Seeing this post on Vox got me thinking – I wonder how housing prices vary in response to disaster risk when the risk is forecasted over a longer term rather than a shorter term?  I've read a bit of the literature on the housing price response to hurricane risk and climate change-based flood risk (from a certain blogger here as well as my undergraduate advisor no less) and covered some basics but I don't think I've seen a comparative study.

It seems that short term risk predictions would be more likely to be internalized in the price.  For one, disasters such as hurricanes seem to strike more often so they're often more salient in homeowners' minds.  Additionally, many of the predictions often comprise of statements such as "more intense hurricanes are likely to hit X area over the next 8 years," which seems a little more digestable than "there is a 56.2% chance of having a huge earthquake somewhere in your relative vicinity over the next 50 years" which is how many earthquake studies read.

Given the housing prices in the San Francisco Bay Area, where I live, I find it hard to believe that climate change risk and earthquake risk are being appropriately priced into the housing stock around here.  That being said, it is also entirely possible that there are governmental programs that are distorting risk pricing as well.  Discount rates could play into this as well – I suppose many people will just discount away any risk beyond some threshold (see here for what economists tend to think about discount rates in comparison to observed discount rates).

If anyone has a good place to point me for articles comparing short run and long run distaster risks and how (or if) it is priced into housing stocks, I would be grateful for the reading!

Posted in , , , , ,
  1. David Zetland Avatar

    Drew — look at changes in share prices for major insurers after disasters. Over time, those prices will not change by much IF risk has been “correctly” factored in.
    SF does not have flood risk as much as earthquake risk (in certain areas). I do not know how the earthquake insurance market works there, but the events are too infrequent for people to consider them daily. I suggest comparing SF prices to prices in some new suburb, where people do not have a history w/quakes…

  2. Drew Moxon Avatar

    That’s a good point – I would assume you would have to know some relative spatial distribution of risk in the policy portfolio in order to find an insurance company that will proxy for the risk in a given area, but that would be a good data point to check. You’re thinking something like http://www.frbsf.org/econrsrch/workingp/pbc/wppb99-04.pdf ?
    Based on that paper it seems that there’s a rise in stock prices due to increased demand for insurance insinuating that the risk is not incorporated in the price.
    As for flood risk, I would think that SF will have problems with long-term climate change-based flooding ( http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/science/earth/san-francisco-fights-erosion-as-coastal-cities-watch-closely.html ) as opposed to hurricane/seasonal flooding. That would be a long-term risk but one that could be forecast better than earthquakes.
    Thanks for the suggestions!

  3. Chris Weaver Avatar

    I don’t know if I have mentioned this, but have you looked into HAZUS-MH?

  4. Drew Moxon Avatar

    I’ve seen the tool before, though I haven’t used it. Looks like it would be helpful to use for overlaying a risk map for a hedonic housing price study.

  5. Chris Weaver Avatar

    It has prepackaged data for the entire country. It also allows you to put in property data yourself to get as accurate a picture as possible. The ability to customize the scenario does give a whole lot of ability to run almost any type of analysis.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Environmental Economics

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading