Several scholars have advocated for improving land-use decision-making by considering ecosystem services (Bateman et al., 2013). Ecosystem services can be fundamental to finding sustainable solutions for many societal challenges and are also increasingly considered in urban planning (Gomez-Baggethun and Barton, 2013; Haase et al., 2014 ;  Hubacek and Kronenberg, 2013). Urban green spaces (UGSs) are of significant relevance for a population's well-being (Bai et al., 2013 ;  Brander and Koetse, 2011) and the provision of urban ecosystem services, such as temperature regulation, noise reduction, air purification and recreation (Fuller and Gaston, 2009 ;  Gomez-Baggethun and Barton, 2013). However, recognizing urban ecosystem services in planning and land management is challenged by the complexity of these systems — in particular, as being interwoven with societal institutions, such as the real estate market (Bartke and Schwarze, 2015 ;  Hagedorn, 2008).

Several methods have been suggested to assess the importance that people attribute to certain ecosystem functions and derived services (Bateman et al., 2011; Häyhä and Franzese, 2014 ;  Reid et al., 2005), specifically related to the effects of environmental amenities in properties (Czembrowski and Kronenberg, 2016). The most commonly applied methods for the latter are hedonic pricing and contingent valuation (Brander and Koetse, 2011 ;  Czembrowski and Kronenberg, 2016). Hedonic pricing analysis infers values from data on price differences that reflect behavioral changes in real (estate) markets. These are related to simultaneous decisions on components of the environment, which have no market on their own (Martín-López et al., 2011).