Abstract
Brownfield site development is subject to uncertainty of hidden environmental issue, legal liability, and social cost. The brownfield land market is known for its transparency concern in communicating valuable private information to aid redevelopment decision of the market actors. Therefore, a risk factor is defined as the communicable rational risk perception affecting choice or decision. This paper develops a conceptual frame to identify and organise brownfield development risk and risk factor from experienced professional and industry perspective. It is not based on direct consumer-driven risk perception. Instead it examines both the literature and theories to bring to upfront the problems of risk communication amongst key stakeholders who are influential to identify and affect the formation of risk factors and decision hierarchy in brownfield development processes. The clustered risk factors, systematically formed and validated, help the development of a brownfield risk evaluation tool, which has the potential to support private decision and public policy making, in the current economic structurally driven land use intensification and gentrification.
Keywords
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
References
Adair A, Hutchison N (2005) The reporting of risk in real estate appraisal property risk scoring. J Prop Invest Financ 23(3):254–268
Agnieszka Z (2014) Stated WTP and rational WTP: willingness to pay for green apartment in Sweden. Sustain Cities Soc 13(1):46–56
Alberini A, Longo A, Tonin S, Trombetta F, Turvani M (2005) The role of liability, regulation and economic incentives in brownfield remediation and redevelopment: evidence from surveys of developers. Reg Sci Urban Econ 35(4):327–351
Attoh-Okine NO, Gibbons J (2001) Use of belief function in brownfield infrastructure redevelopment decision making. J Urban Plan Dev ASCE 127(3):126–143
Bond S (2001) The use of conjoint analysis to assess the impact of environmental stigma. Pacific Rim Prop Res J 7(3):182–194
Bienert S, Brunauer W (2007) The mortgage lending value: prospects for development within Europe. J Prop Invest Financ 25(6):542–578
Boopathy R (2000) Factors limiting bioremediation technologies. Biores Technol 74(1):63–67
Carlon C, Pizzol L, Critto A, Marcomini A (2008) A spatial risk assessment methodology to support the remediation of contaminated land. Environ Int 34(3):397–411
Carr V, Tah JHM (2001) A fuzzy approach to construction project risk assessment and analysis: construction project risk management system. Adv Eng Softw 32(10):847–857
Case B, Colwell PF, Leishman C, Watkins C (2006) The impact of environmental contamination on condo prices: a hybrid repeat-sale/hedonic approach. Real Estate Econ 34(1):77–107
Chan N (2000) How Australian appraisers assess contaminated land. Apprais J 68(4):432–439
Chan N (2001) Stigma and its assessment methods. Pacific Rim Prop Res J 7(2):126–140
Chan N (2002) Stigma assessment: a multi-criteria decision-making approach. Pacific Rim Prop Res J 8(1):29–47
Chan N (2009) Reassessing the valuation of contaminated land in Australia. Pacific Rim Prop Res J 15(2):161–181
Chan N, Jefferies R, Simons R (1998) Government regulation of contaminated land—a tale of three cities. Environ Plan Law J 15(5):321–337
Coffin SL, Shepherd A (1998) Barriers to brownfield redevelopment: lessons learned from two Great Lakes states. Public Works Manag Policy 2(3):258–266
De Sousa C (2000) Brownfield redevelopment versus greenfield development: a private sector perspective on the costs and risks associated with brownfield redevelopment in the Greater Toronto Area. J Environ Plan Manag 43(6):831–853
Fisher P, Robson S (2006) The perception and management of risk in UK office property development. J Prop Res 23(1):135–161
French N (2011) Valuing in the downturn: understanding uncertainty. J Prop Invest Financ 29(3):312–322
