This article critically evaluates the economic capitalization of urban nature within housing markets to inform residential planning. It addresses the limitation of strategies prioritizing green space “quantity” over “quality”, aiming to resolve inconsistencies in Hedonic Pricing Model (HPM) literature regarding environmental amenities.
A rigorous three-level random-effects meta-analysis was conducted on 75 empirical studies (1990–2023). To ensure robustness, the study applied strict inclusion criteria, specifically filtering for research that quantified ecological quality metrics (e.g. vegetation health) rather than mere presence, ensuring a high-integrity dataset.
The analysis reveals that ecological quality (e.g. vegetation condition) and spatial configuration (accessibility) are significantly stronger drivers of housing price premiums than mere quantity (size). Notably, this capitalization effect is context-dependent, showing significantly stronger impacts in developing countries and high-density regions compared to developed contexts.
For rapidly urbanizing societies, particularly in the Global South, shifting focus from “large, distant parks” to “high-quality, accessible pockets” offers a more socially equitable path. This strategy maximizes resident well-being and economic value in high-density environments where land resources for housing are scarce.
This study challenges the simplistic “more is better” approach. It provides the first meta-analytic evidence distinguishing “quality versus quantity” in housing markets, offering evidence-based strategies for optimizing built environments in density-constrained cities.
