1. INTRODUCTION
The role of location quality in housing consumption is an
increasingly important research objective given the demand-side
considerations stemming from economic and socio-cultural changes in
urban and metropolitan housing market areas. The reason for this growing
importance is that we are experiencing a shift from a suppliers market
towards buyers market, where diverse branding strategies and lifestyle
segmentation are becoming crucial for builders and developers as well as
planners and policymakers, in order to know what the housing consumers
want in terms of the dwelling and environment characteristics. In
circumstances involving diversified demand, the consumption pattern
comprises a set of different preference profiles. From an operational
point of view, such outcome can be generated through ranking location
attributes with respect to their relative importance for the house buyer
or renter. This procedure may, for example, be based on pair-wise
comparison of attributes based on expert judgements and the analytic
hierarchy process (AHP). While not sufficiently robust in itself, this
information is suitable to enhance the housing market analysis by
confirming and animating the findings obtained by larger scale models
based on market data or questionnaire surveys.
In this paper I report findings concerning housing consumption in
the inner city of Budapest, Hungary. For this selected supply side
segment, one aggregate model and a few disaggregated models (i.e. demand
sided segments) of preference profiles were generated based on expert
judgements and the AHP The originality of this contribution lies in the
application of unconstrained (i.e. ex ante) choice modelling for
CEE/post-communist housing circumstances. Here two interlinked issues
stand out: one, the quality of locations (with a bottom up definition of
the unit of analysis, i.e. neighbourhood or vicinity); and two, the
specificity of a local market context that suffers from mismatch between
supply and demand. The study has two aims related to these two issues:
first, to assess the determinants of intra-urban housing location
attractiveness using the AHP tool; and second, to understand the
contextual factors behind the resulting assessments. In a broader sense,
this research project involves triangulation in order to confirm and to
animate the findings obtained from prior housing market analysis of
Budapest based on market data (Kauko, 2007), as well as comparison with
findings from comparable studies from other housing market
circumstances. Section 2 describes some intricacies within the study
area that ought to be taken into account when designing the research.
Section 3 reviews the literature on expert interviewing and the AHP
technique, in order to position the study. Section 4 presents the
analysis of descriptive material, interviews and the AHP exercise.
Finally, section 5 concludes the study.
2. HOUSING SUBMARKETS AND RESIDENTIAL PATTERNS IN BUDAPEST
It is argued that Eastern European countries are of general
interest due to the dramatic changes made from communist-type welfare
systems to a free market system (Kovacs, 1997; Kovacs and Szekely,
2004). As a result of the social and economic changes, residential
segregation patterns have emerged (Kovacs, 1998). According to Kovacs
(1994), in Budapest the basic ecological structure coincides with the
physical geographic features: high status areas are traditionally
situated near the River Danube and in the hilly Buda side in the west
and in the centre of the city, with concentrations of low-income
households at the outskirts of the city (see Figure 1). The mean price
levels in the prestigious Buda side districts II and XII were already by
the early 1990s three and a half times higher than the mean price levels
of the working-class areas of Pest (Kovacs, 1994).
While segregation of social groups existed in Budapest and other
socialist cities, and that this was also measurable on the spatial level
across neighbourhoods, it may be argued that the early 1990s
privatization contributed further to the increasing spatial differences
(see Kok and Kovacs, 1999). After the year 2000 the Hungarian
right-centre coalition government launched a programme for the
construction of new public rentals, but its impact was/is negligible in
Budapest where the liberals and socialists are in power. To balance the
lack of social housing programs a new mortgage system that improved the
affordability of homeownership for middle-income starter households (in
particular, with respect to the larger dwellings) was launched in the
year 2000, but this system lasted only two years-to the next
parliamentary elections. On the other hand, piecemeal redevelopment of
inner city sites and luxurious housing construction (residential parks)
in certain locations for the most affluent buyers has indeed occurred,
and it is predicted that middle-class buyers, too, will be targeted for
high quality houses or apartments. Continuing the urban renewal further
will however be increasingly difficult due to predominantly private
homeownership. This impediment to rehabilitation and renewal might
however be overcome with a well organised condominium board.
[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]
The prestige of the neighbourhood is another factor that influences
market driven urban renewal. Kovacs and Wiessner (2004) noted that the
restructuring of the Budapest housing market is a spatial matter: areas
are differentiated in terms of price levels and social standing. While
Kovacs and Wiessner recognise problems in the inner city and the most
monotonous housing estates that need to be addressed by urban policies,
they nevertheless offer optimistic prognoses for the city as a whole. A
notable new feature is the development of 'residential parks'
from 1999 onwards -these are modern, guarded condominium buildings of
two to three times higher market price than the average (Kovacs and
Wiessner, 2004).
In the 1980s the worst types of housing micro-locations in Budapest
were the tenement buildings situated in the inner city along the Grand
Boulevard, and just outside it. Two decades later, these types of
dwellings and housing environments still remain at the bottom of the
market. On the other hand, about one third of the housing stock in
Budapest is prefabricated high-rise. There are differences in the
prestige of the building types, and these differences coincide with the
era in which they were built (see Egedy, 2000, 2001; Kovacs and Douglas,
2004):
* 1950s and early 1960s: the 'Stalin baroque' or
'social realism' style, comprising small blocks of low
density; these are traditional buildings adjusted to the urban
environment.
* Late 1960s: the first prefab projects, comprising still
relatively small, low-rise blocks without elevator or central heating,
often surrounded by open space; these were allocated based on merit.
* 1970s: the Soviet-style, high-rise giant estates with
5,000-15,000 flats, lift and central heating, often built in peripheral
locations with poor infrastructure; the welfare aspect in their
allocation caused stigma and today these are the most problematic
estates.
* 1980s: better quality housing estates. According to Bertaud
(2006) in general CEE cities have 'European' characteristics:
a strong and prestigious inner city, served by functioning public
transport system, and today these characteristics are being re-evaluated
by the market. At the same time, these cities have typically
post-communist characteristics too; because the urban form did not
follow prices, today the density gradient is lagging the price gradient,
which, given mono-centricity, manifests itself in a derelict industrial
zone too close to CBD, a lack of retail and service space in city
centers, and residential estates built at the outskirts of town.
Therefore, one ought to pay attention to the particular local market
context and its path of development, rather than assume that market
evidence is completely transportable from Western to more Eastern
settings.
The mismatch between available product groups on offer and the
aspirations of the consumers is a problem of the inner city housing
market in Budapest like in other post-communist cities. Due to
historical reasons the inner city housing stock, particularly on the
Pest side of the river Danube, suffers from deterioration and monotony.
At the same time the increasingly quality conscious and differentiated
buyer preferences of the growing middle and higher income groups are not
recognised to a sufficient extent.
The following section develops a methodology for market analysis of
housing choice in a post-communist/CEE context. This methodology is
based on the AHP tool and expert judgements, Despite the mismatch
problem noted above the existence of relatively unconstrained
market-based preferences for certain neighbourhood qualities is assumed.
It is not to say that the same methodology is not suitable for more
Western market circumstances, as the conceptual ideas much are building
on the extensive literature that theorizes market segmentation, going
back to pioneering work by Grigsby (1963) and numerous authors since,
who mainly have looked at North American and British cities. In this
work it was recognised that the housing market in one and the same urban
area is segmented into different, often spatial submarkets, each with a
specific mix of dynamic and static features that determine the
composition of supply, demand and/ or price. As a consequence, visible
or invisible boundaries prevail and emerge between locations that, for
one reason or another, are not substitutes for each other (see e.g.
Maclennan, 1977; Grigsby et al., 1987; Rothenberg et al., 1991;
Whitehead, 1999).
3. THE EXPERT INTERVIEWS AND PREFERENCE MODELLING APPROACHES TO
LAND USE AND HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS
3.1. Modelling stated choice
Sophisticated consumer choice modelling methodologies have been
proposed, inter alia, by Di Clemente and Hantula (2003) and Guerin
(2003). Methods based on stated (as opposed to revealed) choices allow
us to identify consumer choice empirically using semi-structured
interviews. Within this tradition of housing research known as
perceptions/preferences modelling, many other specific methodological
issues have gained attention too, such as group decision-making (Molin
et al., 1999), neighbourhood aspect (Galster, 2001), how to incorporate
supply side shortages (Rietveld and Wagtendonk, 2004), and transitional
housing markets (Wang and Li, 2004). Multidimensional decision analysis
techniques comprise a sophisticated tool for land use related or
environmental problems that require behavioural or prescriptive
treatments (see Gregory et al., 1997). While this genre fits well into
the housing consumption and preference modelling tradition, it eschews
the more philosophical debates within economic theory and methodology
that tend to be attached to the use of stated choice methods. A related
multicriteria decision making methodology has been applied for the
determination of the utility degree and market value of real estate
using experts' assessments of preference decisions on competing
alternatives (see Kaklauskas et al., 2007).
Multidimensional value and benefit refers to a generic quality
measure that goes beyond monetary value or transaction price (Gregory,
2000). According to this modelling tradition the elicited preference
models are suited for making monetary values (i.e. market prices)
commensurable with non-monetary (i.e. environmental, social, cultural,
aesthetic, ecological etc.) values, for various locations or housing
bundles (Kauko, 2002, 2003, 2006). In a related strand of inquiry, Daly
and colleagues (2003) advocate the 'behavioural paradigm' in
residential valuation, which puts more emphasis on the demand or
consumer-driven factors related to preferences and intangible quality
components.
3.2. The AHP and expert judgments
The analytic hierarchy process (AHP, Saaty 1977) technique is based
on pair-wise comparison of elements (attributes or alternatives). In
sharp contrast to the classical multi-attribute value-tree modelling
approach, which is based on the assumption that utility functions can be
explained, the AHP does not assume that the evaluator is able to express
the overall elicitation of the problem as a single function. Instead,
the AHP is based on the assumption that the relevant dominance of one
attribute over another can be measured with a systematic, pair-wise
comparison (e.g., Ball and Srinivasan, 1994). This elicitation of
weights for the elements under comparison takes place in two stages:
initially as ordinal ranks using the original scale of the input, and
eventually cardinally as ratios between 0 and 1 derived via a matrix
comparison of the ordinal ranks. (See Kauko, 2004, for full
explanation).
In other words, the AHP requires numerical ordinal data and
measured facts. The comparison begins at the lowest level, where the
elements (attributes or alternatives) are usually elicited with an
ordinal scale from 1 to 9, with the values corresponding to verbal
expressions. A value of 1 means that 'both are of equal
importance', and a value of 9 means that A has an extreme
importance over B'. The comparisons are then converted into
cardinal rankings. Balancing the pair-wise ranks in this way involves
the use of measurement theory, as pair-wise judgments cannot be assumed
consistent across the entire set of comparisons (e.g., Ball and
Srinivasan, 1994). Finally, local weights are transformed into global
weights. The most attractive choice is determined by aggregating the
local priorities into global priorities. These procedures generate a
value tree model, where the overall objective of the decision stands at
the top of the hierarchy, with lower-level objectives or attributes at
the lower levels (e.g., Zahedi 1986).
Methods such as the AHP have an added value in situations, when
more nuanced insight into the context is needed. For this we need
different variables than the ones readily available in registers, and as
a consequence, a different way of collect the data--through interviews.
Given that the method was developed by psychologists, and that it is
often used on a set of less than ten attributes or cases, the problem is
that is not suited for comparison of several observations
simultaneously. Moreover, in order to cover all relevant interest
groups, the set of respondents have to be selected meaningfully, not
random. Hence the method of saturation is preferred instead of
statistical sampling (see Poyhonen, 1998). Using this method each new
respondent is expected to contribute with new information, and if that
is not the case, including a new respondent does not bring added value
that would offset the time costs involved in the interviewing. This
implies that the number of respondents does not have to be
high--depending on the application even one expert may be sufficient,
because, rather than relying on statistical sampling, the use of AHP is
always depending on qualitative information relating to the defined
context as well as order and scale of variable levels (Kauko, 2002).
The AHP has already been applied successfully in various contexts
with different aims and objectives, data size and merits. In a classic
demonstration Saaty (1990) showed how to select the best (single-family)
house to buy for one (hypothetical) decision maker. In a similar
setting, Ball and Srinivasan (1994) offered a rigorous evaluation on the
use of AHP, and an application of the role of psychological factors in
house selection (again one decision maker) in a suburb of Boston, US
(see also Ong and Chew, 1996). Prior studies show that the optimal size
of selected respondents for the AHP when used for housing quality and
area assessment is about twenty (Nevalainen et al., 1990; but see also
Bender et al., 1997, 1999, for the use of questionnaire survey). Most
recently, the AHP has been applied for land mass appraisal in Donetsk,
Ukraine by Kryvobokov (2005, 2006). In the realm of environmental
externality related economic impact analysis AHP has been applied by
Erkut and Moran (1991). Using related methodology, impact analysis has
been conducted by Willis and Garrod (1993), McLean and Mundy (1998), and
Strand and Vagnes (2001).
While the AHP fundamentally is not meant as a statistical survey
method, the attribute weights elicited by the AHP can be understood as
weights in housing market models, for example, as hedonic coefficients.
It is however acknowledged that the experts may underestimate the
intensity of the effects of each attribute compared to market
participants (i.e. averaging). Kryvobokov (2006) compared the outcome of
expert and market based methods by relating each resulting attribute
weight or hedonic coefficient to the sum of all weights (or hedonic
coefficients) in the model. This exercise showed that the weights
resulting from the AHP and also those resulting from a direct
questionnaire have systematically lower field ranges than the
corresponding hedonic regression coefficients. In other words, the least
important attributes were overvalued, and the most important attributes
undervalued by the expert based models in relation to hedonic models.
On the other hand, existing market data may be an inappropriate
mirror of market reality, in which case interviews become apt. When the
equilibrium pertains to choices--not prices--the focus tends to switch
to preferences and intangible quality features, and then the measured
values can be all kinds of values--not just monetary ones. This way seen
the method has two obvious and substantial benefits: (1) it allows for
diversification of demand (and then indirectly also supply); (2) it
ascertains an intangible elements in relation to perceptions (see Kauko,
2004). The method has certain problems however, such as the inevitable
lack of robustness, the inherent property of the AHP restricts the
elements to compare to very few, and the inability to perform direct
comparison of validity with results obtained with methods based on
revealed choice and market outcome data.
Lastly, each of the preference profiles is compared with known
cases based on earlier research, but possibly from other circumstances.
In this way the findings of the AHP together with prior information can
be used for building an operational typology that covers the phenomenon,
in this case location-specific housing consumption, as broadly as
possibly. This methodology, referred to as naturalistic generalisation,
implies that, rather than assuming any strategic reason for generating
typical cases, the case repertoire is growing with each new result, with
the eventual purpose in operational classification (see Johansson,
2005).
4. SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS USING THE AHP
4.1. The study area
The Budapest inner city can be considered a special case, when
relating the study to more Western type of housing market circumstances.
Here the starting point is to note that in Budapest a Western style
suburbia is yet to develop. While there are a lot of settlements around
Budapest that grew very intensively after 1990 and a massive
suburbanisation process took place, this suburbanisation process is
showing signs of slowing down as the public transport system capacity is
lagging behind--still ca. 60% of the transport within Budapest is public
(Tosics, 2006). After the 1990s period of beginning suburbanisation,
today two trends work against urban sprawl as Locsmandi (2006) notes:
(1) the private housing boom within the city; (2) the lack of public
investments in transportation facilities. On the other hand, in the
inner city urban renewal and housing rehabilitation has been on the
agenda constantly for the last twenty years. This is because the inner
city area comprises a big problem for the whole image of the city--an
increasingly important urban policy aspect. The housing market balance
between supply and demand is not well developed after the socialist era
as the existing stock is to a great extent derelict, especially with
respect to the maintenance of communal areas and the facades, and
lagging behind the preferences of those consumers with purchase power.
As already noted, on a detailed level the situation is indeed very
different than in the Western urban context. On a more general level, it
is possible to nevertheless make some cautious links to certain
contested urban and neighbourhood regeneration issues brought up in
Western policy evaluation studies (see e.g. Cameron, 2006), in so far as
the discussion concerns attracting the targeted population segment
necessary for housing market renewal without neglecting the rights of
the current residents. At the time of interviews (summer 2005) the
market for private dwelling construction is very marginal at the
citywide level; out of 800,000 units the output of the last ten years is
ca 5%, which is the share of those households who are 'in the
market'. (This figure has apparently increased somewhat since then,
due to the activity of first time buyers and younger up-graders.) Within
this group, the target for the analysis reported in this paper is the
segment that comprises households who move to the outer part of the Pest
inner city, that is to say neighbourhoods in the following Pest-side
districts (around the circular Grand Boulevard, clockwise from north to
south, see the right hand side of the map in Figure 1):
* Ujlipotvaros, i.e. the inner part of district XIII situated by
the river (best image),
* Terezvaros, district VI,
* Erzsebetvaros, district VII (VI and VII are small districts,
where the government is passive in relation to urban regenerations),
* Jozsefvaros, district VIII (worst image) and
* Ferencvaros, district IX (rehabilitated). No large differences
exist across the microlocations within this 'zone'. (The
city-core District V is here excluded, as it is too luxurious in
comparison with the rest of inner Pest.) This area is characterised as
transitional zone or potential renewal area. It is assumed that the move
takes place from outside this belt. A number of conclusions could be
made from the prior findings from the Budapest housing market (see
Kauko, 2007), according to which the spatial housing pattern in relation
to price and quality on the micro-locational level is mosaic-like; not
just in the poorer area (as suggested by Ladanyi, 1989); but in the
whole city's housing market there is a substantial heterogeneity.
The type, age and size of the house and its immediate vicinity matter
more than the location per se. There is no notable association between
price-level and the district location. Even the worst districts possess
some relatively attractive places, and also some expensive small
dwellings in modern/modernised, non-panel buildings; likewise, even the
best districts possess dwellings that are typically cheap because of one
reason or another.
The issue of sample size was brought up in the previous section.
Nine selected experts agreed to participate in this exercise: a manager
of a large developer, a manager of the land management company of one of
the district governments, a real estate agent, a real estate consultant,
three planning consultants, a statistical officer, and a professor who
also worked as a planner. This number is small, largely due to language
barriers experienced in this context. The problem was overcome by
triangulating the results with other findings of Budapest obtained from
the descriptive literature, empirical modelling of Kauko (2007), and
in-depth expert interviews.
The first task was to map the relevant differences between
micro-locations and recent developments in the study area. The following
points were raised in the interviews. To start with, the
middle-/upper-middle income groups have more heterogeneous preferences
than lower income groups, and as such, very few locations on the Pest
side are suitable for them. Whereas Buda is improving, in Pest big
pockets are degrading faster than other areas, and the professional
middle-class is unable to move out of them. On the other hand, the group
of 25-35 years old buy in the inner city after seeing illustrations of
refurbished flats in magazines. These projects are reasonably
successful.
The Pest side market provides plenty of interesting motives and
NIMBY aspects. In 2003 Irish investors invented the market in the
districts V VI, and VII. However, they did not cross 'the lesser
Boulevard' (Muzeum korut) to the Palace Quarters, which in fact is
a fairly popular neighbourhood among local residents, as this area
administratively already is part of the infamous VIII district. The
image of district VIII is considered bad and worse than the reality.
However, this is about the thinking of the people, and this thinking has
begun to change. New residents who come from the countryside do not have
problem with the image of the district.
On the other hand, even districts with bad reputation (VI, VII,
VIII) include smaller parts: i.e. neighbourhoods, that locals know are
attractive. These make then good bargains. In particular, district VIII
comprises totally different areas: the inner part (Palace quarters),
which also is the densest area, is without doubt the most attractive
neighbourhood; the Grand Boulevard is the cutting line between the inner
and middle parts; the outer parts, including the Clerks quarters, are
far away and represent different area types altogether. Within the
mid-Jozsefvaros there is a diversity of areas in relation to two
factors: (1) social status; (2) housing and location quality. New
housing development has begun in two of the eleven quarters that the
strategic development plan of Jozsefvaros partitions the whole district
(Rev8, 2004). In district VIII no 'real market' has emerged
yet, as people are waiting to see how the area will develop. In district
VIII the housing prices increased merely because of news--urban renewal
and gentrification where about to happen, but the prices were not
realised at the market. According to one expert, however, in district IX
the reason for high prices are not in social factors, but that of the
actions of the first homebuyers, who depend on the availability of
subsidies, and the foreign investor-buyers, who are influenced by
macroeconomic trends.
4.2. The attributes
Given a defined set of attributes, and a set of respondents, the
AHP enables profiling the demand side into a certain combination of
attribute levels. Additionally, more open in-depth interviews were
carried out on the same respondents. Below each of the attributes is
defined, and after that, the research findings are presented. The
findings tell whether, and in what kind of particular circumstances, a
given attribute was considered important or not.
Accessibility and proximity: distances to work and services (-) and
the level of the public transport system (+).
* This is a 'given'; public transport is good everywhere
within the study area: 5 to 10 minutes difference in distances makes no
difference, which apparently is typical in Eastern European cities.
* In particular, for the young upper classes, who are mobile, this
is not important.
Social factors of the neighbourhood: the socio-economical status
(+) and externalities caused by social disturbances (-).
* There may be a large variation within one and the same quarter
(as already noted).
* This is worst in the outer parts of district VII and parts of
district VIII.
* One comment emphasised the effect of noise, vandalism and other
dis-amenities (nuisances), caused by services (see below) that are
against residential use. Service infrastructure in the neighbourhood:
availability and level of all kinds of public and private services (+).
* All areas were considered unattractive in this respect--only the
big streets have good services.
* Services are good everywhere. (Hence a contradiction with the
view above.)
* People are concerned about schools, but they are also mobile (as
noted: good public transport) and do not need one in the vicinity.