French N, Gabrielli L (2004) The uncertainty of valuation. J Prop Invest Financ 22(6):484–500
Glumac B, Han Q, Schaefer WF (2015) Actors’ preferences in the redevelopment of brownfield: latent class model. J Urban Plan Dev 141(2):1–10
Greenberg M, Downton D, Mayer H (2003) Are mothballed brownfields sites a major problem: property owners who avoid environmental clean-up costs hold back community redevelopment efforts. Public Manag Lawrence Then Wash 85(5):12–17
Gupta A, Tiwari P (2016) Investment risk scoring model for commercial properties in India. J Prop Invest Financ 34(2):156–171
Hendershott P, Hendershott R (2002) On measuring real estate risk. Real Estate Financ 18(4):35–50
Hollander J (2010) Private property owners and the remaking of brownfields. Public Works Manag Policy 15(1):32–56
Howland M (2003) Private initiative and public responsibility for the redevelopment of industrial brownfields: three Baltimore case studies. Econ Dev Q 17(4):367–381
Hutchison N, Adair A, Leheny I (2005) Communicating investment risk to clients: property risk scoring. J Prop Res 22(2–3):137–161
Joslin A (2005) An investigation into the expression of uncertainty in property valuations. J Prop Invest Financ 23(3):269–285
Karn B, Kuiken T, Otto M (2009) Nanotechnology and in situ remediation: a review of the benefits and potential risks. Environ Health Perspect, 1823–1831
Lange D, McNeil S (2004) Clean it and they will come? Defining successful brownfield development. J Urban Plan Dev 130(2):101–108
Linkov I, Varghese A, Jamil S, Seager TP, Kiker G, Bridges T (2004) Multi-criteria decision analysis: a framework for structuring remedial decisions at contaminated sites. Comp Risk Assess Environ Decis Making 38:15–54
Lorenz D, Trück S, Lützkendorf T (2006) Addressing risk and uncertainty in property valuations: a viewpoint from Germany. J Prop Invest Financ 24(5):400–433
Lutzkendorf T, Lorenz D (2007) Integrating sustainability into property risk assessments for market transformation. Build Res Inf 35(4):644–661
Mallinson M, French N (2000) Uncertainty in property valuation—the nature and relevance of uncertainty and how it might be measured and reported. J Prop Invest Financ 18(1):13–32
Meins E, Wallbaum H, Hardziewski R, Feige A (2010) Sustainability and property valuation: a risk-based approach. Build Res Inf 38(3):280–300
Meyer PB, Lyons TS (2000) Lessons from private sector brownfield redevelopers—planning public support for urban regeneration. J Am Plan Assoc 66(1):46–57
Page CA, Diamond ML, Campbell M, McKenna S (1999) Life-cycle framework for assessment of site remediation options: case study. Environ Toxicol Chem 18(4):801–810
Pediaditi K, Wehrmeyer W, Chenoweth J (2006) Sustainability evaluation for brownfield redevelopment. In: The proceedings of the institution of civil engineers-engineering sustainability, Thomas Telford Ltd
Petts J (1994) Contaminated sites: blight, public concerns and communication. Land Contam Reclam 2(4):171
Rao PSC, Jawitz JW, Enfield CG, Falta RW Jr, Annable MD, Wood AL (2001) Technology integration for contaminated site remediation: clean-up goals and performance criteria. Groundw Qual Nat Enhanc Restor Groundw Pollut 275:571–578
Robertson HG (1999) One piece of the puzzle: why state brownfields programs can’t lure businesses to the urban cores without finding the missing pieces. Rutgers Law Rev 51(5):1075–1132
Saaty T (1994) How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Interfaces 24(6):19–43
Simons RA, Pendergrass J, Winson-Geideman K (2003) Quantifying long-term environmental regulatory risk for brownfields: are reopeners really an issue. J Environ Plan Manag 46(2):257–269
Simons RA, Saginor J, Karam AH, Baloyi H (2008) Use of contingent valuation analysis in a developing country: market perceptions of contamination on Johannesburg’s mine dumps. Int Real Estate Rev 11(2):75–104
