Identification and estimation of hedonic models
Open accessAbstract
This paper considers the identification and estimation of hedonic models. We establish that in an additive version of the hedonic model, technology and preferences are generically nonparametrically identified from data on demand and supply in a single hedonic market. The empirical literature that claims that hedonic models estimated on data from a single market are fundamentally underidentified is based on arbitrary linearizations that do not use all the information in the model. The exact economic model that justifies linear approximations is unappealing. Nonlinearities are generic features of equilibrium in hedonic models and a fundamental and economically motivated source of identification.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A standard strategy for evaluating the marginal willingness to pay for a local amenity is to estimate the response of housing values to exogenous shocks in the amenity.
“A standard strategy for evaluating the marginal willingness to pay for a local amenity is to estimate the response of housing values to exogenous shocks in the amenity (Rosen, 1974 and Ekeland et al. 2004).”
From The effects of low income housing tax credit developments on neighborhoods (2009) · cites this paper as Ekeland et al. 2004
Cites
Mussa, M., & Rosen, S. (1978) · Journal of Economic Theory · doi:10.1016/0022-0531(78)90085-6 · Cited by 3,306 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The effects of low income housing tax credit developments on neighborhoods
Baum-Snow, N., & Marion, J. (2009) · Journal of Public Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2009.01.001 · Cited by 264 · see citing works
- Authors
- Ekeland, I., Heckman, J. J., & Nesheim, L.
- Affiliations
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- American Bar Foundation (US)
- Institute for Fiscal Studies (GB)
- Venue
- Journal of Political Economy
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 2004-02
- Volume
- 112
- Issue
- S1
- Pages
- S60-S109
- ISSN
- 0022-3808 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-534X
- OpenAlex
- W2891377854
- Cited by
- 380
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 19
- FWCI
- 24.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Political Economy (publishedVersion)
- SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Base Institutionnelle de Recherche de l'université Paris-Dauphine (BIRD) (University Paris-Dauphine) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Econstor (Econstor) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- American Bar Foundation
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Housing Market and Economics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic theories and models
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economics of Agriculture and Food Markets
- Keywords
- hedonic model, nonparametric identification, technology identification, preference identification, linearization
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
