Please wait a minute...
浙江大学学报(理学版)  2023, Vol. 50 Issue (2): 236-248    DOI: 10.3785/j.issn.1008-9497.2023.02.013
城市科学     
国家工业遗产项目认定的资本化效应研究——基于双重差分法的实证分析
赵沁娜1,2(),李航1,2
1.合肥工业大学 管理学院,安徽 合肥 230009
2.合肥工业大学 产业转移与创新发展研究中心,安徽 合肥 230009
Study on capitalization effect of the national industrial heritage designation:An empirical analysis based on DID method
Qinna ZHAO1,2(),Hang LI1,2
1.School of Management,Hefei University of Technology,Hefei 230009,China
2.Industrial Transfer and Innovation Development Research Center,Hefei University of Technology,Hefei 230009,China
 全文: PDF(2738 KB)   HTML( 8 )
摘要:

以2017—2021年认定的国家工业遗产项目为研究对象,在特征价格模型基础上,采用双重差分法分析了国家工业遗产项目认定在住宅价格中的资本化效应及其时空异质性。结果显示:从整体上看,国家工业遗产项目认定对周边住宅价格具有显著的积极影响。认定后,工业遗产周边的住宅价格提升了1.62%,且影响呈随时间推移逐渐增强、随距离增加逐渐减弱的趋势;国家工业遗产项目认定在城市等级、使用现状和住宅分市场中存在显著的异质性。从城市等级层面看,位于二线城市的国家工业遗产项目对住宅价格的资本化效应比一线城市和新一线城市更为显著;从使用现状看,改造为博物馆的工业遗产项目所带来的经济效益最大,而被封存保护的工业遗产项目则会带来负的经济效益;从住宅分市场看,低档住宅因居住环境和配套设施尚未完善,比高档住宅更能感知国家工业遗产项目认定带来的资本化效应。

关键词: 国家工业遗产住宅价格双重差分法特征价格模型    
Abstract:

Based on DID-Hedonic price model, this paper analyzes the capitalization effect and spatio-temporal Heterogeneity of national industrial heritage designation on housing prices. The results show that on the whole, the designation of national industrial heritage has a significant positive impact on the residential housing prices. After designation, the housing price around it increased significantly by 1.62%, and the influence gradually increased with time, but gradually weakened with the increase of distance. Besides, the capitalization effect of national industrial heritage designation has a significant heterogeneity in city grade, use status of industrial heritage and residential sub-market. From the city grade aspect, the capitalization effect in second-tier cities is more significant than that in first-tier cities and new first-tier cities. From the current use status of industrial heritage aspect, the museum brings the largest economic benefits, while the sealed protection status will bring negative effect; From the view of housing sub-market, due to its less perfect living environment and supporting facilities, low-grade housing is more able to perceive the capitalization effect brought by national industrial heritage recognition than high-grade housing.

Key words: national industrial heritage    housing price    double difference method (DID)    hedonic price model
收稿日期: 2022-03-29 出版日期: 2023-03-21
CLC:  F 299.27  
基金资助: 国家自然科学青年基金项目(41401654)
作者简介: 赵沁娜(1978—),ORCID:https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2707-0896,女,博士,副教授,主要从事资源环境经济研究,E-mail:zhaoqinna@sina.com.
服务  
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章  
赵沁娜
李航

引用本文:

赵沁娜,李航. 国家工业遗产项目认定的资本化效应研究——基于双重差分法的实证分析[J]. 浙江大学学报(理学版), 2023, 50(2): 236-248.

Qinna ZHAO,Hang LI. Study on capitalization effect of the national industrial heritage designation:An empirical analysis based on DID method. Journal of Zhejiang University (Science Edition), 2023, 50(2): 236-248.

链接本文:

https://www.zjujournals.com/sci/CN/10.3785/j.issn.1008-9497.2023.02.013        https://www.zjujournals.com/sci/CN/Y2023/V50/I2/236

