Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Housing Prices in a Market Under Years of Constant Transformation: A County-Based Analysis of Istanbul


Objective: The objective of the article is to present a comprehensive approach to analysing Istanbul’s housing prices, using a hedonic price model with a large dataset and
a single variable for locational attributes.

Research Design & Methods: The analysis of consequent housing prices in İstanbul’s counties with hedonic price modelling and the extrapolation of results by comparing the prices to the human development level of counties. We use multiple regression and Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) methods to estimate two semi-log hedonic price models for two time periods.

Findings: The relationship between socioeconomic development levels and housing prices varies for counties under different urban transformation processes.

Implications & Recommendations: The results are useful for the housing price analysis in Istanbul. The housing prices appear to follow the socioeconomic development level of the county in which a house is located, thus showing variations between different counties. The relationship between housing prices and urban transformation processes should be approached with caution by policymakers, as the outcomes may disturb both the sociological and economic balance in the long run.

Contribution & Value Added: The study contributes to the existing research on housing price analysis by interpreting locational attributes as a whole and housing research at large by combining hedonic price modelling and case study methods.


Housing Prices, Semi-Log Hedonic Price Model, Istanbul

(PDF) Save


  1. Akdogan, G. (2009). Dealing with rapid development: Creation of the informal urban economy and gecekondu housing in Istanbul. Iowa State University.
  2. Atkinson, R., & Bridge, G. (2005). Gentrification in a Global Context: The New Urban Colonialism. New York: Routledge.
  3. Berry, B.J.L., & Bednarz, R.S. (1975). A Hedonic Model of Prices and Assessments for Single-Family Homes: Does the Assessor Follow the Market or the Market Follow the Assessor?. Land Economics, 51(1), 21-40.
  4. Billingham, C.M. (2015). The Broadening Conception of Gentrification: Recent Developments and Avenues for Future Inquiry in the Sociological Study of Urban Change. Michigan Sociological Review, 29(Fall 2015), 75-102.
  5. Bodur, A., & Dülgeroğlu Yüksel, Y. (2017). Assessing change in quality of life following rehousing from slum settlements to social housing. A/Z ITU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 14(3), 53-65.
  6. Bradbury, K., Engle, R., Irvine, O., & Rothenberg, J. (1977). Simultaneous estimation of the supply and demand for housing location in a multizoned metropolitan area. In G.K. Ingram (Ed.), Residential Location and Urban Housing Markets (pp. 51-92). National Bureau of Economic Research.
  7. Can, A. (1992). Specification and estimation of hedonic housing price models. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 22(3), 453-474.
  8. Ciraci, H., & Kundak, S. (2000). Changing Urban Pattern of Istanbul: from Monocentric To Polycentric Structure. 40th Congress of the European Regional Science Association. Barcelona, Spain.
  9. Clarke, K.A. (2005). The phantom menace: Omitted variable bias in econometric research. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 22(4), 341-352.
  10. de Haan, J., & Diewert, E. (2013). Hedonic Regression Methods. In Handbook on Residential Property Price Indices (pp. 49-64). Luxembourg: Eurostat.
  11. Dokmeci, V., Berkoz, L., Levent, H., Yurekli, H., & Cagdas, G. (1996). Residential preferences in Istanbul. Habitat International, 20(2), 241-251.
  12. Efe, R., Bizzarri, C., Cürebal, I., & Nyussupova, G. (2015). Environment and Ecology at the Beginning of 21 st Century. In R. Efe, C. Bizzarri, I. Cürebal, & G. Nyussupova, (Eds.). Sofia: St. Kliment Ohridski University Press.
  13. Eraydın, A. (2008). The Conditional Nature of Relations Between Competitiveness, Social Cohesion and Spatial Inequalities: The Evidence from Istanbul. In P. Ache, H.T. Andersen, T. Maloutas, M. Raco, & T. Taşan-Kok (Eds.), Cities between Competitiveness and Cohesion (pp. 99-115). Springer.
  14. Ergun, N. (2004). Gentrification in Istanbul. Cities, 21(5), 391-405. j.cities.2004.07.004
  15. Fletcher, M., Gallimore, P., & Mangan, J. (2000). Heteroscedasticity in hedonic house price models. Journal of Property Research, 17(2), 93-108.
  16. Frenkel, A., Bendit, E., & Kaplan, S. (2013). The linkage between the lifestyle of knowledge-workers and their intra-metropolitan residential choice: A clustering approach based on self-organizing maps. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 39, 151-161.
  17. Głuszak, M. (2018). Externalities and house prices: A stated preferences approach. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 6(4), 181-196.
  18. Goodman, A.C. (1978). Hedonic Prices, Price Indices and Housing Markets. Journal of Urban Economics, 5, 471.
  19. Goodman, A.C., & Thibodeau, T.G. (2003). Housing market segmentation and hedonic prediction accuracy. Journal of Housing Economics, 12(3), 181-201.
  20. Guerrieri, V., Hartley, D., & Hurst, E. (2013). Endogenous gentrification and housing price dynamics. Journal of Public Economics, 100, 45-60.
  21. Güler, E.Z. (2013). Urban renewal in working class areas in Istanbul De-industrialization and urban renewal in Beykoz – Paşabahçe Istanbul. In RC21 Resourceful Cities (pp. 8-10). Berlin, Germany.
  22. Gülersoy, N.Z., & Güler, E. (2011). Conceptual challenges on urban transformation. ITU A|Z, 8(1), 10-24.
  23. Güney, K.M., Keil, R., & Üçoğlu, M. (2019). Massive Suburbanization: (Re)Building the Global Periphery. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
  24. Heyman, A.V., & Sommervoll, D.E. (2019). House prices and relative location. Cities, 95(April).
  25. Hill, R. (2011). Hedonic price indexes for housing. OECD Statistics Working Papers, (1), 3-61.
  26. Hülagü, T., Kızılkaya, E., Özbekler, A.G., & Tunar, P. (2016). A Hedonic House Price Index for Turkey.
  27. Islam, T. (2010). Current Urban Discourse: Urban Transformation and Gentrification in Istanbul. Architectural Design, 80(1), 58-63.
  28. Kangallı Uyar, S.G. (2015). Hedonik fiyat teorisi çerçevesinde İstanbul konut piyasası fiyat dinamiklerinin parametrik ve parametrik olmayan mekânsal modeller ile karşılaştırmalı analizi (Doctoral dissertation). Pamukkale University, Turkey.
  29. Karaman, O. (2009). Urban Pulse – (RE)Making Space for Globalization in Istanbul. Urban Geography, 29(6), 518-525.
  30. Karaman, O., & Islam, T. (2012). On the Dual Nature of intra-urban borders: The case of a Romani neighborhood in Istanbul. Cities, 29(4), 234-243.
  31. Kaya, A. (2012). Türki̇ye’de Konut Fi̇yatlarını Etki̇leyen Faktörleri̇n Hedoni̇k Fi̇yat Modeli̇ i̇le Beli̇rlenmesi̇. Specialist Dissertation submitted to TCMB Statistics Department.
  32. Keskin, B. (2008). Hedonic analysis of price in the istanbul housing market. International Journal of Strategic Property Management, 12(2), 125-138.
  33. Keyder, Ç. (2005). Globalization and Social Exclusion in Istanbul. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 29(1), 124-134.
  34. Kisar Koramaz, E., Koramaz, T.K., & Özer, Ö. (2018). Urban transformation through property-led regeneration: A case of building renewals in Istanbul. A/Z ITU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 15(2), 183-196.
  35. Kolluoglu, B., & Bartu Candan, A. (2008). Emerging Spaces of Neoliberalism: A Gated Town and a Public Housing Project in Istanbul. New Perspectives on Turkey, 39(1), 5-46.
  36. Kuyucu, T., & Ünsal, Ö. (2010). “Urban transformation” as state-led property transfer: An analysis of two cases of urban renewal in Istanbul. Urban Studies, 47(7), 1479-1499.
  37. Li, M.M., & Brown, J.H. (1980). Micro-Neighborhood Externalities and Hedonic Housing Prices. Land Economics, 56(2), 125-141.
  38. Lipscomb, C. (2006). An Alternative Spatial Hedonic Estimation Approach. Journal of Housing Research, 15(2), 143-160.
  39. Lovering, J., & Türkmen, H. (2011). Bulldozer neo-liberalism in Istanbul: The state-led construction of property markets, and the displacement of the urban poor. International Planning Studies, 16(1), 73-96.
  40. Martin, I.W., & Beck, K. (2018). Gentrification, property tax limitation, and displacement. Urban Affairs Review, 54(1), 33-73.
  41. Michalos, A.C. (2014). Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research.
  42. Mieszkowski, P., & Smith, B. (1991). Analyzing urban decentralization. The case of Houston. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 21(2), 183-199.
  43. Montgomery, M.R. (2008). The urban transformation of the developing world. Science, 319(5864), 761-764.
  44. NYU Furman Center. (2015). State of New York City’s Housing and Neighborhoods in 2015. New York.
