
Sumber: ………. 2/3/2013 Industry, however, is willing to pay to be in the outer core. There is more land available for their factories, but they still have many of the benefits of the inner core, such as a market place and good communications. As one goes farther out, the land becomes less attractive to industry because of the reducing communication links and a decreasing market place. Because householders do not rely heavily on these and can now afford the reduced costs (when compared with the inner and outer core),they can purchase land. The further from the inner core and, the cheaper the land. This is why inner city areas are very densely populated (terraces, flats and high rises), whilst the suburbs and rural areas are sparsely populated (semi and detached houses with gardens). Bid rent theory in the Central Business District (CBD)
ECONOMICS OF LANDUSE Sumber: ………. 2/3/2013 Every human activity requires some elbowroom. The qualities of land include, in addition, such attributes as the topographic, structural, agricultural, and mineral properties of the site; the climate; the availability of clean air and water; and finally, a host of immediate environmental characteristics such as quiet, privacy, aesthetic appearance, and so on. All these things—plus the availability of such local inputs as labor supply and community services, the availability of transferable inputs, and the accessibility of markets—enter into the judgment of what a particular site is worth for any specific use.
ECONOMICS OF LANDUSE Sumber: ………. 2/3/2013 COMPETITION FOR THE USE OF LAND Most land can be utilized by any of several activities. Even an uninhabitable and impassable swamp may have to be allocated between the competing claims of those who want to drain or fill it and those who want to preserve it as a wetland wildlife sanctuary. The normal multiplicity of possible uses means that in considering spatial patterns of land use, we can no longer think in terms of the individual location unit or of one specific activity but must move up to another level of analysis: that of the multiactivity area or region. Competition for land plays an important locational role in areas where activities tend to concentrate for any reason. Locations having good soil, climate, and access to other areas, and areas suitable for agglomeration under the influence of local external economies are in demand. The price of land, which is our best measure of the intensity of demand and competition for land, varies with quality and access, and rises abruptly to high peaks in the urban areas. Anything we can discover about the locational role of land-use competition, then, has particular relevance to the urban and intraurban problems that have become so important in recent years.
ECONOMICS OF LANDUSE Sumber: ………. 2/3/2013 COMPETITION FOR THE USE OF LAND In order to understand the way in which land is allocated to various activities, we shall first ask what determines how strong a bid any particular activity can make for the use of land—that is, the maximum rent per acre that that activity could pay for land in various locations. In a society that uses prices, costs, and profits as a principal mechanism for allocating resources, this line of inquiry will help explain actual location patterns. It will also provide a rough guide as to which location patterns represent an efficient allocation of resources from the standpoint of the economy as a whole.
ECONOMICS OF LANDUSE Sumber: ………. 2/3/2013 RENT AND LAND VALUE Our discussion of rents and competition for land has placed almost exclusive emphasis on the location of a site (relative to markets and sources of inputs) as an index of its value. Location has determined how much rent any particular activity can afford to pay for the use of a site; the purchase price has been explained as simply the capitalized value of the expected stream of future rents. At this point we need to recognize some significant complications that have until now been ignored.
ECONOMICS OF LANDUSE Sumber: ………. 2/3/2013 Speculative Value of Land The expected future returns on a parcel of land may sometimes be quite different from current returns, particularly in locations where radical changes of use are taking place or expected. This is generally true around the fringes of urban areas, where the change involves conversion from farm to urban uses. The price that anyone will pay for the current use of the land may be quite low in relation to the speculative value based on a capitalization of expected returns in a new use. This point is illustrated in the results of a study of agricultural land near the city of Louisville, Kentucky, well over half a century ago. It will be observed that in the zones farther than 8 or 9 miles from the city, the current annual rent was consistently about 5 percent of the average value of the land. In other words, the value was approximately 20 years’ rent at the current rate. Closer to the city, the land was worth, on the average, well over 26 times the current annual rent; the capitalization rate was only 3.8 percent. This obviously reflected the expectation that returns on the nearby land would rise as the urbanized area spread.
ECONOMICS OF LANDUSE Sumber: ………. 2/3/2013 Improvements on Land A further complication is that land is ordinarily priced, sold, and taxed in combination with whatever buildings and other "improvements" have been erected on it, since such structures are usually durable and difficult (if not impossible) to move. On urban land, improvements may account for a major part of the value of the parcel of real estate; and in all cases it is probably difficult to estimate just how much of the price represents the value of space per se, or "site value." Sometimes the "improvements" have a negative value: In other words, the land would be more desirable if it were cleared of its obsolete structures.
ECONOMICS OF LANDUSE Sumber: ………. 2/3/2013 RESIDENTIAL LOCATION The analysis of land use developed in this chapter views economic activities as differing in the value that they place on access to some central location. As indicated earlier, households are a major land-using activity, and they too are characterized by significant access linkages. Because of this, some of the principles developed thus far concerning land-use decisions are applicable to residential location decisions. One of the first and most widely recognized efforts to explain residential location behavior is that of William Alonso. 15 Alonso applies the concept of bid rent in order to isolate factors that contribute to the household’s willingness to pay for access to the central business district (CBD) of an urban area. Bid rents have been defined as the maximum rent that could be paid for an acre of land at a given distance from the market center, if the activity in question is to make normal profits. Here, however, we want to analyze residential location behavior, so the concept of profits is no longer relevant to the decision-making process. 15 Instead, Alonso recognizes that households make choices among alternative locations based on the utility or satisfaction that they expect to realize. Consequently, the bid rent of a household is defined as the maximum rent that can be paid for a unit of land (e.g., per acre or per square foot) some distance from the city center, if the household is to maintain a given level of utility.
ECONOMICS OF LANDUSE Sumber: ………. 2/3/2013 The figure presents several bid rent curves labeled u 1, u 2, and u 3 for one household. Each of these curves plots the relationship between rent bids and distance from the CBD associated with a different level of utility. These curves have several important characteristics. First, they are negatively inclined. As developed earlier in this chapter, the rent gradient of a particular activity plots out decreasing rent bids as distance from the market increases because of transfer costs. Household rent bids are similarly affected by transfer considerations. An individual facing a daily commute to the CBD for work or shopping, or both, must pay lower rents in order to offset the associated transfer costs of a longer trip, if utility is to be held constant. Second, lower bid rent curves are associated with greater utility. Assuming that the household’s budget is fixed, at any given distance from the CBD, if a lower rent bid is accepted, more other goods can be consumed. Therefore, utility will increase. Finally, bid rent curves are single valued. This means that for a given distance from the CBD only one rent bid is associated with each level of utility. By implication, we may state that bid rent curves cannot intersect; otherwise they could not be single valued.
ECONOMICS OF LANDUSE Sumber: 2/3/2013 Production of land may be use for "farming", residential, industrial or commercial occupancy. Best and highest "use" refers to the production which gets the highest bids from all non-coerced bidders, while the seller is not coerced to sell.
ECONOMICS OF LANDUSE Sumber: 2/3/2013 A Basic Sequence of Rural Land Uses In von Thünen’s schematic model, he assumed that the land was a uniform flat plain (not too unrealistic for the part of the world where he farmed), equally traversable in all directions. Consequently, the various land uses could be expected to occupy a series of concentric ring-shaped zones surrounding the market town, and the essential question was the most economical ordering of the zones.
ECONOMICS OF LANDUSE Sumber: 2/3/2013 A bid-rent curve is a graph of the variations in land rents payable by different users with distance from some point in the market, usually the CBD. Since transport costs rise with distance from the market, rents generally tend to fall correspondingly, but different forms of land use (retail, service, industrial, housing, or agricultural) generate different bid-rent curves.
ECONOMICS OF LANDUSE Sumber: theories………. 2/3/2013 Bid-rent theory In order to have a good understanding of the way urban areas are likely to grow, it is important to have an understanding of Bid- rent theory. The diagram shows what various land-users are prepared and able to pay for good access to the CBD:
ECONOMICS OF LANDUSE Sumber: ………. 2/3/2013 Bid-rent theory It can be seen that commerce (in particular large department stores/chain stores) is willing to pay the greatest rent to be located in the CBD. The CBD is very valuable for them because it is traditionally the most accessible location for a large population. This large population is essential for department stores, which require a considerable turnover. As a result, they are willing and able to pay a very high land rent value. They maximise the potential of their site by building many stories. As you move from the CBD, commerce is unwilling to pay as much for a site. In fact, what they are willing to pay declines rapidly. Industry is, however, willing to pay to be on the outskirts of the CBD. There is more land available for their factories, but they still have many of the benefits of the CBD, such as a market place and good communications. As you move further out, so the land is less attractive to industry and the householder is able to purchase land. The further you go from the CBD, the cheaper the land. This is why inner city areas are very densely populated (terraces, flats and high rises), whilst the suburbs and rural areas are sparsely populated (semi and detached houses with gardens).
ECONOMICS OF LANDUSE Sumber: 2/3/2013 Land Use Pattern Models : Concentric Ring Model - Bid Rent model
PETANI WORTEL Assume: land is equally fertile, profits are zero, there is one central market, p is fixed and farmers use fixed factor production Cost is now fn of distance –Transport Cost= cost/ton/mile*dist*Q –Profit= P*Q-PC-TC-Rent = 0 –Rent= P*Q-PC-TC Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Carrot Farmer’s bid rent function Bid rent/acre $50 $300 CloseDistance to marketFar Total Cost Land rents Total revenue per acre (P*Q; Q/acre does not vary) $190 $110 $250 Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
KEPUTUSAN PETANI PEPAYA 1.Now, market- proximate land replaces fertile land as the most valuable type 2.However, competition for close land bids away surplus profit so, assuming farmers are identical, they are indifferent among all locations, as long as total revenue exceeds total cost Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics Foto :smno.kediri.plemahan.febr2013
Petani dan Faktor Substitusi 1.What if farmers can be different? Then the bid-rent function becomes convex. 2.Under linear function, fixed amount of land and non- land inputs, no matter where 3.Under convex function, farmers engage in factor substitution: they increase non-land inputs (equipment, labor, technology) as land gets more central and expensive Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Bid Rent fn for both farmers Bid rent for flexible farmer Bid rent for fixed-factor farmer Rent/ acre Distance to market U* Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Bid rent of flexible farmer 1.Flexible farmer will outbid the inflexible farmer in all locations but u 2.That is, land will be used more intensively and, hence, more efficiently at central locations, and non- land inputs will be fewer far away 3.With inflexible farmers, land is used more inefficiently 4.Rents will still equal profits of highest bidder Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Two competing land uses Different land uses (e.g. SPAM factory and grain farm) may have different bid rent functions. The shapes of those functions will determine who will locate where Steepness of fn determined per unit transport costs relative to per unit price As usual, land goes to highest bidder Market allocates land efficiently to usage with the most to gain from being close to the market Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Determinants of bid rent slope 1.Per acre transportation costs. The more weight you produce/acre, the more transport will cost per acre cultivated. E.g. potatoes vs. cotton 2.Unit transport costs. The more a given unit weight costs to ship, the higher the transport costs. E.g. eggs vs. turnips Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics Foto :smno.kediri.plemahan.febr2013
Bid Rent fn for both farmers Rent/ acre U’ Heavy good Light good U’= where heavy use transitions to light use Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Bid Rent of Firms in the CBD Profit is: – = PQ-NC-TC(d)-R(d) –Profit= price*quantity – nonland costs- transport costs (function of distance) – rents (function of distance); –TC(d)= cost/ton/mile* distance*quantity –Then R(d)= PQ-NC-TC(d) Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Freight Costs and Rents 1.Freight costs decrease with proximity to city center 2.Through leftover principle, rents increase as transport costs decrease 3.Hence, there will be a downward sloping bid rent function; it will be linear for fixed factor producers and convex for flexible producers Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics Foto :smno.malang.sutta.Febr2013
