探索地方公共品影响家庭居住选址行为和住房价格的经济机制与实际效应，是城市经济学和住房经济学领域微观研究的核心内容和热点问题。在当前“以人为核心”的新型城镇化战略下，如何通过改进城市公共资源的配置效率及包容性水平，提高居民的生活质量与城市社会经济的可持续发展潜力，已成为摆在城市规划和管理部门面前的一个重要问题。因此，系统把握中国城市中地方公共品影响居住选址和住房价格的经济机制，定量识别家庭对地方公共品的偏好及其影响效应，具有重要的理论意义和实践价值。在国际前沿研究的基础上，论文提出了“居住选址-房价响应”的双维度分析框架；并利用北京市较为丰富的家庭、住房交易和四类典型地方公共品微观数据，开展了微观机制和影响效应的实证研究。在“居住选址”维度，利用离散选择模型从选址概率角度识别了家庭对地方公共品的平均偏好，不同家庭的差异性偏好及内在机制；在“房价响应”维度，利用特征价格模型从支付意愿角度识别了相应偏好，及在不同子市场中的差异性。特别地，“居住选址”维度的分析为“房价响应”维度的子市场差异性提供了微观机制层面的解释。最后，论文探索了基于家庭居住选址偏好的三种政策支持方法，尝试为城市居住用地、公共服务设施及保障性住房的空间配置决策提供参考。论文实证研究发现：（1）从居住选址的微观机制来看，不同特征家庭对各类地方公共品具有显著的偏好差异性；（2）从地方公共品对住房价格空间差异的影响效应来看，典型地方公共品在租买子市场中的资本化效应存在明显差异，且能被居住选址的微观机制所解释；（3）从地方公共品变化对住房价格变化的影响效应来看，轨道交通和城市更新两类地方公共投资均提高了周边住房价格及租金，且在控制了遗漏变量和区位自选择后效应依然显著。结合实证研究结论和对政策支持方法的初步探索，论文建议城市管理部门：（1）充分发挥市场力量在地方公共品空间配置中的决定性作用，同时有效发挥规划和管理政策的引导性；（2）地方公共品及公共服务的相关城市规划与管理政策应当建立在对居民需求的客观把握基础上，提高科学性和有效性；（3）相关的城市规划和管理政策需要兼顾城市空间效率和包容性，合理协调地方公共品为各类群体带来的收益和成本。
A core area and hot topic in the fields of urban economics and housing economics is to understand how local public goods affect urban households’ residential location choices and housing prices in a city’s urban form. From the practical perspective, the strategy of “people-centered” “New Urbanization” proposed by the new central government also means that it is crucial for local governments to improve the city’s quality of life quality and sustainability by the effective and inclusive provision of local public goods and services. Therefore, from both academic and practical perspectives it is important to examine the economic mechanisms of local public goods’ impacts on residential location choices and housing prices, quantify the corresponding effects, and use those findings to support local governments’ demand-oriented urban planning and management policies.With thorough literature review, a two-dimensional analysis framework of “location choice - housing price response” is proposed, and empirical analysis is conducted under this framework using micro datasets of urban households, housing transactions and four types of local public goods in Beijing. Along the “location choice” dimension, discrete choice model is estimated to identify urban households’ preferences for local public goods and the preference heterogeneity across different household groups. Along the “housing price response” dimension, hedonic housing price model is estimated to identify the corresponding preferences, the differential preferences in homeownership and rental markets, and the effects of local public goods and their changes on the spatial variation and changes in housing prices and rents. It is worth mentioning that, the household references obtained from the “location choice” dimension help to understand the differential effects of local public goods on housing prices and rents. Based on all these empirical results, three urban planning and management policy evaluation methods are proposed, with the aim to provide quantitative decision supporting tools for city government’s provision and spatial allocation of residential land, local public goods and public housing projects.The main empirical findings are as follows. First, local public goods have significant impacts on urban households’ residential location choice behaviors, and their preferences varies significantly among different household groups. Second, the capitalization effects of local public goods in housing prices and rents are all statistically significant. Remarkable differentials exist in for-sale and rental markets, which can be explained by the micro mechanisms identified in residential location choice behaviors. Third, after partially addressing the endogeneity problems, the housing price and rent premiums from new subway stations and the removal of “urban villages” are still statistically significant.Based on the above empirical findings, this dissertation raises several policy implications for urban planning and management practices from three aspects. First, the role of market forces should be fully understand and respected when managing urban spatial growth, while public policy is also important to mitigate negative externalities. Second, urban planning and management policies related to local public goods should be carefully designed based on the real demand of urban residents. Third, such policies should consider both spatial efficiency and inclusive development in a city, and carefully balance the benefits and costs of different population groups.