图1  五批次国家工业遗产项目分布示意注 基于国家测绘地理信息局标准地图服务网站下载的审图号为GS(2020)4619的标准地图制作,底图无修改。
图2  研究样本筛选过程
名称地址使用现状认定年份
汉阳铁厂湖北省武汉市博物馆2017
重钢型钢厂重庆市博物馆2017
国营738厂北京市文化创意园2018
国营751厂北京市文化创意园2018
北京卫星制造厂北京市工业生产2018
金陵机器局江苏省南京市文化创意园2018
济南第二机床厂山东省济南市工业生产2018
青岛啤酒厂山东省青岛市博物馆2018
青岛国棉五厂山东省青岛市文化创意园2018
成都国营红光电子管厂四川省成都市文化创意园2018
北京珐琅厂北京市博物馆2019
度支部印刷局北京市工业生产2019
上海造币厂上海市博物馆2019
成都市井街酒坊四川省成都市博物馆2019
北京电报大楼北京市博物馆2020
天津第三棉纺织厂天津市文化创意园2020
兵工署第一兵工厂旧址重庆市博物馆2020
大连造船厂修船南坞辽宁省大连市工业生产2020
长春电影制片厂吉林省长春市博物馆2020
哈尔滨卷烟厂旧址黑龙江省哈尔滨市封存保护2020
哈尔滨电机厂黑龙江省哈尔滨市工业生产2020
哈尔滨锅炉厂黑龙江省哈尔滨市封存保护2020
大北电报局上海市博物馆2020
山东省邮电管理局旧址山东省济南市博物馆2020
表1  国家工业遗产项目样本基本概况
变量量化指标均值标准差最小值最大值
住宅价格万元/套329.20296.7042.001 310.00
住宅价格对数住宅价格的自然对数5.420.893.747.18
房间数住宅的房间数量/间5.461.4339
面积住宅建筑面积/m279.8834.0932.35179.42
装修情况虚拟变量,对装修情况进行赋值:毛坯房(0)、简装房(1)、精装房(2)1.090.8302
电梯虚拟变量,对是否有电梯进行赋值:有电梯(1)、无电梯(0)0.640.4801
房龄房屋年龄=交易年份-建成年份/ a17.259.28039
容积率住宅小区实际容积率/2.821.191.005.90
绿化率住宅小区实际绿化率/0.310.090.100.50
物业费住宅小区物业管理费/(元/月·m)19.4412.123.6054.36
公园虚拟变量,小区1 km内是否有公园,有(1)无(0)0.850.3601
公交线路小区500 m内公交线路条数/条6.593.19014
生活配套小区1 km内是否有超市、餐饮、医院、银行,有每项计1分,共4分3.340.4834
教育配套小区1 km内是否有幼儿园、小学、中学,有每项计1分,共3分2.900.3313
地铁站距离小区到最近地铁站的直线距离/km0.800.650.104.50
CBD距离小区到市政府的直线距离/km15.7310.822.2035.10
商圈距离小区到最近商圈的直线距离/km1.080.570.103.90
表2  样本数据主要变量的描述性统计

被解释变量:

住宅价格对数

回归结果
(1)(2)(3)(4)
treat0.004 2(0.930 4)0.011 8***(2.680 7)0.018 7***(7.003 6)0.019 0***(7.088 0)
treat×post0.064 5***(8.030 3)0.048 5***(6.074 1)0.016 2***(3.837 9)0.104 8***(9.300 5)
treat×post×D-0.123 3***(-8.384 9)
房间数0.066 2***(42.330 1)0.066 1***(42.304 5)
面积0.008 1***(112.034 4)0.0081***(112.158 4)
装修情况0.017 9***(13.846 6)0.017 8***(13.800 6)
电梯0.035 0***(10.400 3)0.035 4***(10.519 2)
房龄-0.003 5***(-15.818 1)-0.003 5***(-15.942 9)
容积率0.000 3(0.312 2)0.000 2(0.164 8)
绿化率0.029 4**(2.104 2)0.027 1*(1.942 1)
物业费0.098 1***(59.007 2)0.097 8***(58.848 9)
公园0.018 1***(6.417 9)0.018 1***(6.411 5)
公交线路-0.002 8***(-6.710 2)-0.002 7***(-6.325 7)
生活配套0.027 7***(11.348 9)0.028 5***(11.680 4)
教育配套0.091 5***(30.918 3)0.090 5***(30.572 6)
地铁站距离-0.057 4***(-31.246 6)-0.057 1***(-31.108 6)
CBD距离对数-0.103 1***(-19.897 8)-0.1041 ***(-20.0732)
商圈距离-0.058 3***(-29.655 6)-0.057 6***(-29.296 0)
常数项6.012 3***(1.4×1036.095 1***(1.2×1035.072 9***(202.554 7)5.077 0***(202.594 9)
年份固定效应
城市固定效应
工业遗产固定效应
样本量76 03576 03576 03576 035
调整R20.682 60.687 10.906 10.906 2
F-static1.1×1049.9×1032.2×1042.2×104
表3  基准回归结果

被解释变量:

住宅价格对数

回归结果
(1)(2)(3)(4)
treat0.003 5(0.790 0)0.011 4***(2.582 6)0.018 5***(6.903 8)0.018 7***(6.985 3)
treat×post0.003 6(0.227 0)0.015 3(0.985 2)-0.000 5(-0.059 9)0.087 8***(6.751 8)
treat×trend0.043 2***(4.709 4)0.023 7***(2.612 2)0.012 0***(2.802 6)0.012 4***(2.905 0)
treat×post×D-0.123 7***(-8.398 0 )
年份固定效应
城市固定效应
工业遗产固定效应
住房特征因素
样本量76 03576 03576 03576 035
调整R20.682 70.687 10.906 10.906 2
F-static1.0×1049.5×1032.2×1042.1×104
表4  动态效应检验结果
图3  国家工业遗产项目认定对周边住宅价格影响的时空动态效应
图4  treat×post估计系数的t值分布
图5  treat×post×D估计系数的t值分布

被解释变量:

住宅价格对数

回归结果
(1)(2)(3)(4)
treat0.001 3(0.223 2)0.004 8(0.817 7)0.011 9***(3.269 3)0.012 4***(3.407 2)
treat × post0.086 0***(9.223 8)0.070 9***(7.572 2)0.030 6***(6.070 1)0.113 8***(9.947 4)
treat × post × D-0.115 7***(-7.965 7)
年份固定效应
城市固定效应
工业遗产固定效应
住房特征因素
样本量39 71239 71239 71239 712
调整R20.664 50.672 70.898 50.898 6
F-static5.2×1034.9×1031.1×1041.0×104
表5  PSM-DID的回归结果

被解释变量:

住宅价格对数

回归结果
Re=0~500 mRe=0~800 mRe=0~1 000 m
Rc=500~1 000 mRc=800~1 600 mRc=1 000~2 000 m
基准回归PSM基准回归PSM基准回归PSM
treat

0.010 0**

(2.155 1)

0.033 6***

(5.241 5)

0.020 8***

(6.268 2)

0.049 7***

(11.341 3)

0.019 0***

(7.088 0)

0.012 4***

(3.407 2

treat×post

0.157 0***

(5.135 1)

0.140 9***

(4.714 5)

0.084 3***

(5.556 2)

0.071 8***

(4.766 4)

0.104 8***

(9.300 5)

0.113 8***

(9.947 4)

treat×post×D

-0.368 6***

(-5.5161 )

-0.335 9***

(-5.265 3)

-0.116 7***

(-4.888 0)

-0.128 9***

(-5.554 9)

-0.123 3***

(-8.384 9)

-0.115 7***

(-7.965 7)

年份固定效应
城市固定效应
工业遗产固定效应
住房特征因素
样本量24 39811 05251 15725 81776 03539 712
调整R20.905 50.921 70.902 10.902 90.906 20.898 6
F-static7.0×1033.9×1031.4×1047.2×1032.2×1041.0×104
表6  不同影响半径的回归结果
被解释变量:住宅价格对数一线城市新一线城市二线城市
treat

0.001 4

(0.373 9)

-0.010 1***

(-2.988 7)

0.048 0***

(5.764 1)

treat×post

0.089 9***

(5.787 1)

0.062 7***

(4.813 8)

0.094 9***

(2.649 1)

treat×post×D

-0.127 8***

(-6.157 0)

-0.064 5***

(-3.869 0)

-0.055 4

(-1.169 9)

