skip to main content

Comparison of The Property Players’ Preferences on Housing Prices in Surabaya

Sebastian Arif Muktiwibowo  -  Petra Christian University, Indonesia
*Njo Anastasia orcid scopus publons  -  Petra Christian University, Indonesia

Citation Format:
Abstract
A landed house is a real estate product that is used to fulfill consumption or investment motives. This study was conducted to compare the preferences of developers, consumers, and investors for housing prices in Surabaya on both motives. Respondents were selected by purposive sampling and obtained 417 respondents. Data collection through questionnaires was conducted offline to developers and online to consumers and investors. Test data used Kendall concordance and Kruskal Wall test to analyze the comparison of developer, consumer, and investor preferences. The results showed that the three players had different preference variables on house prices in Surabaya related to physical quality, brand, location concept, location environment, financial condition, and livability. Developers focus on products (physical quality and housing concept) and brands. Consumers prioritize physical quality, location environment, and financial condition. Furthermore, investors prioritize the physical and environmental quality of the location.  Physical quality is a key preference among developers, consumers, and investors. These findings indicate that each party has their own prioritized interests, so their preferences differ according to their motives.
Fulltext View|Download
Keywords: Developer, Consumer, Investor, Housing Price

Article Metrics:

  1. Aliyev, K., Amiraslanova, M., Bakirova, N., & Eynizada, N. (2019). Determinants of Housing Prices in Baku: Empirical Analyses. International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, 12(2), 281–297. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJHMA-08-2018-0062
  2. Aluko, B. T. (2007). Examining Valuer’s Judgement in Residential Property Valuations in Metropolitan Lagos, Nigeria. Property Management, 25(1), 98–107. https://doi.org/10.1108/02637470710723281
  3. Badan Pusat Statistik Kota Surabaya. (2023, September 13). Banyaknya Penduduk Menurut Jenis Kelamin Per Kecamatan Hasil Registrasi (Jiwa), 2020-2022. Dinas Pendaftaran Penduduk dan Pencatatan Sipil Kota Surabaya. https://surabayakota.bps.go.id/indicator/12/117/1/banyaknya-penduduk-menurut-jenis-kelamin-per-kecamatan-hasil-registrasi.html
  4. Blakely, E. J., & Snyder, M. G. (1999). Fortress America: Gated communities in the United States. Brookings Institution Press
  5. Boarnet, M. G., & Chalermpong, S. (2001). New Highways, House Prices, and Urban Development: A case Study of Toll Roads in Orange County, Ca. Housing Policy Debate, 12(3), 575–605
  6. Chia, J., Harun, A., Kassim, A. W. M., Martin, D., & Kepal, N. (2016). Understanding Factors that Influence House Purchase Intention among Consumers in Kota Kinabalu: An Application of Buyer Behavior Model Theory. Journal of Technology Management and Business, 3(2), 94–110
  7. Clark, W. A. V., & Dieleman, F. M. (2017). Choice and Outcomes in the Housing Market. In Households and housing. Taylor and Francis
  8. Coolen, H., & Hoekstra, J. (2001). Values as Determinants of Preferences for Housing Attributes. In Journal of Housing and the Built Environment (Vol. 16, Issue 4). https://www.jstor.org/stable/41107184?seq=1&cid=pdf-
  9. Daly, J., Gronow, S., Jenkins, D., & Plimmer, F. (2003). Consumer Behaviour in the Valuation of Residential Property: A Comparative Study in the UK, Ireland and Australia. In Property Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/02637470310508653
  10. de Bruin, A., & Flint-Hartle, S. (2003). A Bounded Rationality Framework for Property Investment Behavior. Journal of Property Investment and Finance, 21(3), 271–284. https://doi.org/10.1108/14635780310481685
  11. Dhar, R., & Simonson, I. (2003). The Effect of Forced Choice on Choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 40(2), 146–160. https://www.jstor.org/stable/30038845
  12. Farasa, N., & Kusuma, H. E. (2018). Housing Preferences of Young Adults in Indonesia: Housing Attributes and Consequences. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 126(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/126/1/012184
  13. Gabrielli, L. (2018). Residential Investment: Cash Cows or Question Marks? In Journal of Property Investment and Finance (Vol. 36, Issue 6, pp. 510–512). Emerald Group Holdings Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPIF-09-2018-097
  14. Glaeser, E. L., Gyourko, J., & Saks, R. E. (2005). Why Have Housing Prices Gone Up? American Economic Review, 95(2), 329–333
  15. Hårsman, B., & Quigley, J. M. (1994). Housing Markets and Housing Institutions: An International Comparison. Journal of Housing Economics, 3(2), 156–163
  16. Henderson, J. V., & Ioannides, Y. M. (1983). A Model of Housing Tenure Choice. The American Economic Review, 73(1), 98–113. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1803929
  17. Hofman, E., Halman, J. I. M., & Ion, R. A. (2006). Variation in Housing Design: Identifying Customer Preferences. Housing Studies, 21(6), 929–943. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673030600917842
