Regional Science and Urban Economics 1 I (1981) 1-17. North-Hol’snd DYNAMICS OF LAND-USE FOR A CLOSED CITY Jan K. BRUECKNER* University of zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCB Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801, zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLK USA Burkhard von RABENAU Ohio State University, Coiumbus, OH 43210, USA Received October 1979, iinal version received May 1980 This paper analyses land-use patterns in a closed a;ty wk : ~1 experiences a discontinuous population change that is anticipated by developers. AI ._ach location, developers choose among five development strategies: constructing a building a~ .&mezero which is left standing forever, constructing a building at time zero and replacing it 3t the date z of the population change, farming the land until t, with residential development thereafter, and vice-versa, farming the land continuously. By deriving admissible spatial patterns for these Ike strategies, the analysis is able to characterize the spatial and temporal pattern of land-use in a closed city. 1. Introduction In spite of a proliferation of models of durable housing in recent years, the literature lacks a treatment of the market for durable housing in a closed city, in which population is fixed and the utility level of residents is endogenous, using a model where the lifespan of buildings is chosen by the developer. While Brueckner (1979, 1980a and b) constructs such a model for an open city, where utility is exogenous, and Anas (1978) and Arnott (1980) treat the spatial development of closed cities under the assumption that buildings last forever, a closed city with endogenous building lives has not yet been analysed. The present paper attempts to fill this void in the literature.’ By combining the basic approach of an earlier unpublished study by von Rabenau (1975) with the demand and production framework from Brueckner’s earlier papers, the analysis generates useful qualitative results on land-use dynamics for a closed city. The failure of static urban models with perfectly malleable structures to capture many features of u;ban land-use has been a principal factor motivating the recent dynamic analyses. Brueckner (1980a ?nd b) shows that *We wish to thank Johr. M. Marshall and Richard Arnott for helpful suggestions. Any errors, however, are ours. ‘For other papers which develop dynamic housing models, see Evans (1975), Fisch ;rJY), Fujita (1976), Muth (1973). and Sweeney (1974).