年份固定效应
城市固定效应
工业遗产固定效应
住房特征因素
样本量35 91131 8448 280
调整R20.737 40.821 30.814 0
F-static3.6×1035.4×1031.7×103
表7  城市等级的异质性检验
被解释变量:住宅价格对数工业生产博物馆文化创意园封存保护
treat0.020 5***4.335 9)0.041 2***(10.444 0)-0.036 8***(-7.354 9)-0.073 7***(-5.279 6)
treat×post0.094 5***(4.518 5)0.144 4***(9.220 5)0.124 8***(7.617 9)-0.080 5*(-1.769 7)
treat×post×D-0.078 3***(-2.904 0)-0.230 5***(-10.432 7)-0.082 9***(-4.018 1)0.161 3**(2.491 5)
年份固定效应
城市固定效应
工业遗产固定效应
住房特征因素
样本量15 62038 64719 4522 316
调整R20.906 50.885 10.928 60.724 4
F-static5.6×1031.2×1048.9×103275.024 0
表8  国家工业遗产项目使用现状的异质性检验
图6  treat×post分位数回归结果
1 TONIN S, TURVANI M. Redeveloping industrial land: Are contamination and remediation schemes affecting the price of industrial real estate properties?[J]. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 2014, 57(7): 443-447. DOI:10.1080/09640568.2013.782271
doi: 10.1080/09640568.2013.782271
2 徐苏宁, 王国庆, 李世芬, 等. 工业遗产保护与城市更新[J]. 城市规划, 2017, 41(2): 81-84, 101. DOI:10.11819/cpr201702013s
XU S N, WANG G Q, LI S F, et al. Industrial heritage protection and urban regeneration[J]. City Planning Review, 2017, 41(2): 81-84, 101. DOI:10.11819/cpr201702013s
doi: 10.11819/cpr201702013s
3 NEWELL T. Development and neighborhood revitalization: The effects of residential investment on property values in Durham, NC[J]. Michigan Journal of Business, 2010, 3(2): 97-120.
4 王璠. 城市公园对住宅价格影响的时空效应研究[D]. 徐州: 中国矿业大学, 2020.
WANG F. Study on Spatiotemporal Effect of Urban Park on Housing Price[D]. Xuzhou: China University of Mining and Technology, 2020.
5 刘彩霞, 陈安平. 城市更新的溢价效应: 来自城中村改造的准自然实验[J]. 中国经济问题, 2021(4): 78-90. DOI:10.19365/j.issn1000-4181.2021.04.06
LIU C X, CHEN A P. Urban renewal's premium: Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment of urban village redevelopment[J]. Economic Issues in China, 2021(4): 78-90. DOI:10.19365/j.issn1000-4181.2021.04.06
doi: 10.19365/j.issn1000-4181.2021.04.06
6 汤庆园. 土地开发与产业升级关系的研究:以上海为例[D]. 上海: 华东师范大学, 2014.
TANG Q Y. Relationship Between Land Development and Industrial Upgrading: A Case Study of Shanghai[D]. Shanghai: East China Normal University, 2014.
7 FORD D A. The effect of historic district designation on single-family home prices[J]. Real Estate Economics, 1989, 17(3): 353-362. DOI:10.1111/1540-6229.00496
doi: 10.1111/1540-6229.00496
8 ASABERE P K, HUFFMAN F E. Historic designation and residential market values[J]. Appraisal Journal, 1994, 62(3): 396-401. doi:10.1007/bf01096993
doi: 10.1007/bf01096993
9 LEICHENKO R M, COULSON N E, LISTOKIN D. Historic preservation and residential property values: An analysis of texas cities[J]. Urban Studies, 2001, 38(11): 1973-1987. doi:10.1080/00420980120080880
doi: 10.1080/00420980120080880
10 RUIJGROK E C M. The three economic values of cultural heritage: A case study in the Netherlands[J]. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 2006, 7(3): 206-213. DOI:10.1016/j.culher.2006.07.002
doi: 10.1016/j.culher.2006.07.002
11 MORO M, MAYOR K, LYONS S, et al. Does the housing market reflect cultural heritage? A case study of Greater Dublin[J]. Environment & Planning A, 2013, 45(12): 2884-2903. DOI:10.1068/a45524
doi: 10.1068/a45524
12 DUIJN M V, ROUWENDAL J, BOERSEMA R. Transformations of industrial heritage: Insights into external effects on house prices[J]. Journal of Regional Science, 2020, 60(4): 583-611.
13 JAYANTHA W M, YUNG E H K. Effect of revitalisation of historic buildings on retail shop values in urban renewal: An empirical analysis[J]. Sustainability, 2018, 10(5): 1-18. DOI:10.3390/su10051418
doi: 10.3390/su10051418
14 KEE T, CHAU K W. Economic sustainability of heritage conservation in Hong Kong: The impact of heritage buildings on adjacent property prices[J]. Sustainable Development, 2020, 28(1): 308-319. DOI:10.1002/sd.2004