Physical environment, two types:
1. Hard/tangible factors: density, that is per sq.m. building
efficiency. As long as one is situated within approximately three to
four km from the city centre, and thereby outside the influence of the
repulsion effect of 1970s housing estates which produce a dense and
unattractive location on average eight to nine km from the city centre
(see Bertaud, 2006, p. 99), the housing consumers prefer high densities.
That is to say, the closer to the Grand Boulevard, the better the
location is. Further from the city centre, however, the situation is the
opposite as people prefer the suburban single family house.
2. Soft/intangible factors: 'pleasantness', visual
factors, greenery etc. are secondary factors. Furthermore, the image
implies, among other things, that the particular history of a
neighbourhood may be an issue of relevance. By and large, the physical
environment is deteriorated in most of this part of town; particularly,
it is everywhere in mid-Jozsefvaros and Erzsebetvaros bad.
Municipality (kerulet): whether the municipal image and local
government policy, including the social policy and the right to set
taxes, matters for the decision. The comments unveil some interesting
spatially diversified and conditional effects related to images and
policies:
* Young people tend to have higher tolerance for the bad image
areas in VIII and VII than older people.
* The policy does not matter so much for ordinary households. The
final comparison was on a higher level in the hierarchy between the
composite locational quality, i.e. all the locational attributes above
taken together, and the house itself (see Table 1).
Thus, on balance location is more important than the house, which
as such is well known from household surveys. However, here at least
three different viewpoints could be distinguished behind these scores.
First and foremost, like many other cities, also Budapest was perceived
as a fairly segregated city, and the more segregated the city, the more
location counts for the buyer's choice. Second, one respondent
emphasized that the area matters only for the first dwelling buyers, and
that, when moving upward in the housing career, the quality of the house
matters much more than the location. Finally, at least one interview
clearly maintained that, usually both the location and the house are
severely deteriorated within this segment and neither of them really
matters for the potential buyer or renter.
4.3. AHP elicited profiles for demand side segments
The idea was to create one aggregate profile and a few more
disaggregated profiles based on the elicitation intensities and their
variation (see Kauko, 2006, for prior exercises undertaken in
Metropolitan Helsinki and the Dutch Randstad). The profiles were
aggregated using the Perth -formula (a + 4b + c)/6, where a is the
smallest value, b the median and c the largest value of the
observations. This way extreme elicitations for a and c do not bias the
calculations too much. This is considered a safe way of aggregating the
profiles.
[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]
The aggregate profile is shown in Figure 2. (The disaggregated
profiles are obtainable from the author upon request.) Overall, the
social factors are the most important and the services the least
important attributes. It can be noted that the accessibility obtains a
very low score. The responses may also be divided into four
differentiated patterns based on simple grouping of the profiles (see
Table 2). In order to make connections with known cases, a number of
simple labels were given in order to easily generalise the type of
dominating features we are dealing with, according to the principles of
naturalistic generalisation already explained.
Four specific profiles were identifiable. A 'more traditional
European' urban sentiment (urbanity) emphasises the physical
environment (respondents 5 and 9 above). According to respondent 8 the
social dimensions are important too, whereas accessibility is not. A
'more American' segregation sentiment emphasises the social
factors (respondents 2, 3, 4 and 6) or the municipality in the sense of
a 'Tiebouteffect': the households choose their jurisdiction
based on the combination of public expenditures and image--variations in
tax rate is however not (yet) reality in Budapest (respondent 7).
Finally, when accessibility (and also social) factors are important, the
profile is akin to what Kauko (2002, 2003, 2006) found in the Helsinki
analysis (respondent 1).
These four general profiles can be elaborated further using the
supporting 'in-depth' comments of the nine respondents (almost
verbatim from the open interviews when asked about the logic of a
certain ranking):
'Traditional urban' (three respondents).
* All districts include good and bad areas. Closeness to Danube
matters. (Tangible factor.)
* To some extent the inner part of district VII is still quite
popular as it is a 'historical' area. (Intangible factor.)
* Even if the neighbourhood is not renewed, but it is close to the
rehabilitated properties it is attractive. Thus, the anticipation of a
change towards the better matters. (Intangible factor.)
* Nice physical environment and not having social problems go
together. 'Segregation' (four respondents).
* While the social factors are improving with time, if there are
50% Romas in a building people do not move there.
* Social factors are important for the upper classes. However,
unlike in the US, negative social externalities such as school district
or crime rate are irrelevant here. (Thus it is only about status and
possibly a 'sense of community'.)
'Tiebout' (one respondent).
* In general, young families look for cheap alternatives in the
inner city, and consider districts IX, VII and XIII.
* The social aid is the best in district VIII.
* According to surveys the district (kerulet) matters to some
extent (when moving in, and also when moving out); its image matters
more than its policies.
* Buyers from Budapest and elsewhere are two separate groups: the
former group knows better about the district image, and therefore avoids
district VIII.
'CBD Accessibility' (one respondent).
* It is important to have good accessibility to downtown and other
areas with good services.
* Proximity to education services is important for housing choice
in this context; young residents choose a temporary dwelling. (This fits
socio-demographic housing theory.)
* Not everyone wants a car and then public transport is important.
* With the increase of private cars parking problems have become
worse.
* People do not care about the image of the municipality, if the
neighbourhood is acceptable--provided they have all the relevant
information.
In sum, the four disaggregated profiles above all follow the
aggregate profile with regard to the relative importance of the
attributes. Social factors was by far the most important attribute
overall. The municipality factor, the physical environment and the
services were all considered less important attributes. Accessibility
was also played down in many of the interviews, which raises some
further thoughts, as having a short travel distance to the city centre
in general is considered an important attribute for location choice in
the literature on mono-centric Western cities.
5. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
Following the principles of naturalistic generalisations, ones case
repertoire is allowed to grow, with the purpose of operational
classification. Budapest inner city was analysed by classifying its
housing consumer profiles into groups, which may be related to earlier
studies from other geographic and institutional circumstances and/or to
general theory cases from the literature. Based on these findings, two
locational factors matter for the preference formation. First, to avoid
Roma concentrations--this is the same for all movers. This finding is
not unlike models of social segregation from the US, where the avoidance
of ethnic concentrations is a common finding. The second finding, in
turn, reflects traditional European urban sentiments: that is to say,
the closeness to the city, and living in the densest possible (but
nevertheless pleasant) urban environment is appreciated. This finding is
much similar to the findings from other European housing market
contexts. However, in the Budapest segment in question this is not an
issue of public transport, which is good everywhere, but rather about
'nice architecture', properly urban density and the cityscape.
Considering the literature, this is hardly surprising, and by no means a
new phenomenon--compare for example with Ley's (1986) findings
about a 'prourban ethos' in Canadian cities.
Apparently the condition of the dwelling is not as important as the
micro-location, i.e. the condition of the block or the building as a
whole. On the other hand, the administrative district (kertilet) does
not matter that much either, which confirms the prior market based
modelling results where the immediate surroundings of the dwelling is
considered the key to location choices (see Kauko, 2007). Thus, the most
attractive locations are the ones that contain a strong presence of a
traditional urban sentiment in the cityscape, or the ones that do not
suffer from social dis-amenity influences caused by proximity to ethnic
minority concentrations. Besides these attributes, the appropriate area
level matters too. That is to say, each target location is considered on
a small spatial scale: the building, the block and the immediate
vicinity.
An interesting possibility now opens up: we can make a comparison
with other studies from a post-communist Eastern European urban context.
At least one of the results above raise intriguing thoughts (see Figure
2): CBD accessibility carries less weight than the attributes related to
the prestige and environmental attributes of the neighbourhood, and
image of the district. Apparently more than a decade of free market has
not erased the backwardness of the outer part of the inner city as a
residential environment and where a noticeable upgrading has taken
place, it will be seen in the expressed choices of housing consumers
too. This is potentially a key issue. At least two recent studies on
this context corroborate this finding: using regression analysis
Raslanas and colleagues (2006) concluded that in Vilnius, Lithuania, CBD
accessibility is not an important factor for the price formation of
apartments; and using expert judgements, the AHP and a hedonic approach
Kryvobokov (2006) found out that in Donetsk, Ukraine the most important
value influencing factor is prestige, followed by proximity to positive
environmental externalities with scarcity value (in this case parks and
water), and only after that by the traditional variable CBD
accessibility. That this feature, as a rule, is taken for granted, and
therefore neglected, by the residents in Eastern bloc urban context
could thus be developed into a testable hypothesis.
Lastly, the methodological findings require some attention. It was
noted that the nuanced findings of location specific housing consumption
are achieved at the cost of some undoubted and perhaps unavoidable
drawbacks, namely the lack in modelling robustness, restrictiveness of
the analysis, and the effect of averaging the estimates. Obviously these
limits are of concern, if the application is in housing market modelling
or real estate valuation, and the benchmark is a hedonic regression
model or a quantitative stated preferences model. On the other hand, we
may argue against treating the expert elicited AHP approach as a
completely quantitative method. After all, the input data--expert
interviews--is judgemental by definition. Besides, triangulation with
other methods and datasets will to a great extent help in overcoming
problems of reliability and validity. Cautiously considered, the real
merit of this analysis may be in generating preliminary or confirmatory
findings in an environment where little comparable research has been
conducted.
Acknowledgement
An earlier draft of this paper was presented at the 13th conference
of the European Real Estate Society (ERES) in Weimar, Germany, June
7-10, 2006. 1 wish to thank the audience of the session for a
stimulating discussion on the topics covered and issues raised.
REFERENCES
Ball, J. and Srinivasan, V C. (1994) Using the Analytic Hierarchy
Process in house selection. Journal of Real Estate Finance and
Economics, 9(1), p. 69-85.
Bender, A., Din, A., Favarger, P., Hoesli, M. and Laakso, J. (1997)
An analysis of perceptions concerning the environmental quality of
housing in Geneva. Urban Studies, 34(3), p. 503-513.
Bender, A., Din, A., Hoesli, M. and Laakso. J. (1999) Environmental
quality perceptions of urban commercial real estate. Journal of Property
Investment and Finance, 17(3), p. 280-296.
Bertaud. A. (2006) The spatial structures of Central and Eastern
European cities, In Tsenkova, S. and Nedovic-Budic, Z. (eds), The Urban
Mosaic of Post-Socialist Europe, Space, Institutions and Policy,
Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag, p. 91110.
Cameron, S. (2006) From low demand to rising aspirations: housing
market renewal within regional and neighbourhood regeneration policy.
Housing Studies, 21(1), p. 3-16.
Daly, J., Gronow. S., Jenkins, D. and Plimmer, F. (2003) Consumer
behaviour in the valuation of residential property. A comparative study
in the UK, Ireland and Australia. Property Management, 21(5), p.
295-314.
Di Clemente, D. F. and Hantula, D. A. (2003) Applied behavioural
economics and consumer choice. Journal of Economic Psychology, 24(5)
October, p. 589-602.
Egedy, T. (2000) The situation of high-rise housing estates in
Hungary, In Kovacs, Z. (ed.), Hungary towards the 21st Century: the
human geography of transition, Studies in Geography in Hungary 31,
Geographical Research Institute, Hungarian Academy of Sciences,
Budapest, p. 169-185.
