Spatial Variability of the ‘Airbnb Effect’: A Spatially Explicit Analysis of Airbnb’s Impact on Housing Prices in Sydney
Over the last decade, the emergence and significant growth of home-sharing platforms, such as Airbnb, has coincided with rising housing unaffordability in many global cities. It is in this context that we look to empirically assess the impact of Airbnb on housing prices in Sydney—one of the least af...
Saved in:
Published in | ISPRS international journal of geo-information Vol. 11; no. 1; p. 65 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Basel
MDPI AG
01.01.2022
|
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Over the last decade, the emergence and significant growth of home-sharing platforms, such as Airbnb, has coincided with rising housing unaffordability in many global cities. It is in this context that we look to empirically assess the impact of Airbnb on housing prices in Sydney—one of the least affordable cities in the world. Employing a hedonic property valuation model, our results indicate that Airbnb’s overall effect is positive. A 1% increase in Airbnb density is associated with approximately a 2% increase in property sales price. However, recognizing that Airbnb’s effect is geographically uneven and given the fragmented nature of Sydney’s housing market, we also employ a GWR to account for the spatial variation in Airbnb activity. The findings confirm that Airbnb’s influence on housing prices is varied across the city. Sydney’s northern beaches and parts of western Sydney experience a statistically significant value uplift attributable to Airbnb activity. However, traditional tourist locations focused around Sydney’s CBD and the eastern suburbs experience insignificant or negative property price impacts. The results highlight the need for policymakers to consider local Airbnb and housing market contexts when deciding the appropriate level and design of Airbnb regulation. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2220-9964 2220-9964 |
DOI: | 10.3390/ijgi11010065 |