PurposeAims to examine financial risk management. The UK valuation profession has been criticised for inconsistencies and failures to reflect risk and uncertainty in certain valuation assignments such as the pricing of urban regeneration land. Also the Investment Property Forum/Investment Property Databank specifically concluded that a new approach is needed which combines conventional analysis of returns uncertainty with a more comprehensive survey of business risks. This debate has been brought into sharper focus by the publication of the Carsberg Report, which emphasised the need for more acceptable methods of expressing uncertainty, particularly when pricing in thin markets.Design/methodology/approachThe paper commences with an examination of risk analysis within investment decision making and the property industry, drawing on the findings of the most recent literature that assesses the utilisation of risk management approaches.FindingsFinancial risk management is examined and the workings of the D&B credit rating model illustrated. The paper explains the decision‐making framework within which the property risk score is applied.Originality/valueThe aim of this paper is to present an alternative paradigm for the reporting of risk based on techniques utilised within business applications. In particular it applies a standard credit‐rating technique, based on the D&B model, to report the level of risk within property pricing – property risk scoring (PRS).

This paper examines the nature and significance of ownership constraints within the urban redevelopment process. It suggests that such constraints derive from the distinctiveness of land as a commodity, the imperfect nature of the land market, the behavioural characteristics of landowners and the institutional context for land ownership, exchange and development. From this, the paper proposes a common definition of ownership constraints as a basis for their practical classification. This divides ownership constraints between those that concern deficiencies in, or limitations to, the extent of ownership rights in potential development land and those that relate specifically to the strategies, interests and actions of those who hold such rights. The various types of ownership constraints that fall under these headings are then explored, with research presented into the extent to which they each disrupted plans to use, market, develop or purchase 80 large redevelopment sites in four British cities between 1991 and 1995.

No abstract

Addresses the issue of valuation variation. The fundamental research question is to establish the range of valuations which a group of qualified valuers operating in the same market and using the same basic assumptions would produce in their estimation of price. It significantly extends the approach adopted by Hager and Lord and draws conclusions about different market sectors, locations and size of firms. The results of the survey show a wide variation in value across both rack rented and reversionary interests. In terms of the former over 80 per cent of all valuations produced a variation from the mean of less than 20 per cent with a corresponding figure of over 90 per cent for the reversionary investments. These levels of accuracy fall short of the contention that valuers can value to within 5‐10 per cent of market value.