Search results

The purpose of this research is to investigate Australian property valuers' identification and consideration of physical risks to properties in valuation practice. The research further explores valuers' considerations of climate change-related risks.

The research approach comprised an online survey of Australian valuers who were members of the Australian Property Institute. The online survey included structured and unstructured questions to explore types and extent of risk investigations in valuation practice.

The analysis reflects that while valuers easily identified and engaged with physical risks, there is a lack of understanding of, and engagement with, climate change risks. This supports the need for better information sources and guidance to inform valuers of climate change risks per se, as well as the development of specific mechanisms for consideration of such risks to be included in valuation processes, practices and reports.

The research is limited by the small sample size achieved due to the timing of the survey deployment, which occurred during the first wave of COVID-19 lockdowns in Australia. Thus, the findings are not necessarily representative of the Australian valuation profession, but they do provide indications of current approaches to risk identification in practice and the need for more guidance in relation to climate change risks.

This research identifies that more support, guidance, information and tools, as well as awareness-raising, are required to enable valuers to accurately identify all risks affecting a property.

The research provides a snapshot of current understandings of physical risk identification in valuation practice. As investors and other organisations integrate and build up their analysis of climate risks to their portfolios and organisations, this research indicates that valuers also need to be aware of changing market assessment of physical and climate risks associated with property for consideration in valuation.

The purpose of this paper is to explain the rationale for integrating sustainability issues into property valuation theory and practice and to provide initial suggestions for valuers on how to account for sustainability issues within valuation reports.

The authors emphasise the key role of valuation professionals and of the valuation process itself in achieving a broader market penetration of sustainable construction. It is explained that, on the one hand, property valuation represents the major mechanism to align economic return with environmental and social performance of property assets, and thus to express and communicate the advantages and benefits of sustainable buildings. On the other hand, it is explained that gradual changes in market participants' perceptions in favour of sustainable buildings must be reflected within the property valuation and associated risk assessment process (otherwise valuers would produce misleading price estimates). The authors identify both the financial benefits and risk reduction potential of sustainable design as well as valuation input parameters that would allow these benefits to be reflected in property price estimates.

The authors show that the main reasons for immediately and rigorously integrating sustainability issues into property valuation are as follows: more sustainable patterns of behaviour are urgently necessary to sustain the viability of the Earth's ecosystems; a huge untapped market potential exists for sustainable property investment products and consulting services; sustainable buildings clearly outperform their conventional competitors in all relevant areas (i.e. environmentally, socially and financially); neglecting the benefits of sustainable design leads to distorted price estimates; and reflecting sustainability issues in property price estimates is already possible and the validity of this decision depends solely on the valuer's capability and sophistication to explain and justify his/her assumptions within the valuation report. However, it is also shown that efforts need to be undertaken to improve the description of property assets in transaction databases in order to provide the informational databases necessary to empirically underpin a valuer's decision to assign a “valuation bonus” to a sustainable building or a “valuation reduction” to an unsustainable/conventional one.

The paper postulates that valuation reports should be extended to include the following additional elements: a clear description of the availability of certain sustainability‐related property characteristics and attributes; a statement of the valuer's opinion about the benefits of these characteristics and attributes; and a statement of the valuer's opinion about the impact of these benefits and/or risks on property value.

There is significant research related to risk and uncertainty in valuation. Risk, in valuation, is mostly communicated to investors in qualitative terms. There has been some research in developed markets to communicate risk quantitatively to clients through property risk scores. However there is paucity of research on communicating risk in emerging markets where the valuation profession is still evolving. Indian property markets have emerged as one the fastest growing markets in the last five years. With the growth in Indian economy and the emergence of indirect property investment market, it is likely that domestic and international passive investors would play an important role in property investment in India. Valuation of assets in portfolio and communication of risk in appropriate way would gain utmost importance. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This study uses analytical hierarchical process method to quantitatively assess risk to value for office properties in India. This study focuses on identifying principal elements of risk as perceived by key market players in an emerging economy like India. It identifies fundamentals of market, property and lease to determine valuation risk. It may be highlighted here that the risk that this paper is analysing is not the risk that is associated with the valuation for valuer who is conducting valuation but systematic and non-systematic risk associated with property. A two round of survey has been conducted to find various principal elements of valuation risk and sub criteria’s through an online survey conducted through survey monkey.

The study found that in an emerging market like India there are limited exit option for developers and investors due to absence of exit vehicle like REITs for office property. Principal element of risk considered is the resale of property, i.e. exit from an investment, followed by tenant and lease specific elements to be other principal elements of risk in the order tenant risk, lock-in duration, functional obsolescence and lease duration. Other market risks like yield movement, rental movement, occupier demand were not considered principal elements of risk.

The study could be expanded further by increasing the sample size and as this study demonstrates present market sentiments. Study needs to be updated periodically to retain its practical importance and relevance to the industry.

Findings of this study could be used by valuers and investors investing in office properties in India.

This is the first paper on risk scoring for commercial properties in the Indian market. It has high importance as Indian market for office space will grow significantly with introduction of REITs.

This research investigated Australian property valuers' identification and consideration of physical climate change risks in valuation practice.

Thirty Australian valuer members of the Australian Property Institute from a variety of specialisations were interviewed. The semi-structured interviews explored climate change risks and the extent of risk investigation and consideration in valuation practice. The analysis utilised the Moser and Luers (2008) climate risk preparedness framework as a lens to evaluate current valuation practice in Australia.

The analysis reflects that while physical risks are easily identified and engaged with by valuers, correspondingly, there is a lack of understanding of and engagement with, climate change risks. This supports the need for better information sources and guidance to inform valuers of climate change risks and the development of specific mechanisms for the consideration of such risks to be included in valuation processes, practices and reports.

The research was limited by its sample size and qualitative approach. Therefore, the research is not a representative opinion of the Australian profession; however, the analysis provides the perspective of a range of valuers from across Australia with different valuation specialisations.

This research has established that valuers have the potential to be prepared to address climate change in their professional capacity, as described by Moser and Luers (2008). However, they are constrained by information communication, access and detail and subsequent market awareness of information on climate change risk exposure on properties. There is a need for further support, guidance, information and tools, as well as awareness-raising, to enable valuers to accurately identify and reflect all risks affecting a property in the process of valuation.

This research provides the first investigation into the consideration of climate change in valuation practice. Property stakeholders—owners, investors, financiers and occupiers—are escalating their climate change risk analysis and reporting for property portfolios and organisations. This research suggests that valuers also need to be aware of the changing dynamics of market reporting and decision-making related to climate change risks to ensure appropriate reflection in valuation practice.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.