  45. Ocakçı, M. (2000). Commuting Pattern of Industrial Laborers in the Istanbul Metropolitan Area. Cities, 17(1), 55-61.
  46. OECD. (2018). OECD Economic Surveys: Turkey Overview.
  47. Öktem, B. (2011). The role of global city discourses in the development and transformation of the Buyukdere-Maslak axis into the international business district of Istanbul. International Planning Studies, 16(1), 27-42.
  48. Ottensmann, J. R., Payton, S., & Man, J. (2008). Urban Location and Housing Prices within a Hedonic Model. Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy, 38(1), 19-35.
  49. Ozcevik, O., Turk, S.S., Beygo, C., Akcakaya, I., & Sen, K. (2007). Community Development for Sustainable Urban Regeneration: Reflections of Zeytinburnu Ottoman Neighbourhood Case. ENHR International Conference on Sustainable Urban Areas (pp. 1-19). Rotterdam, Nether-lands.
  50. Ozcevik, O., Turk, S., Tas, E., Yaman, H., & Beygo, C. (2008). Flagship regeneration project as a tool for post-disaster recovery planning: the Zeytinburnu case. Disasters, 33(2), 180-202.
  51. Özdemir Sarı, Ö.B., Özdemir, S.S., & Uzun, N. (Eds.). (2019). Urban and Regional Planning in Turkey. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
  52. Ozden, P. (2012). Culture-led regeneration projects in post-industrial areas: the Istanbul experience. In Transactions on Ecology and The Environment (pp. 823-834).
  53. Ozsoy, A., Altas, N.E., Ok, V., & Pulat, G. (2003). Quality assessment model for housing. Habitat International, 20(2), 163-173.
  54. Ozus, E., Dokmeci, V., Kiroglu, G., & Egdemir, G. (2007). Spatial analysis of residential prices in Istanbul. European Planning Studies, 15(5), 707-721.
  55. Ozus, E., Turk, S.S., & Dokmeci, V. (2011). Urban restructuring of Istanbul. European Planning Studies, 19(2), 331-356.
  56. Pinarcioǧlu, M., & Isik, O. (2008). Not only helpless but also hopeless: Changing dynamics of urban poverty in Turkey, the case of Sultanbeyli, Istanbul. European Planning Studies, 16(10), 1353-1370.
  57. Salkind, N. (2010). Encyclopedia of Research Design. Dictionary of Statistics & Methodology. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
  58. Şeker, M. (2015). Quality of Life Index: A Case Study of İstanbul. Ekonometri ve İstatistik, (23), 1-15.
  59. Şeker, M., Bakış, Ç., & Dizeci, B. (2018). İnsani Gelişme Endeksi – İlçeler 2017. İstanbul: İNGEV Yayınları.
  60. Song, Y., & Knaap, G.J. (2004). Measuring the effects of mixed land uses on housing values. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 34(6), 663-680.
  61. Steinmetz-Wood, M., Wasfi, R., Parker, G., Bornstein, L., Caron, J., & Kestens, Y. (2017). Is gentrification all bad? Positive association between gentrification and individual’s perceived neighborhood collective efficacy in Montreal, Canada. International Journal of Health Geographics, 16(24), 1-8.
  62. Tang, Z. (2006). The Urban Housing Market in a Transitional Economy: Shanghai as a Case Study (Doctoral dissertation). Indiana University, USA.
  63. The World Bank. (2015). Rise of the Anatolian Tigers: Turkey Urbanization Review.
  64. Turkmen, H. (2014). Urban renewal projects and dynamics of contention in Istanbul: The cases of Fener-Balat-Ayvansaray and Suleymaniye. Cardiff University.
  65. Wacquant, L. (2008). Relocating gentrification: The working class, science and the state in recent urban research. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 32(1), 198-205.
  66. White, M.J. (1975). The Effect of Zoning on the Size of Metropolitan Areas. Journal of Urban Economics, 2(4), 279-290.
  67. Xiao, Y. (2017). Urban Morphology and Housing Market. Shanghai: Springer.
  68. Yapıcı, M., & Ileri, E. (2019). Urban Transformation in Istanbul. In E. Özyürek, G. Özpınar, & E. Altındiş (Eds.), Authoritarianism and Resistance in Turkey. Springer.
  69. Yetiskul, E., Kayasü, S., & Ozdemir, S. Y. (2016). Local responses to urban redevelopment projects: The case of Beyoğlu, Istanbul. Habitat International, 51, 159-167.
  70. Yılmaz Bakır, N. (2019). Project-Based Urban Renewal and Transformation of Urban Landscape in Turkey. In Landscape Reclamation - Rising From What’s Left [Working Title] (pp. 1-22). InTech Open.
  71. Zambon, I., & Salvati, L. (2019). Metropolitan growth, urban cycles and housing in a Mediterranean country, 1910s-2010s. Cities, 95(July), 102412.


Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.