Flexible versus fixed producers Fixed: R(d)= P*Q-NC-TC(d) Flexible: = P*Q-NC-TC(d)-R(d)*L(d), Where L(d) is amount of land used at distance d; this results in rent function: R(d)= (P*Q-NC-TC(d))/L(d) Flexible farmer substitutes nonland for land input: spends more on equipment and labor as land gets more expensive Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Flexible versus fixed producers Flexible produce = factor substitution = lower costs* = higher profits By leftover principle, higher profits= higher bid rents Close to city center, land costs are lower; at periphery, freight costs are lower Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Monocentric city firms’ bid rent function Distance from export hub Bid Rent Fixed-factor producer flexible producer A B The flexible firm outbids the fixed factor firm everywhere but point u’’. At u’, the fixed factor producer uses too much land u’ u’’ Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Nonland versus land inputs for the Flexible producer Land Amount Non- land inputs flexible producer A B Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Most central firm type: offices 1.Office firms: require 1) lots of meetings and face to face contact, 2)ability to gather, process and distribute information quickly and 3)access to services, like printing, lawyers, designers, accountants, etc. 2.This type of firm will have a steep bid rent function because the travel cost of individuals is very high; travel cost is high because their pay rate is high, since it is generally skilled work Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics Foto :smno.malang.kota.febr2012
Land use in CBD 1.All firms are attracted to center, but only some will be willing to bid enough 2.Office firms have steepest bid rent fn, and will occupy the most central land 3.Market allocation is efficient, because the office industry has the most to gain from being in the center; manufacturing could gain too, but not as much, so it’s willing to locate a little further out. Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Office vs. manufacturing 1.Suppose office firm 1 block from center and manufacturer 5 blocks. If they swapped locations, this would dramatically increase the office firm’s travel cost 1.Office firm TC= 3min/block*$4/min*200 meetings/month= $2400 per block/month 2.So the swap increase TC for office by $9,600/mo, but only saves the manufacturer $800/month in transportation costs (50 tons * $4/ton/block= $200/block). Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Multiple land use rent gradient Office zone Manufacturing zone Residential zone Distance to center Bid Rent Office Bid rent Manuf. Bid rent Residential bid rent U’U’’ Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Locational choices Office Zone Residential Zone Manufacturing Zone U’ U’’ Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Pilihan Lokasi Office Zone Residential Zone Manufacturing Zone U’ U’’ So workers live on the periphery because they are cheap to transport (i.e. commuting costs are low) relative to cost of moving freight (for manufacturers). For offices, same problem, because of high price of moving executives around for meetings. If office is in suburbs, executive is constantly going to CBD Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Siapa menghuni apa? Activities are arranged according to transport costs; those with the highest costs occupy the most central land Activity with the highest transport cost will have the highest bid rent curve All firms have tug-of-war between locating centrally to keep transport cheap, and locating in the suburbs to keep workers’ commute cost lower (and hence pay lower wages) CBD wins because cost of freight hauling greater than cost of moving workers Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Fungsi harga perumahan 1.In the monocentric model, residents will be attracted towards the center but be outbid by offices and manufacturing. 2.Assume no factor substitution, identical 1000 sq ft houses, fixed budget of $300/mo for housing+commuting, commute cost (CC)= $20/mi. 3.WTP for housing = $300- CC. Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics Foto :smno.malang.klandungan.juli2012
Fungsi harga perumahan P housing/ sq ft $.3 $.18 $.06 6 mi 12 mi D for housing near center pushes up price until rent= budget-CC. Residents now indifferent among all locations in city Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Fungsi harga perumahan dengan substitusi konsumen 1.With consumer substitution, residents consume less land as price of land goes up; instead consume more local amenities 2.Hence, more central homes are smaller 3.Flexible residents will outbid fixed factor residents everywhere but tangency point 4.Change in P due to distance =, or negative of (tranpo cost/mi divided by amount of housing consumed) Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Fungsi harga rumah hunian dengan subsitusi konsumen P housing/ sq ft $.3 $.18 $.06 6 mi 12 mi Price w consumer sub Sumber: Lecture by Austin Troy University of Vermont, based on Arthur O’Sullivan, Urban Economics
Sumber: foto:smno.rumahkampus.dau.febr2013 Economics rent of land : location accessibility