Home • PRRES Inc. Journal • Read the Journal

Stigma and its Assessment Methods

Author/s: Nelson Chan

Date Published: 1/01/2001

Published in: Volume 7 - 2001 Issue 2 (pages 126 - 140)

Abstract

This paper discusses the nature of stigma and its assessment methods. Stigma has a complex nature. Apart from affecting a contaminated or potentially contaminated property, stigma also affects the value of properties that are not contaminated, but are in close proximity to a source of contamination. It may be seen as a loss in property value due to the risk perception associated with the property. Although Australia is generally regarded as a non-polluted country, there is also contaminated land in this country. This paper finds that stigma also exists in Australia. Since stigma is caused by risk perception, its impact on property value is difficult to quantify and market evidence cannot be used as a reliable means to assess value loss due to stigma. Regarding stigma assessment methods, this paper looks at the methods suggested by property researchers, as well as those used by practising valuers. It also provides a comparison of methods used by Australian valuers and valuers in the US, UK and New Zealand. The paper finds that the methods suggested by property researchers and the methods used by Australian valuers are not satisfactory. There is a need for a better method to assess stigma.

Download Full Article

Download the Full Article PDF

14445921.2001.11104100.pdf 14445921.2001.11104100.pdf (1MB)

Keywords

Australian and Overseas Methods - Evaluation Criteria - Quantifying Stigma - Stigma

References

  • Australian Property Institute (API), 1999, Guide Note 15, Professional Practice 2000, pp. 183–205.
  • Baum, A. & Crosby, N. 1989, Property Investment Appraisal, Routledge London.
  • Bond, S., 2000, Do Market Perceptions Affect Market Prices? A Case Study of a Remediated Contaminated Site, Research paper presented at the 16 American Real Estate Society Conference, Santa Barbara, California, 29 March – 1 April.
  • Chalmers, J. & Jackson, T., 1996, Risk Factors in the Appraisal of Contaminated Property, The Appraisal Journal, LXIV (1), pp.44–58.
  • Chalmers, J. & Roehr, S., 1993, Issues in the Valuation of Contaminated Property, The Appraisal Journal, LXI (1), pp.28–41.
  • Chan, N., 2000, How Australian Appraisers Assess Contaminated Land, The Appraisal Journal, LXVIII (4), pp.432 - 440.
  • Clarke, G., 1998, Director of McGees National Property Consultants, (Interview, August 1998).
  • Dotzour, M., 1997, Groundwater Contamination and Residential Property Values, The Appraisal Journal, LXV (3), pp.279 - 285.
  • Dybvig, L., 1992, Contaminated Real Estate Implications for real estate appraisers, The Research And Development Fund, Appraisal Institute Of Canada (AIC).
  • Freudenburg, W., 1988, Perceived Risk, Real Risk: Social Science And The Art Of Probabilistic Risk Assessment, Science, 242, pp.44–49.
  • Greenberg, M. & Huges, J., 1993, Impact of Hazardous Wastes Sites on Property Value and Land Use: Tax Assessors’ Appraisal, The Appraisal Journal, LXI, (1), pp.42–51.
  • Guntermann, ?., 1995, Sanitary Landfills, Stigma and Industrial Land Values, Journal of Real Estate Research, 10 (5), pp.531—542.
  • Kinnard, W., Worzala, E., Bond, S. & Kennedy, P. 1999, Comparative Studies of United States, United Kingdom and New Zealand Appraisal Practice: Valuing Contaminated Property.Research paper presented at the 15 American Real Estate Society Annual Meeting in Tampa, Florida, 7–10 April.
  • Lentz, G. & Tse, K., 1995, An Option Pricing Approach to the Valuation of Real Estate contaminated with Hazardous Materials, Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 10 (2), pp. 121–144.
  • McLean, D. & Mundy, B. 1998, The Addition of Contingent Valuation and Conjoint Analysis to The Required Body of Knowledge for the Estimation of Environmental Damages, Journal of Real Estate Practice and Education, 1 (1), pp.1–19.
  • Mundy, B., ?., 1992a, Stigma and Value, The Appraisal Journal, LX (1), pp.7–13.
  • Mundy, B., ?., 1992b, The Impact of Hazardous Materials on Property Value, The Appraisal Journal, LX (2), pp. 155–162.
  • Mundy, B., ?., 1992c, The Impact of Hazardous Materials on Property Value: Revisited, The Appraisal Journal, LX (4), pp.463–471.
  • Neustein, R. & Bell, R. 1998, Diminishing Diminution: A Trend in Environmental Stigma, Environmental Claims Journal, 11 (1), pp.47–59.
  • Patchin, P., 1988, Valuation of Contaminated Properties, The Appraisal Journal, LVI (l),pp.7–16.
  • Patchin, P., 1991, Contaminated Properties - Stigma Revisited, The Appraisal Journal, LIX (2), pp. 167–172.
  • Patchin, P., 1994, Contaminated Properties and the Sales Comparison Approach, The Appraisal Journal, LXII (3), pp.402–409.
  • Reichert, A., 1997, Impact of a Toxic Waste Superfund Site on Property Values, The Appraisal Journal, LXV (4), pp.381–392.
  • Roddewig, R., 1996, Stigma, Environmental Risk and Property Value: 10 Critical Inquiries, The Appraisal Journal, LXTV (4), pp.375–387.
  • Roddewig, R., 2000, Adjusting Environmental Case Study Comparables by Using an Environmental Risk Scoring System, The Appraisal Journal, LXVIII (4), pp.371–374.
  • Sanders, M., 1996, Post-Repair Diminution in Value from Geotechnical Problems, The Appraisal Journal, LXTV (1), pp.59–66.
  • Spencer, J., 1993, Standard for Valuation of Contaminated Land in Australia, The Valuer And Land Economist, 32 (8), pp.585–587.
  • Syms, P., 1996a, Dealing with Contaminated Assets, Estates Gazette, Issue 9612, pp. 124–125.
  • Syms, P., 1996b, The Valuation of Contaminated Land: the Problems Caused by Lack of Accessible Data in the United Kingdom, Journal of Property Development, 1(1), pp. 17–25.
  • Syms, P., 1997a, Perceptions of Risk in the Valuation of Contaminated Land, Journal of Property Valuation & Investment, 15 (1), pp.27–39.
  • Syms, P., 1997b, Contaminated Land, Blackwell Science.
  • Weber, ?., 1997, The Valuation of Contaminated Land, Journal of Real Estate Research, 14 (3), pp.379–398.
  • Wilson, A., 1992, Environmentally Impaired Valuation: A Team Approach To a Balance Sheet Presentation, Technical Report: Measuring the Effects of Hazardous Materials Contamination on Real Estate Values: Techniques and Applications, Appraisal Institute, pp.23–42.
  • Wilson, A., 1994, The Environmental Opinion: Basis for an Impaired Value Opinion, The Appraisal Journal, LXII (3), pp.410-423.
  • Wiltshaw, D., 1996, An Economic Analysis of Contaminated Land, Remediation and Liability, Journal of Property Research, 13, pp.131–141.