Egedy, T. (2001) Budapest pilot study--Havanna housing estate, In
Kovacs, Z (ed.), Housing policy and social exclusion,
Nehom--Neighbourhood Housing Models, Project under the EU 5th Framework
Programme: 'Improving the quality of life', D2, Department of
Geography, University of Bergen, p. 15-34.
Erkut, E. and Moran, S. R. (1991) Locating obnoxious facilities in
the public sector: an application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process to
municipal landfill siting decisions. Socio-economic planning sciences,
25(2), p. 89-102.
Galster, G. (2001) On the nature of neighbourhood. Urban Studies,
38(12), p. 2111-2124.
Gregory, R. (2000) Valuing environmental policy options: a case
study comparison of multiattribute and contingent valuation survey
methods. Land Economics, 76(2), p. 151-173.
Gregory, R., Flynn, J., Johnson, S. M., Satterfield, T. A., Slovic,
P. and Wagner, R. (1997) Decision-pathway surveys: a tool for resource
managers. Land Economics, 73(2), p. 240-254.
Grigsby, W., Baratz, M., Galster, G. and Maclennan, D. (1987) The
dynamics of neighbourhood change and decline. Progress in Planning, 28
(1), p. 1-76.
Guerin, B. (2003) Putting a radical socialness into consumer
behaviour analysis. Journal of Economic Psychology, 24(5) October, p.
697-718.
Johansson, R. (2005) On case study methodology, In Vestbro, D.U.,
Hurol, Y, and Wilkinson, N. (eds.), Methodologies in housing research,
Gateshead: Urban International Press, p. 3039.
Kaklauskas, A., Zavadskas, E.K., Banaitis, A. and Satkauskas, G.
(2007) Defining the utility and market value of a real estate: a
multiple criteria approach. International Journal of Strategic Property
Management, 11(2), p. 107-120.
Kauko, T. (2002) Modelling locational determinants of house prices:
neural network and value tree approaches doctoral dissertation,
University of Utrecht,
http://www.library.uu.nl/decollectie/proefschriften/11688main.html
Kauko, T. (2003) Residential property value and locational
externalities: on the complementarity and substitutability of
approaches. Journal of Property Investment & Finance, 21(3), p.
250270.
Kauko, T. (2004) Sign value, topophilia and the locational
component in property prices. Environment and Planning A, 36(5), p.
859-878.
Kauko, T. (2006) What makes a location attractive for the housing
consumer? Preliminary findings from metropolitan Helsinki and Randstad
Holland using the analytical hierarchy process. Journal of Housing and
the Built Environment, 21, p. 159-176.
Kauko, T. (2007) A heterodox economic analysis of the housing
market structure in Budapest using neural network classification.
Journal of Real Estate Literature, 15(1), p. 85-124.
Kok, H. and Kovacs, Z. (1999) The process of suburbanization in the
agglomeration of Budapest. Netherlands Journal of Housing and the Built
Environment, 14(2), p. 119-141.
Kovacs, Z. (1994) A city at the crossroads: social and economic
transformation in Budapest. Urban Studies, 31(7), p. 1081-1096.
Kovacs, Z. (1997) Aspects of Post-Socialist Transformation in
Eastern Europe with Special Attention to the Labor and Housing Market,
In van Weesep, J. (ed.), Conference proceedings, 'Transformation
Processes in Eastern Europe, Part I, Housing and the Labor Market, March
6 and 7, 1997, ESR, The Hague, p. 43-56.
Kovacs, Z. (1998) Ghettoization or gentrification? Post-socialist
scenarios for Budapest. Netherlands Journal of Housing and the Built
Environment, 13(1), p. 63-82.
Kovacs, Z. and Douglas, M. (2004) Hungary, From socialist ideology
to market reality, In Turkington, R., van Kempen, R. and Wassenberg, F.
(eds.), High-rise housing in Europe, Current trends and future
prospects, Housing and urban policy studies 28, Delft: DUP Science, p.
231-248.
Kovacs, Z. and Szekely, J. (2004) Hungarian Housing Policy Before
and After Transition, In
Kovacs, Z. (ed.), Housing policy and social exclusion,
Nehom--Neighbourhood Housing Models, Project under the EU 5th Framework
Programme: 'Improving the quality of life', D2, Department of
Geography, University of Bergen, p. 128-139.
Kovacs, Z. and Wiessner, R. (2004) Budapest--Restructuring a
European Metropolis. Europa Regional, 12(1), p. 22-31.
Kryvobokov, M. (2005) Estimating the weights of location attributes
with the analytic hierarchy process in Donetsk, Ukraine. Nordic Journal
of Surveying and Real Estate Research, 2(2), p. 5-29.
Kryvobokov, M. (2006) Mass valuation of urban land in Ukraine: from
normative to a market-based approach, Doctoral thesis in Real Estate
Planning, Real Estate Planning and Land Law, Department of Real Estate
and Construction Management, School of Architecture and the Built
Environment, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Stockholm.
Ladanyi, J. (1989) Changing patterns of residential segregation in
Budapest. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 13(4),
p. 555-572.
Ley, D. (1986) Alternative explanations for inner-city
gentrification: a Canadian assessment. Annals of the Association of
American Geographers, 76(4), p. 521-535.
Locsmandi, G. (2006) National report--Hungary and Budapest.
McLean, D. G. and Mundy, B. (1998) The addition of contingent
valuation and conjoint analysis to the required body of knowledge for
the estimation of environmental damages to real property. Journal of
Real Estate Practice and Education, 1(1), p. 1-19.