doi: 10.1002/sd.2004
15 LIU C X, LIU X L. Adaptive reuse of religious heritage and its impact on house prices[J]. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 2020, 64(1): 71-92. DOI:10.1007/s11146-020-09798-x
doi: 10.1007/s11146-020-09798-x
16 TAN S B, TI E S W. What is the value of built heritage conservation? Assessing spillover effects of conserving historic sites in Singapore[J]. Land Use Policy, 2020, 91: 104393. DOI:10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104393
doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104393
17 SCHAEFFER P V, MILLERICK C A. The impact of historic district designation on property values: An empirical study[J]. Economic Development Quarterly, 2014, 5(4): 301-312. DOI:10.1177/089124249100500402
doi: 10.1177/089124249100500402
18 NOONAN D S, KRUPKA D J. Making-or Picking-Winners: Evidence of internal and external price effects in historic preservation policies[J]. Real Estate Economics, 2011, 39(2): 379-407. DOI:10.1111/j.1540-6229.2010.00293.x
doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6229.2010.00293.x
19 HEINTZELMAN M D, ALTIERI J J. Erratum to: Historic preservation: Preserving value?[J]. The Journal of Real Estate Finance & Economics, 2013, 46(3): 564-564. DOI:10.1007/s11146-011-9355-7
doi: 10.1007/s11146-011-9355-7
20 MESTHRIGE J W, WONG J K W, YUK L N. Conversion or redevelopment? Effects of revitalization of old industrial buildings on property values[J]. Habitat International, 2018,73(1): 53-64. DOI:10.1016/j.habitatint.2017.12.005
doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2017.12.005
21 马雨墨, 周岚, 韩强. 国家工业遗产认定方式探究:从专业视角推动决策的尝试[J]. 遗产与保护研究, 2018, 3(3): 30-34. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.2096-0913. 2018.03.007
MA Y M, ZHOU L, HAN Q. Research on the identification of national industrial heritage: Decision making propulsion from profession point of view[J]. Research on Heritage and Preservation, 2018, 3(3): 30-34. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.2096-0913.2018. 03.007
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2096-0913.2018. 03.007
22 温海珍. 城市住宅的特征价格:理论分析与实证研究[D]. 杭州: 浙江大学, 2004. doi:10.1631/jzus.2005.a0907
WEN H Z. Hedonic Prices of Urban Housing: Theoretical Analysis and Empirical Study[D]. Hangzhou: Zhejiang University, 2004. doi:10.1631/jzus.2005.a0907
doi: 10.1631/jzus.2005.a0907
23 王德, 黄万枢. 外部环境对住宅价格影响的Hedonic法研究:以上海市为例[J]. 城市规划, 2007, 31(9): 34-41, 46. DOI:10.3321/j.issn:1002-1329.2007. 09.006
WAND D, HUANG W S. Effect of urban environment on residential property values by hedonic method: A case study of Shanghai[J]. City Planning Review, 2007, 31(9): 34-41, 46. DOI:10.3321/j.issn:1002-1329.2007.09.006
doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1002-1329.2007.09.006
24 曾迎香, 张英杰, 刘萍. 北京市新建城市公园对住房的价格溢出效应研究[J]. 价格月刊, 2021(1): 1-8. DOI:10.14076/j.issn.1006-2025.2021.01.01
ZENG Y X, ZHANG Y J, LIU P. Research on the spillover effect of newly-built urban parks on housing prices in Beijing[J]. Prices Monthly, 2021(1): 1-8. DOI:10.14076/j.issn.1006-2025.2021.01.01
doi: 10.14076/j.issn.1006-2025.2021.01.01
25 张英杰. 地方公共品影响居住选址和住房价格的机制与效应研究[D]. 北京: 清华大学, 2015.
ZHANG Y J. Research on the Economic Mechanisms and Effects of Local Public Goods′ Impacts on Residential Location Choice and Housing Price[D]. Beijing: Tsinghua University,2015.
26 LIANG C M, LEE C C, YONG L R. Impacts of urban renewal on neighborhood housing prices: Predicting response to psychological effects[J]. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 2020, 35(1): 191-213. DOI:10.1007/s10901-019-09673-z
doi: 10.1007/s10901-019-09673-z
27 SCHWARTZ A E, ELLENA I G, VOICU I, et al. The external effects of place-based subsidized housing[J]. Regional Science & Urban Economics, 2006, 36(6): 679-707. DOI:10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2006.04.002
doi: 10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2006.04.002
28 WANG J. The economic impact of special economic zones: Evidence from Chinese municipalities[J]. Journal of Development Economics, 2013, 101(1): 133-147. DOI:10.1016/j.jdeveco.2012.10.009
doi: 10.1016/j.jdeveco.2012.10.009
29 董藩, 丁宏, 赵安平. 通勤成本与轨道交通周边房价的空间分布: 以北京地铁五号线周边住宅市场为例的实证分析[J]. 北京师范大学学报(社会科学版), 2009(4): 137-143. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-0209. 2009.04.016
DONG F, DING H, ZHAO A P. Commuting cost and space distribution of housing price in areas near rail transit: An empirical analysis of residential market near No.5 line subway in Beijing[J]. Journal of Beijing Normal University (Social Sciences), 2009(4):137-143. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-0209.2009.04.016
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-0209.2009.04.016
30 彭涛. 成都市住宅价格空间分异及其影响因素研究[D]. 成都: 四川师范大学, 2020.
PENG T. Spatial Differentiation and Influencing Factors of Housing Prices in Chengdu[D]. Chengdu: Sichuan Normal University, 2020.
31 王优容, 王自义, 易成栋, 等. 棚户区改造对周边住房价格的溢出效应:基于北京市海淀区的实证分析[J]. 城市发展研究, 2020, 27(12): 106-113, 131. DOI:10. 3969/j.issn.1006-3862.2020.12.019
WANG Y R, WAND Z Y, YI C D, et al. The spillover effects of urban renewal projects on local housing prices: Empirical evidences based on shanty town reconstruction in Beijing[J]. Urban Development Studies, 2020, 27(12): 106-113, 131. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1006-3862.2020.12.019
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-3862.2020.12.019
32 CAI X Q, LU Y, WU M Q, et al. Does environmental regulation drive away inbound foreign direct investment?Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment in China[J]. Journal of Development Economics, 2016, 123(1): 73-85. DOI:10.1016/j.jdeveco.2016.08.003
doi: 10.1016/j.jdeveco.2016.08.003
33 何瑛, 于文蕾, 杨棉之. CEO复合型职业经历、企业风险承担与企业价值[J]. 中国工业经济, 2019(9): 155-173.
HE Y, YU W L, YANG M Z. CEOs with rich career experience, corporate risk-taking and the value of enterprises[J]. China Industrial Economics, 2019(9): 155-173.
34 万思齐, 杨励雅. 高铁建设对城市经济集聚的影响:基于地区和行业异质性角度[J]. 城市问题, 2020 (4): 40-50. DOI:10.13239/j.bjsshkxy.cswt.200405
WAN S Q, YANG L Y. The impact of high-speed rail construction on urban economic agglomeration: From the perspective of regional and industrial heterogeneity[J]. Urban Problems, 2020(4): 40-50. DOI:10.13239/j.bjsshkxy.cswt.200405
doi: 10.13239/j.bjsshkxy.cswt.200405
35 刘彬, 陈忠暖. 城市怀旧空间的文化建构与空间体验:以成都东郊记忆为例[J]. 城市问题, 2016(9): 35-41. DOI:10.13239/j.bjsshkxy.cswt.160905
LIU B, CHEN Z N. Research on the cultural construction and tourists' space experience:Taking the eastern suburb memory of Chengdu as an example[J]. Urban Problems, 2016(9): 35-41. DOI:10.13239/j.bjsshkxy.cswt.160905
doi: 10.13239/j.bjsshkxy.cswt.160905
36 徐萌琦, 范群杰, 黄景能, 等. 近60年苏州河岸带逆工业化演变与遗产保护[J]. 地理空间信息, 2022, 20 (3): 42-47. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1672-4623.2022. 03.009
XU M Q, FAN Q J, HUANG J N, et al. Suzhou creek riparian zone deindustrialization evolution and heritage protection in the past 60 years[J]. Geospatial Information, 2022, 20(3): 42-47. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1672-4623.2022.03.009
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-4623.2022.03.009
[1] 张凌, 杨霖尊. 基于CEEMD的重大事件对香港住宅价格影响的实证分析[J]. 浙江大学学报(理学版), 2020, 47(3): 380-390.
[2] 冯友建, 陈天一. 基于SEM模型的轨道交通对住宅价格的空间效应——以杭州市为例[J]. 浙江大学学报(理学版), 2020, 47(1): 115-122.