Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Risk and Risk Factors in Brownfield Development

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Proceedings of the 21st International Symposium on Advancement of Construction Management and Real Estate

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agnieszka Z (2014) Stated WTP and rational WTP: willingness to pay for green apartment in Sweden. Sustain Cities Soc 13(1):46–56

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bond S (2001) The use of conjoint analysis to assess the impact of environmental stigma. Pacific Rim Prop Res J 7(3):182–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bienert S, Brunauer W (2007) The mortgage lending value: prospects for development within Europe. J Prop Invest Financ 25(6):542–578

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boopathy R (2000) Factors limiting bioremediation technologies. Biores Technol 74(1):63–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan N (2000) How Australian appraisers assess contaminated land. Apprais J 68(4):432–439

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan N (2001) Stigma and its assessment methods. Pacific Rim Prop Res J 7(2):126–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan N (2002) Stigma assessment: a multi-criteria decision-making approach. Pacific Rim Prop Res J 8(1):29–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan N (2009) Reassessing the valuation of contaminated land in Australia. Pacific Rim Prop Res J 15(2):161–181

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Coffin SL, Shepherd A (1998) Barriers to brownfield redevelopment: lessons learned from two Great Lakes states. Public Works Manag Policy 2(3):258–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher P, Robson S (2006) The perception and management of risk in UK office property development. J Prop Res 23(1):135–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • French N (2011) Valuing in the downturn: understanding uncertainty. J Prop Invest Financ 29(3):312–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • French N, Gabrielli L (2004) The uncertainty of valuation. J Prop Invest Financ 22(6):484–500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta A, Tiwari P (2016) Investment risk scoring model for commercial properties in India. J Prop Invest Financ 34(2):156–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hendershott P, Hendershott R (2002) On measuring real estate risk. Real Estate Financ 18(4):35–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollander J (2010) Private property owners and the remaking of brownfields. Public Works Manag Policy 15(1):32–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchison N, Adair A, Leheny I (2005) Communicating investment risk to clients: property risk scoring. J Prop Res 22(2–3):137–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joslin A (2005) An investigation into the expression of uncertainty in property valuations. J Prop Invest Financ 23(3):269–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Lange D, McNeil S (2004) Clean it and they will come? Defining successful brownfield development. J Urban Plan Dev 130(2):101–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lutzkendorf T, Lorenz D (2007) Integrating sustainability into property risk assessments for market transformation. Build Res Inf 35(4):644–661

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meins E, Wallbaum H, Hardziewski R, Feige A (2010) Sustainability and property valuation: a risk-based approach. Build Res Inf 38(3):280–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Petts J (1994) Contaminated sites: blight, public concerns and communication. Land Contam Reclam 2(4):171

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty T (1994) How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Interfaces 24(6):19–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Slovic P (1992) Perception of risk: reflections on the psychometric paradigm. In: Krimsky S, Golding D (ed) Social theories of risks. Praeger

    Google Scholar 

  • Swartz RD (1994) Michigan’s approach to urban redevelopment involving contaminated properties. Econ Dev Q 8(4):329–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Syms P (1996) Perceptions of risk in the valuation of contaminated land. J Prop Valuat Invest 15(1):27–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Syms, P (1997) Contaminated land: the practice and economics of redevelopment. Blackwell Science

    Google Scholar 

  • Syms P (1999) Redeveloping brownfield land: the decision-making process. J Prop Invest Financ 17(5):481–500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Syms P (2004) Previously developed land: industrial activities and contamination. Blackwell, Oxford, UK

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tam EK, Byer PH (2002) Remediation of contaminated lands: a decision methodology for site owners. J Environ Manag 64(4):387–400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tedd P, Charles JA, Driscoll R (2001) Sustainable brownfield re-development: risk management. Eng Geol 60(1–4):333–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas MR (2003) Brownfield redevelopment: information issues and the affected public. Environ Pract 5(1):62–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaidya O, Kumar S (2006) Analytic hierarchy process: an overview of applications. Eur J Oper Res 169(1):1–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viscusi WK, Hamilton JT (1999) Are risk regulators rational? Evidence from hazardous waste cleanup decisions. Am Econ Rev 89(4):1010–1027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber B (1997) The valuation of contaminated land. J Real Estate Res 14(3):379–398

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheaton WC (2002) On measuring real estate risk: a reply. Real Estate Financ 18(4):41–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Whipple RTM (2006) Property valuation and analysis, 2nd edn. Thomson LawBook Co

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitman I (2006) Brownfield redevelopment by the private sector: market driven decision making, brownfield sites iii: prevention, assessment. Rehabil Dev Brownfield Sites 94:11121

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson AR (1996) Emerging approaches to impaired property valuation. Apprais J 21:155–170

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O (1985) The economic institutions of capitalism. Simon and Schuster

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu H, Qin B, Yang J (2016) Regulation system and institutional design for brownfield redevelopment in Melbourne. Urban Plan Int 31(4):72–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yount KR (1997) The organizational contexts of decisions to invest in environmentally risky urban properties. J Econ Issues 31(2):367–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Architecture Building and Planning, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia

    Hao Wu, Piyush Tiwari, Sun Sheng Han & Toong-Khuan Chan

Authors
  1. Hao Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Piyush Tiwari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sun Sheng Han
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Toong-Khuan Chan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hao Wu .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Real Estate and Construction, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong

    K. W. Chau

  2. Department of Real Estate and Construction, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong

    Isabelle Y.S. Chan

  3. Department of Real Estate and Construction, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong

    Weisheng Lu

  4. Faculty of Architecture, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong

    Chris Webster

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

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

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation