MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4384665647 · doi:10.22215/etd/2022-15463

Quantifying Willingness-to-Pay for Complete Streets

2022· dissertation· en· W4384665647 on OpenAlexaffabout
Morgan Vincent Nordstrom

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProperty valueResidential propertyValue (mathematics)Willingness to payProperty (philosophy)Land ValuesGeographyBusinessTransport engineeringPublic economicsEngineeringCivil engineeringEconomicsRegional scienceLand useStatisticsMathematicsFinanceMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Complete Streets have been lauded for their environmental and social benefits, but quantifying those benefits can be challenging.This thesis uses a difference-in-differences method to evaluate how Complete Streets in Toronto, Ontario impacted residential property values.Using a dataset of nearly all residential properties sold in the city, I find that residential property values near a Complete Street conversion increase by, on average, 10.5%.However, the magnitude and significance of that impact vary around each street.Results contrast with other on-and off-street bike lane installations, which did not significantly impact house prices, but questions remain about the exact mechanism of a Complete Street's valorizing effects.Understanding how and when Complete Streets influence property values can be a helpful policy input for municipalities interested in capturing value from cycling infrastructure investments.However, further research is needed to understand how these effects might impact the equitable distribution of housing.Many years ago, Dr. Abel Brodeur reviewed the very first model I used to test the property value response from Complete Streets.At the time it was only a proof-ofconcept with a few hundred houses worth of data, but he helped me focus the model and tested some of my early intuitions.Though this research has evolved substantially since his original input, I would be remiss without thanking him for starting me on this path in the first place.Since then, I have been fortunate to have received helpful instruction from Dr. Pablo Mendez and Dr. Matt Webb.Your guidance and suggestions, and the interdisciplinary combination of your insights, in particular, have been invaluable.The experience of writing this thesis with you both has been a pleasure, and I look forward to our future work together.I also want to thank the faculty and administration in the Department of Geography and Environmental Studies.Their dedication and support of the DGES students are unwavering and always appreciated.Thank you to Dr. Ardyn Nordstrom for constantly cheering me on

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.094
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.195 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHousing Market and Economics→French-language works237,207→