IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jre/issued/v27n22005p193-220.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determining Market Perceptions on Contamination of Residential Property Buyers using Contingent Valuation Surveys

Author

Listed:
  • Robert A. Simons

    (Maxine Goodman Levin College of Urban Affairs, 1717 Euclid Avenue UR223, Cleveland State University, Cleveland OH 44115)

  • Kimberly Winson-Geideman

    (Department of Political Science and Public Administration, Savannah State University, PO Box 20385, Savannah, Georgia 31404)

Abstract

This study reports on the results of several residential contingent valuation (CV) studies conducted throughout the US. Over the past several years CV has often been used to illustrate potential residential buyer bid prices for contaminated real property. The data set for this study contains 1,115 telephone interviews and examines the consistency of the results for residential property affected by a Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) in different markets in eight states, controlling for income, age, education, local market type, and other demographic factors. Negative discounts associated with a LUST for marginal bidders in the top half of the market were quite consistent across states, varying from ?25% to ?33%, with an average of ?31%,. Using ANOVA indicates that bidding patterns from six of the seven states were statistically similar. Male bidders, those over 40 years of age and those with no high school degree were more likely to bid, while those with higher incomes and those bidding on certain, rather than suspected contamination, were less likely to bid. Local market type did not appear to affect bid outcomes. Using the marginal bidder approach, the CV results benchmark reasonably closely to, but still higher than, revealed preference outcomes for residential LUST sites in Ohio.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert A. Simons & Kimberly Winson-Geideman, 2005. "Determining Market Perceptions on Contamination of Residential Property Buyers using Contingent Valuation Surveys," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 27(2), pages 193-220.
  • Handle: RePEc:jre:issued:v:27:n:2:2005:p:193-220
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://pages.jh.edu/jrer/papers/pdf/past/vol27n02/04.193_220.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert A. Simons & William Bowen & Arthur Sementell, 1997. "The Effect of Underground Storage Tanks on Residential Property Values in Cuyahoga County, Ohio," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 14(1), pages 29-42.
    2. Rowe, Robert D. & D'Arge, Ralph C. & Brookshire, David S., 1980. "An experiment on the economic value of visibility," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 1-19, March.
    3. Paul R. Portney, 1994. "The Contingent Valuation Debate: Why Economists Should Care," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 3-17, Fall.
    4. Hank Jenkins-Smith & Carol Silva & Robert Berrens & Alok Bohara, 2002. "Information Disclosure Requirements and the Effect of Soil Contamination on Property Values," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(3), pages 323-339.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Robin R. Jenkins & Dennis Guignet & Patrick J. Walsh, 2014. "Prevention, Cleanup, and Reuse Benefits from the Federal UST Program," NCEE Working Paper Series 201405, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Nov 2014.
    2. Vincenzo Del Giudice & Pierfrancesco De Paola & Paolo Bevilacqua & Alessio Pino & Francesco Paolo Del Giudice, 2020. "Abandoned Industrial Areas with Critical Environmental Pollution: Evaluation Model and Stigma Effect," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-34, June.
    3. Joaquin Ameller & Jean-Daniel Rinaudo & Corinne Merly, 2020. "The contribution of economic science to brownfield redevelopment: a review," Post-Print hal-02532209, HAL.
    4. Dennis Guignet & Anna Alberini, 2015. "Can Property Values Capture Changes in Environmental Health Risks? Evidence from a Stated Preference Study in Italy and the United Kingdom," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(3), pages 501-517, March.
    5. Dennis Guignet & Anna Alberini, 2013. "Can Property Values Capture Changes in Environmental Health Risks? Evidence from a Stated Preference Study in Italy and the UK," Working Papers 2013.67, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    6. Anna Alberini & Dennis Guignet, 2010. "Preliminary Stated-Preference Research on the Impact of LUST Sites on Property Values: Focus Group Results," NCEE Working Paper Series 201009, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Aug 2010.
    7. Guignet, Dennis, 2012. "The impacts of pollution and exposure pathways on home values: A stated preference analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 53-63.
    8. Guignet, Dennis B. & Martinez-Cruz, Adan L., 2018. "The impacts of underground petroleum releases on a homeowner's decision to sell: A difference-in-differences approach," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 11-24.
    9. Robert A. Simons & Jesse Saginor & Aly H. Karam & Hlengani Baloyi, 2008. "Use of Contingent Valuation Analysis in a Developing Country: Market Perceptions of Contamination on Johannesburg’s Mine Dumps," International Real Estate Review, Global Social Science Institute, vol. 11(2), pages 75-104.
