IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fem/femwpa/2003.7.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Role of Liability, Regulation and Economic Incentives in Brownfield Remediation and Redevelopment: Evidence from Surveys of Developers

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Alberini

    (University of Maryland and Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei)

  • Alberto Longo

    (Università di Venezia Ca’ Foscari and Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei)

  • Stefania Tonin

    (Istituto Universitario di Architettura di Venezia)

  • Francesco Trombetta

    (Istituto Universitario di Architettura di Venezia)

  • Margherita Turvani

    (Istituto Universitario di Architettura di Venezia)

Abstract

We examine different market-based mechanisms and other incentives intended to promote the environmental remediation and reuse of brownfields. Policies that encourage cleanup and re-use of brownfields offer real estate developers reductions in regulatory burden, relief from liability for future cleanups once certain mitigation standards are met, and/or financial support for regeneration of brownfields. We use conjoint choice experiments—a stated preference approach—to assess the responses of real estate developers to different mixes of these incentives. Our survey instrument was administered in person to a sample of developers and real estate professionals randomly intercepted at the Marché International des Professionnels de l’Immobilier (MIPIM) in Cannes, France, in March 2002. Conditional and random-coefficient logit models of the responses to the choice questions indicate that developers find sites with contamination problems less attractive than others, and that they value liability relief. This confirms our expectation that contaminated sites are less desirable because of the associated cleanup costs, but refutes earlier claims that liability does not matter. Our developers are not deterred by prior contamination, once it has been cleaned up, suggesting that “contamination stigma” is not very important, and appreciate fast-track review of development and remediation plans, direct financial incentives, and flexible (negotiable) cleanup standards. Developers with prior experience with contaminated sites are more responsive to the policies than are nexperienced developers, especially for subsidies. Inexperienced developers are more responsive to liability relief and regulatory relief than they are to subsidies. Similar considerations hold true for larger developers.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Alberini & Alberto Longo & Stefania Tonin & Francesco Trombetta & Margherita Turvani, 2003. "The Role of Liability, Regulation and Economic Incentives in Brownfield Remediation and Redevelopment: Evidence from Surveys of Developers," Working Papers 2003.7, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
  • Handle: RePEc:fem:femwpa:2003.7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.feem.it/userfiles/attach/Publication/NDL2003/NDL2003-007.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ihlanfeldt, Keith R. & Taylor, Laura O., 2004. "Externality effects of small-scale hazardous waste sites: evidence from urban commercial property markets," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 117-139, January.
    2. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, March.
    3. McGrath, Daniel T., 2000. "Urban Industrial Land Redevelopment and Contamination Risk," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 414-442, May.
    4. Miriam Schoenbaum, 2002. "Environmental Contamination, Brownfields Policy, and Economic Redevelopment in an Industrial Area of Baltimore, Maryland," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(1), pages 60-71.
    5. Kip Viscusi, W. & Magat, Wesley A. & Huber, Joel, 1991. "Pricing environmental health risks: survey assessments of risk-risk and risk-dollar trade-offs for chronic bronchitis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 32-51, July.
    6. Christopher De Sousa, 2000. "Brownfield Redevelopment versus Greenfield Development: A Private Sector Perspective on the Costs and Risks Associated with Brownfield Redevelopment in the Greater Toronto Area," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(6), pages 831-853.
    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. Rinaldo Brau & Antonello Scorcu & Laura Vici, 2009. "Assessing visitor satisfaction with tourism rejuvenation policies: the case of Rimini, Italy," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(1), pages 25-42.
    2. Anna Alberini, 2007. "Determinants And Effects On Property Values Of Participation In Voluntary Cleanup Programs: The Case Of Colorado," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 25(3), pages 415-432, July.
    3. Anna Alberini & Dennis Guignet, 2008. "Voluntary Cleanups and Redevelopment Potential: Lessons from Baltimore, Maryland," Working Papers 2008.87, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    4. Robin R. Jenkins & Elizabeth Kopits & David Simpson, 2006. "Measuring the Social Benefits of EPA Land Cleanup and Reuse Programs," NCEE Working Paper Series 200603, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Sep 2006.
    5. Stefania Tonin & Margherita Turvani, 2011. "Environmental contamination and industrial real estate market: an application of hedonic price method in Italy," ERSA conference papers ersa10p511, European Regional Science Association.
    6. Anna Alberini & Aline Chiabai & Lucija Muehlenbachs, 2005. "Using Expert Judgment to Assess Adaptive Capacity to Climate Change: Evidence From a Conjoint Choice Survey," Working Papers 2005.106, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    7. Robert W. Turner & Laura Noddin & Alita Giuda, 2005. "Estimating nonuse values using conjoint analysis," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 17(7), pages 1-15.
    8. Chattopadhyay, Sudip, 2009. "The random expenditure function approach to welfare in RUM: The case of hazardous waste clean-up," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 58-74, January.
    9. Paolo Rosato & Anna Alberini & Valentina Zanatta & Margaretha Breil, 2009. "Redeveloping Derelict and Underused Historical City Areas: Evidence from a Survey�of�Real�Estate�Developers," Working Papers 2009_02, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    10. Anna Alberini & Aline Chiabai & Margherita Turvani & Stefania Tonin, 2006. "Public Support for Policies Addressing Contaminated Sites: Evidence From a Survey of the Italian Public," ERSA conference papers ersa06p651, European Regional Science Association.
    11. Anna Alberini & Alberto Longo, 2006. "The Effects of Contamination and Cleanup on Commercial and Industrial Properties: A Hedonic Pricing Model of Maryland and Baltimore City," ERSA conference papers ersa06p413, European Regional Science Association.
    12. repec:kap:enreec:v:67:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s10640-015-9985-y is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Paolo Rosato & Anna Alberini & Valentina Zanatta & Margaretha Breil, 2010. "Redeveloping derelict and underused historic city areas: evidence from a survey of real estate developers," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, pages 257-281.
    14. Barrieu, Pauline & Bellamy, Nadine & Sinclair-Desgagné, Bernard, 2017. "Assessing contaminated land cleanup costs and strategies," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 68198, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    15. Toshiaki Sasao, 2016. "Econometric analysis of cleanup of illegal dumping sites in Japan: removal or remedial actions?," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 18(4), pages 485-497, October.
    16. Patrizia Riganti & Anna Alberini & Alberto Longo, 2005. "Public Preferences for Land usesÂ’ changes - valuing urban regeneration projects at the Venice Arsenale," ERSA conference papers ersa05p756, European Regional Science Association.
    17. Hilary Sigman, 2010. "Environmental Liability and Redevelopment of Old Industrial Land," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 53(2), pages 289-306, May.
    18. Adam Eckerd & Andrew Keeler, 2012. "Going green together? Brownfield remediation and environmental justice," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 45(4), pages 293-314, December.
    19. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:17:y:2005:i:7:p:1-15 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. 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.
    21. I-Chun Chen & Yeng-Chieh Tsai & Hwong-Wen Ma, 2016. "Toward Sustainable Brownfield Redevelopment Using Life-Cycle Thinking," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 8(10), pages 1-15, October.
    22. Kris Wernstedt & Peter B. Meyer & Anna Alberini, 2006. "Attracting private investment to contaminated properties: The value of public interventions," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(2), pages 247-369.
    23. Jeffrey Zabel, 2007. "The Impact of Imperfect Information on the Transactions of Contaminated Properties," NCEE Working Paper Series 200703, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Jan 2007.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Brownfields; contaminated sites; real estate developers; stated preferences; conjoint analysis; liability relief; regulatory relief; subsidies;

    JEL classification:

    • Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy
    • R38 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Real Estate Markets, Spatial Production Analysis, and Firm Location - - - Government Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:fem:femwpa:2003.7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (barbara racah). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/feemmit.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.