This article develops a multi-level model assessing the impact of cultural heritage on urban land value, suggesting long-term investment benefits.
<ns0:p>The article proposes a multi-level theoretical and methodological model for assessing the impact of cultural heritage objects on the value of urban land and real estate. The relevance of the study stems from the fact that, in Ukrainian practice, the historical environment is still predominantly viewed as a constraint on development, while its market, fiscal, and spatial effects remain insufficiently measured.The aim of the article is to conceptualize the mechanisms through which heritage is capitalized into real estate value and to develop an analytical toolkit that combines classical spatial methods with new digital indicators of public attention.The research methodology is based on a combination of institutional analysis, hedonic pricing, spatial econometrics, and externality analysis, as well as the use of data from geographic information systems, market monitoring, users’ digital traces, reviews, and photometric indicators of platform visibility.It is substantiated that the influence of heritage assets on value manifests through several channels: aesthetic-symbolic, tourism-commercial, institutional-regulatory, infrastructural, reputational, and fiscal.The scientific novelty lies in introducing the concept of “net heritage capitalization,” defined as the difference between the heritage premium and the heritage discount. It is demonstrated that a positive price effect does not arise automatically from the mere presence of a heritage asset, but depends on clearly registered use regimes, a transparent conservation agreement, low regulatory uncertainty, and the owner’s capacity to maintain the property.The practical significance of the article lies in providing a framework for improving normative monetary valuation, tax policy, urban planning regulation, and investment decision-making within historical areas.It is concluded that the protection of cultural heritage should not be regarded as a consumption-type expenditure, but as a long-term investment in sustaining property values, strengthening local budget bases, and fostering the economic growth of historic territories.Received: 22.04.2026;Accepted: 30.04.2026;</ns0:p>
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Novakovsky et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: