Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea Planning & Design (대한건축학회논문집:계획계)

Architectural Institute of Korea (대한건축학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Economic Valuation and Valuating Properties on the Architectural Aesthetic through the Contingent Valuation Method

가상가치법을 통한 건축미의 경제적 가치추정 및 가치부여 특성

  • 이동주 (연세대학교 심바이오틱라이프텍연구원) ;
  • 고은형 (계명문화대학교 건축인테리어과)
  • Received : 2019.11.07
  • Accepted : 2020.02.07
  • Published : 2020.02.28
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to estimate the economic value of architectural aesthetic using the contingent valuation method and to analyze the value-giving characteristics. The site survey was conducted based on the scenario of Dong-daemun Design Plaza, which is recognized as a work of outstanding architectural aesthetic. Based on 307 opinions collected, the main results are as follows: First, it could be confirmed that the higher the level of architectural aesthetic, the higher the payment amount was. The result of estimating the value of the architectural aesthetic on the basis of the fixed amount levy showed that the average payment amount was 8,859 won per person. The average payment amount was 13,014 won per person when the rejector of payment was excluded. The value of architectural aesthetic was about 13.72% of total construction cost. Second, free riding, which occurs mainly in the measurement of the value of public goods or environmental goods, appeared. This tendency is stronger in the elderly than in the younger, and in the differential amount levy than in the fixed amount levy. Third, the extreme subjectivity of architectural aesthetic value could be confirmed. While there are a lot of extreme denials of payments such as 0 won, the high-income was willing to pay a substantial amount. Fourth, it was confirmed that income factors was partly involved in the measured value.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : 한국연구재단

이 논문은 2017년도 정부(교육부)의 재원으로 한국연구재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 기초연구사업임(NRF-2017R1D1A1B03035577)

References

  1. Stamps III, Arthur. E, (1989). Are environmental aesthetics worth studying, Journal of architectural and planning research vol 6 issue 4, pp. 344-355
  2. Thomas Kapper, (2004). Bring beauty to account in the environmental impact statement: the contingent valuation of landscape aesthetics, Environmental practice vol. 6, No. 4, p.302
  3. Thomas. Kapper, (2000). The economic value of landscape aesthetic: Integrating contingent valuation and aesthetic assessment in a Wisconsin Highway Project, University of Wisconsin-Madison, PH. D
  4. Lee, D. (2009a). A study on the effects of the architecture aesthetic on the potential use value, Ph.D. Dissertation, Kyungpook National University.
  5. Lee, D., & Ko, E. (2009b). A study on the effect of exterior design of buildings on choice of shopping malls, Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea, Planning and Design Section, 25(10), 57-66.
  6. Lee, D., & Ko, E. (2012). A Methodological Approach on Economic Valuation of the Phenomenal Architectural Aesthetic by Integrating the Fuzzy Theory with Contingent Valuation, Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea, Planning and Design Section, 28(3), 63-72.
  7. Lee, D., & Ko, E. (2018). Attractiveness Valuation of Phenomenal Architectural Aesthetic by Mixing the Fuzzy Logic with Contingent Valuation, Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea, Planning and Design Section, 34(5), 3-10.
  8. Lee, I., Moon, Y., & Shin, S. (2008). An Analysis of the Effects of Aesthetic Design Factors on Apartment Price, Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea, Planning and Design Section, 24(2), 121-128.
  9. Lee, D. (2001). Questions and History of Value Theory, Junglimsa.
  10. Samuelson. P. A, (1954). The pure theory of public expenditure, Review of economics and statistics 36: pp.387-389 https://doi.org/10.2307/1925895
  11. Richard T. Carson, (1997). Contingent valuation: Theoretical advance and empirical tests since the NOAA panel, American Journal of Agricultural Economics V. 79 no. 5