Maclennan, D. (1977) Some thoughts on the nature and purpose of
house price studies. Urban Studies, 14, p. 59-71.
Molin, E., Oppewal, H. H. and Timmermans, H. (1999) Group-based
versus individual-based conjoint preference models of residential
preferences: a comparative test. Environment and Planning A, 31, p.
1935-1947.
Nevalainen, R., Staffans, A. and Vuorela, P. (1990) Asumisen laadun
arviointi jatutkiminen (Evaluating and studying the quality of housing,
in Finnish), Center for Urban and Regional Research (YTK), Helsinki
University of Technology, Helsinki.
Ong, S. E. and Chew, T. I. (1996) Singapore residential market: an
expert judgemental forecast incorporating the analytical hierarchy
process. Journal of Property Valuation & Investment, 14(1), p.
50-66.
Poyhonen, M. (1998) On Attribute Weighting in Value Trees, Systems
Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology, Helsinki.
Raslanas, S., Tupenaite, L. and Steinbergas, T. (2006) Research on
the prices of flats in the South East London and Vilnius. International
Journal of Strategic Property Management, 10(1), p. 51-63.
Rev8 (2004) Jozsefvaros 15 eves keruletfejlesztesi strategia (15
years district development strategy, in Hungarian), September.
Rietveld, P. and Wagtendonk, A. J. (2004) The location of new
residential areas and the preservation of open space: experiences in the
Nether lands. Environment and Planning A, 36, p. 2047-2063.
Rothenberg, J., Galster, G., Butler, R. and Pitkin, J. (1991) The
maze of urban housing markets: theory, evidence and policy. University
of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Saaty, T. L. (1990) How to make a decision: the Analytic Hierarchy
Process. European Journal of Operational Research, 48, p. 9-26.
Strand, J. and Vagnes, M. (2001) The relationship between property
values and railroad proximity: a study based on hedonic prices and real
estate brokers' appraisals. Transportation, 28, p. 137-156.
Tosics, I. (2006) Spatial restructuring in post-socialist Budapest,
In Tsenkova, S. and Nedovic-Budic, Z. (eds), The Urban Mosaic of Post-So
cialist Europe, Space, Institutions and Policy, Heidelberg:
Physica-Verlag, p. 131-150.
Wang, D. and Li, S.-M. (2004) Housing preferences in a transitional
housing system: the case of Beijing, China. Environment and Planning A,
36, p. 69-87.
Whitehead, C. M. E. (1999) Urban housing markets: theory and
policy, in Mills, E. S. and P. Cheshire (eds.), Handbook of Regional and
Urban Economics. Elsevier Science BV. p. 1559-1594.
Willis, K. G. and Garrod, G. D. (1993) Not from experience: a
comparison of experts opinions and hedonic price estimates of the
incremental value of property attributable to an environmental feature.
Journal of Property Research, 10, p. 193-216.
Zahedi, F. (1986) The Analytic Hierarchy Process--a survey of the
method and its applications. Interfaces, 16(4) July-August, p. 96-108.
SANTRAUKA
EKSPERTU VERTINIMAIS PAGRISTA BUSTO APLINKOS POZYMIU ANALIZE
BUDAPESTO (VENGRIJA) CENTRE
Tom KAUKO
Vykdant tyrimus svarbus uzdavinys--ivertinti aplinkos kokybes
vaidmeni renkantis busta, nepamirstant su paklausa susijusiu aplinkybiu,
kurias lemia ekonominiai ir socialiniai bei kulturiniai pokyciai miestu
ir didmiesciu busto rinkose. Kai paklausa yra ivairi, vartojimo
polinkiai suformuoja skirtingu pageidaujamu savybiu komplekta. Praktine
prasme tokius rezultatus galima gauti ivertinus aplinkos pozymius pagal
santykine ju svarba namo pirkejui arba nuomininkui. Pavyzdziui, sia
procedura galima atlikti lyginant pozymiu poras pagal ekspertu
vertinimus ir taikant analitini hierarchini procesa (AHP). Sis tyrimas
pagristas ekspertu sudarytais gyvenamosios vietos kokybes aprasymais
Budapesto centre ir remiasi ankstesniais busto rinkos analizes darbais.
Siame darbe demesys atkreipiamas j viena problema, budinga
pokomunistinems salims--siulomu produktu grupiu asortimentas neatitinka
pirkejo pageidavimu. Pirkejai vis dazniau akcentuoja kokybe ir
diferencijuoja savo poreikius.
Tom KAUKO
Department of Geography, Norwegian University of Sciences and
Technology, NTNU, Trondheim, Norway and OTB Research Institute for
Housing, Urban and Mobility Studies, Delft University of Technology,
Delft, The Netherlands Tel.: +47 73591919; fax: +47 73591878; E-mail:
tom.kauko@svt.ntnu.no
Received 10 August 2007; accepted 12 October 2007
Table 1. Comparison of the importance: location vs. house
Respondent Location House
1. 80 20
2. 40 60
3. 50 50
4. 20 80
5. 60 40
6. -- --
7. 60 40
8. 70 30
9. 90 10
Ranges 20 ...90 10 ... 80
Median 60 40
Table 2. The respondent profiles as naturalistic generalisations
Respondent Most important attribute Least important attribute
1. Accessibility (social) Municipality
2. Social Services
3. Social Municipality
4. Social Services
5. Physical Services
6. Social Accessibility
7. Municipality Services
8. Physical, social Accessibility
9. Physical Municipality
COPYRIGHT 2007 Vilnius Gediminas Technical
University Reproduced with permission of the copyright holder. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.
Copyright 2007 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights
reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.
NOTE: All illustrations and photos have been removed from this article.