  18. Kwanda, T., Rahardjo, J., & Wardani, M. K. (2001). Analisis Kepuasan Penghuni Perumahan Sederhana di Denpasar Berdasarkan Faktor Lokasi, Prasarana, Sarana, Kualitas Bangunan, Desain dan Harga. Dimensi Teknik Arsitektur, 29(2), 117–125
  19. Lee, C. L. (2008). Housing in Australia as a Portfolio Investment. International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, 1(4), 352–361. https://doi.org/10.1108/17538270810908641
  20. Lee, K. Y. (2021). Relationship between Physical Environment Satisfaction, Neighborhood Satisfaction, and Quality of Life in Gyeonggi, Korea. Land, 10, 663. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10070663
  21. Lowies, B., Whait, R. B., Viljoen, C., & McGreal, S. (2018). Fractional Ownership – an Alternative Residential Property Investment Vehicle. Journal of Property Investment and Finance, 36(6), 513–522. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPIF-02-2018-0013
  22. Mulliner, E., & Algrnas, M. (2018). Preferences for Housing Attributes in Saudi Arabia: A Comparison between Consumers’ and Property Practitioners’ Views. Cities, 83, 152–164. http://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/id/eprint/8916/
  23. Njo, A., I. Made, N., & Irwanto, A. (2019). Dual Process of Dual Motives in Real Estate Market Indonesia. International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, 12(1), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJHMA-05-2017-0049
  24. Njo, A., Valentina, G., & Basana, S. R. (2021). Willingness to Pay for Green Apartments in Surabaya, Indonesia. Journal of Sustainable Real Estate, 13(1), 48–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/19498276.2022.2036427
  25. Rahadi, R. A., Wiryono, S. K., Koesrindartoto, D. P., & Syamwil, I. B. (2015a). Comparison of the Property Practitioners and Consumer Preferences on Housing Prices in the Jakarta Metropolitan Region. International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, 8(3), 335–358. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJHMA-10-2014-0043
  26. Rahadi, R. A., Wiryono, S. K., Koesrindartoto, D. P., & Syamwil, I. B. (2015b). Factors Influencing the Price of Housing in Indonesia. International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, 8(2), 169–188. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJHMA-04-2014-0008
  27. Ratchatakulpat, T., Miller, P., & Marchant, T. (2009). Residential Real Estate Purchase Decisions in Australia: Is it more than Location? International Real Estate Review, 12(3), 273–294. http://www.umac.mo/fba/irer/
  28. Roberts, C., Rowley, S., & Henneberry, J. (2012). The Impact of Landscape Quality on Property Investment Decisions. Journal of Property Investment and Finance, 30(1), 69–82. https://doi.org/10.1108/14635781211194818
  29. Sander, H. A., & Polasky, S. (2009). The Value of Views and Open Space: Estimates from a Hedonic Pricing Model for Ramsey County, Minnesota, USA. Land Use Policy, 26(3), 837–845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.10.009
  30. Schnell, I., & Harpaz, M. (2005). A Model of a Heterogeneous Neighborhood. GeoJournal, 64(2), 105–115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-005-4093-0
  31. Sean, S. L., & Hong, T. T. (2014). Factors Affecting the Purchase Decision of Investors in the Residential Property Market in Malaysia. Journal of Surveying, Construction and Property, 5(2), 1–13. http://e-journal.um.edu.my/publish/JSCP/1
  32. Shimizu, C. (2014). Estimation of Hedonic Single-Family House Price Function Considering Neighborhood Effect Variables. Sustainability (Switzerland), 6(5), 2946–2960. https://doi.org/10.3390/su6052946
  33. Sugiyono. (2019). Metodologi Penelitian Kuantitatif Kualitatif dan R & D. Alfabeta
  34. Tan, T.-H. (2011). Neighborhood Preferences of House Buyers: The Case of Klang Valley, Malaysia. International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, 4(1), 58–69. https://doi.org/10.1108/17538271111111839
  35. Tan, T.-H. (2012). Meeting First-Time Buyers’ Housing Needs and Preferences in Greater Kuala Lumpur. Cities, 29(6), 389–396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2011.11.016
  36. Tse, R. Y. C., & Love, P. E. D. (2000). Measuring Residential Property Values in Hong Kong. Property Management, Vol. 18 No. 5, 2000, Pp. 366-374, 18(5), 366–374. http://www.emerald-library.com
  37. Vadali, S. (2008). Toll Roads and Economic Development: Exploring Effects on Property Values. The Annals of Regional Science, 42, 591–620. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-007-0180-0
  38. Wang, D., & Li, S. M. (2006). Socio-Economic Differentials and Stated Housing Preferences in Guangzhou, China. Habitat International, 30(2), 305–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2004.02.009
  39. Weimer, A. M. (1966). Real Estate Decisions are Different. Harvard Business Review, 44, 105–112
  40. Wen, H., Zhang, Y., & Zhang, L. (2014). Do Educational Facilities Affect Housing Price? An empirical study in Hangzhou, China. Habitat International, 42(2), 155–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2013.12.004

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update: 2024-06-22 03:49:49

No citation recorded.