Slovic P (1992) Perception of risk: reflections on the psychometric paradigm. In: Krimsky S, Golding D (ed) Social theories of risks. Praeger
Swartz RD (1994) Michigan’s approach to urban redevelopment involving contaminated properties. Econ Dev Q 8(4):329–337
Syms P (1996) Perceptions of risk in the valuation of contaminated land. J Prop Valuat Invest 15(1):27–39
Syms, P (1997) Contaminated land: the practice and economics of redevelopment. Blackwell Science
Syms P (1999) Redeveloping brownfield land: the decision-making process. J Prop Invest Financ 17(5):481–500
Syms P (2004) Previously developed land: industrial activities and contamination. Blackwell, Oxford, UK
Tam EK, Byer PH (2002) Remediation of contaminated lands: a decision methodology for site owners. J Environ Manag 64(4):387–400
Tedd P, Charles JA, Driscoll R (2001) Sustainable brownfield re-development: risk management. Eng Geol 60(1–4):333–339
Thomas MR (2003) Brownfield redevelopment: information issues and the affected public. Environ Pract 5(1):62–68
Vaidya O, Kumar S (2006) Analytic hierarchy process: an overview of applications. Eur J Oper Res 169(1):1–29
Viscusi WK, Hamilton JT (1999) Are risk regulators rational? Evidence from hazardous waste cleanup decisions. Am Econ Rev 89(4):1010–1027
Weber B (1997) The valuation of contaminated land. J Real Estate Res 14(3):379–398
Wheaton WC (2002) On measuring real estate risk: a reply. Real Estate Financ 18(4):41–42
Whipple RTM (2006) Property valuation and analysis, 2nd edn. Thomson LawBook Co
Whitman I (2006) Brownfield redevelopment by the private sector: market driven decision making, brownfield sites iii: prevention, assessment. Rehabil Dev Brownfield Sites 94:11121
Wilson AR (1996) Emerging approaches to impaired property valuation. Apprais J 21:155–170
Williamson, O (1985) The economic institutions of capitalism. Simon and Schuster
Winson-Geideman K, Krause A, Wu H, Warren-Myers G (2017) Non-spatial contagion in real estate markets: the case of Brookland Greens, Journal of Sustainable Real Estate, in press
Wu H, Chen C (2010a) A pilot case study of brownfield high-density housing development in China. Int J Hous Mark Anal 3(2):119–131
Wu H, Chen C (2010b) A pilot case study of inner-city high-density housing on brownfield in Chongqing China. In: Proceedings of the 16th PRRES annual conference, pp 1–15, 24–27 Jan, Wellington New Zealand
Wu H, Chen C (2012) Urban brownfield regeneration: an Australian perspective. In: Proceedings of 18th PRRES annual conference, 15–18 Jan, University of South Australia, Adelaide, pp 1–10
Wu H, Qin B, Yang J (2016) Regulation system and institutional design for brownfield redevelopment in Melbourne. Urban Plan Int 31(4):72–78
Yount KR (1997) The organizational contexts of decisions to invest in environmentally risky urban properties. J Econ Issues 31(2):367–373
Yount KR, Meyer PB (1994) Bankers, developers, and new investment in brownfield sites: environmental concerns and the social psychology of risk. Econ Dev Q 8(4):338–344
Yousefi S, Hipel KW, Hegazy T, Witmer JA, Gray P (2007) Negotiation characteristics in brownfield redevelopment projects. In: 2007 IEEE international conference on systems, man and cybernetics, (1–8), pp 3651–3656
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this paper
Cite this paper
Wu, H., Tiwari, P., Han, S.S., Chan, TK. (2018). Risk and Risk Factors in Brownfield Development. In: Chau, K., Chan, I., Lu, W., Webster, C. (eds) Proceedings of the 21st International Symposium on Advancement of Construction Management and Real Estate. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6190-5_111
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6190-5_111
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-6189-9
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-6190-5
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)