    10. Kuo-Cheng Hsu, 2020. "House Prices in the Peripheries of Mass Rapid Transit Stations Using the Contingent Valuation Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-21, October.
    11. Wenqian Zou & Meichen Yu & Shoshi MIZOKAMI, 2019. "Mechanism Design for an Incentive Subsidy Scheme for Bus Transport," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-13, March.
    12. I-Chun Tsai, 2018. "Investigating Gender Differences in Real Estate Trading Sentiments," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 63(2), pages 187-214, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Robert A. Simons & Jesse Saginor & Aly H. Karam & Hlengani Baloyi, 2008. "Use of Contingent Valuation Analysis in a Developing Country: Market Perceptions of Contamination on Johannesburg’s Mine Dumps," International Real Estate Review, Global Social Science Institute, vol. 11(2), pages 75-104.
    2. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    3. Banzhaf, H. Spencer, 2016. "Constructing markets: environmental economics and the contingent valuation controversy," MPRA Paper 78814, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Chia-Nung Li & Chien-Wen Lo & Wei-Chiang Su & Tsung-Yu Lai, 2015. "A Study on Soil and Groundwater Pollution Remediation of the Surrounding Real Estate Prices and Tax Revenue Impact," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(11), pages 1-13, November.
    5. Oana Mihaescu & Rainer Vom Hofe, 2013. "Using Spatial Regression To Estimate Property Tax Discounts From Proximity To Brownfields: A Tool For Local Policy-Making," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(01), pages 1-23.
    6. Mihaescu, Oana & vom Hofe, Rainer, 2013. "The Impact of Brownfields on Residential Property Values in Cincinnati, Ohio: A Spatial Hedonic Approach," HUI Working Papers 85, HUI Research.
    7. Guignet, Dennis, 2012. "The impacts of pollution and exposure pathways on home values: A stated preference analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 53-63.
    8. M. Morrison & R. Blamey & J. Bennett, 2000. "Minimising Payment Vehicle Bias in Contingent Valuation Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 16(4), pages 407-422, August.
    9. John K. Horowitz & Kenneth E. McConnell & James J. Murphy, 2013. "Behavioral foundations of environmental economics and valuation," Chapters, in: John A. List & Michael K. Price (ed.), Handbook on Experimental Economics and the Environment, chapter 4, pages 115-156, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Robin R. Jenkins & Dennis Guignet & Patrick J. Walsh, 2014. "Prevention, Cleanup, and Reuse Benefits from the Federal UST Program," NCEE Working Paper Series 201405, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Nov 2014.
    11. Richard T. Carson & W. Michael Hanemann, & Raymond J. Kopp & Jon A. Krosnick & Robert C. Mitchell & Stanley Presser & Paul A. Rudd & V. Kerry Smith & Michael Conaway & Kerry Martin, 1997. "Temporal Reliability of Estimates from Contingent Valuation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 73(2), pages 151-163.
    12. John B. Loomis, 2013. "Incorporating distributional issues into benefit–cost analysis: why, how, and two empirical examples using non-market valuation," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 9, pages 294-316, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Clarke, Philip M., 1998. "Cost-benefit analysis and mammographic screening: a travel cost approach," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 767-787, December.
    14. Sunak, Yasin & Madlener, Reinhard, 2012. "The Impact of Wind Farms on Property Values: A Geographically Weighted Hedonic Pricing Model," FCN Working Papers 3/2012, E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN), revised Mar 2013.
    15. Lori D. Snyder & Robert N. Stavins & Alexander F. Wagner, 2003. "Private Options to Use Public Goods Exploiting Revealed Preferences to Estimate Environmental Benefits," Working Papers 2003.49, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    16. Bergstrom, John C. & Dillman, B.L. & Stoll, John R., 1985. "Public Environmental Amenity Benefits Of Private Land: The Case Of Prime Agricultural Land," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 17(1), pages 1-11, July.
    17. Ahmet Tolunay & Çağlar Başsüllü, 2015. "Willingness to Pay for Carbon Sequestration and Co-Benefits of Forests in Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-27, March.
    18. Richard D. Smith, 2003. "Construction of the contingent valuation market in health care:a critical assessment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(8), pages 609-628, August.
    19. Richard T. Carson & W. Michael Hanemann & Raymond J. Kopp & Jon A. Krosnick & Robert Cameron Mitchell & Stanley Presser, 1998. "Referendum Design and Contingent Valuation: The NOAA Panel's No-Vote Recommendation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(2), pages 335-338, May.
    20. Georges Dionne & Paul Lanoie, 2002. "How to Make a Public Choice About the Value of a Statistical Life: The Case of Road Safety," Cahiers de recherche 02-04, HEC Montréal, Institut d'économie appliquée.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • L85 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Real Estate Services

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jre:issued:v:27:n:2:2005:p:193-220. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: JRER Graduate Assistant/Webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.aresnet.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.