Givings Recapture: Funding Public Acquisition of Private Property Interests on the Coasts

Barnhizer, Daniel D.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.436700

Cited by 5 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The effect on adjacent property values is mixed. Barnhizer () shows an increase in nearby property values while Zavar () finds no effect.…”

Section: Government Acquisition Of Flood‐prone Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…The program generally aims to benefit both parties (i.e., property owners and the implementing government agencies). Barnhizer () notes that for every $1 invested in the acquisition program, property owners who accept acquisition contracts generated $2 in reduction of future flood insurance premia. Furthermore, the program gives homeowners the opportunity to financially protect against decreased property value that occurs in the wake of a flood event (Greer and Binder ).…”

Section: Government Acquisition Of Flood‐prone Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, the program gives homeowners the opportunity to financially protect against decreased property value that occurs in the wake of a flood event (Greer and Binder ). Governments, both federal and local, also save on future expenditures for flood mitigation and response when an area is cleared of flood‐prone structures (Barnhizer ). Acquisition can also benefit other members of society, as the resulting open space may be used for fishing, hunting, boating, and hiking (Barnhizer ).…”

Section: Government Acquisition Of Flood‐prone Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Measuring Heterogeneous Price Effects for Home Acquisition Programs in At‐Risk Regions

Frimpong¹,

Kruse²,

Howard³

et al. 2019

Southern Economic Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Any entity offering flood insurance, whether it is private or government‐administered such as the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), faces the challenge of solvency. This is especially true for the NFIP, where homeowner affordability criteria limit the opportunity to charge fully risk‐based premiums. One solution is to remove the highest flood risk properties from the insurer's book of business. Acquisition (buyout) of flood‐prone structures is a potentially permanent solution that eliminates the highest risk properties while providing homeowners with financial assistance to relocate in a less risky location. To encourage participation, homeowners are offered a preflood fair market value of their damaged (or at risk of damage) structures. Although many factors have been shown to affect a homeowner's decision to accept an acquisition offer, very little research has been devoted to the influence of price or monetary incentive offered on homeowners' willingness to participate in acquisition programs. We estimate a pooled probit model and employ a bootstrap methodology to determine the effects of hypothetical home price offers on homeowners' acquisition decisions. We do so while controlling for environmental factors, property characteristics, and homeowner sociodemographic characteristics. Results show that price indeed has a positive effect on likelihood of accepting an acquisition contract. Furthermore, estimated homeowner supply curves differ significantly based on the damage status of the acquisition offer, as well as homeowner and property characteristics.

show abstract

“…The effect on adjacent property values is mixed. Barnhizer () shows an increase in nearby property values while Zavar () finds no effect.…”

Section: Government Acquisition Of Flood‐prone Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Government Acquisition Of Flood‐prone Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Government Acquisition Of Flood‐prone Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Measuring Heterogeneous Price Effects for Home Acquisition Programs in At‐Risk Regions

Frimpong¹,

Kruse²,

Howard³

et al. 2019

Southern Economic Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Troy and Romm found the price discount to be more marked in neighborhoods with larger Hispanic population shares, suggesting that this group was particularly uninformed about flood risks.5 Various proposals for reforming the NFIP have been suggested, including issuing longterm insurance contracts tied to the property instead of one-year renewable policies tied to the individual homeowner(Kunreuther and Michel-Kerjan, 2010) to reduce the number of residents canceling their policies after just 2 or 3 years as has been shown to be the case(Michel-Kerjan et al, 2012), using federal funds to compensate existing landowners, and targeting properties deemed high-risk or environmentally sensitive to purchase flood insurance(Barnhizer, 2003).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

What drives households to buy flood insurance? New evidence from Georgia

Atreya

Ferreira

Michel-Kerjan

2015

Ecological Economics

162

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…• Accelerated sea level rise and consequent coastal erosion, with losses of public and private coastal property and infrastructure (recent analyses show past and future sea level rise to be faster than thought even a few years ago); 55 • Increased insurance uncertainty because of erosion, inundation, and new storm patterns. 56 How long can the federal government subsidize flood insurance? Costs of repairs, replacement costs, loss of land, damage to infrastructure, and loss of tax base are all huge numbers.…”

Section: A the Science In A Nutshellmentioning

confidence: 99%

The “Gift” That Keeps on Giving: Global Warming Meets the Common Law

Cutting¹,

Cahoon²

2008

Vermont Journal of Environmental Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global warming issues have captured an Oscar, a Nobel Prize and the mainstream media's attention. There is significant consensus in the scientific community that global warming is real, most likely due to anthropogenic sources (traceable to the Industrial Revolution), and that it is likely to cost trillions of dollars in health effects; and loss of property, crops, and species; and adverse effects on national security, as described in great detail by the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report. Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are a wastedisposal method for sectors such as power generation and transportation used to save the cost of waste containment at the expense of effects on ground receptors and the planet. In response to U.S. federal inactivity, states have initiated creative legislative schemes, but the federal government has actively resisted most of these efforts through litigation. States have now filed public nuisance actions utilizing federal and state common law claims to protect those who actually suffer damages. This article explores the revitalized use of the common law as a residual or default tool for public prosecutors and public entities when national policy and statutory remedies prove inadequate. The trial court decisions are on appeal and we argue that they erred on the key constitutional issue of justiciability. Reviewing courts may consider displacement of federal common law as well as preemption of state actions. These cases fuel the debate-even if they are ultimately unsuccessful in the courts, displaced by constructive legislative action, or preempted by disruptive legislation-by (1) providing public information; (2) identifying real costs, liabilities, and exposure for the regulated community, the public, politicians, investors, and regulators; and (3) forcing some action by the legislative or executive branches as a result. We offer trespass as an additional theory to compel the internalization of the real costs of pollution by focusing on all the effects of the invasion of public and private space (i.e. property) once pollutants exit generators' property lines. Trespass may better reconcile the law with science and economics. Scientists understand that they do not know enough about the short and long-term effects of the materials commonly found in the environment. Thus, the current regulatory system permits waste disposal on public and private property without adequate knowledge about the effects of such materials and without provisions for their undetermined future harms. These external social costs constitute market failures that violate free market principles because production costs are passed on to the public (as test subjects) rather than borne by the generators' customers. Public nuisance actions offer one method for efficient internalization of global warming's true costs, while trespass offers yet another theory by accounting for waste at the property boundary. In addition, government may incur liability for a Fifth Amendment taking of receptors' rights by...

show abstract

Givings Recapture: Funding Public Acquisition of Private Property Interests on the Coasts

Abstract: [A] foolish man ... built his house on the sand. The rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and slammed against that house; and it fell-and great was its fall. 1

Cited by 5 publications

References 1 publication

Measuring Heterogeneous Price Effects for Home Acquisition Programs in At‐Risk Regions

Measuring Heterogeneous Price Effects for Home Acquisition Programs in At‐Risk Regions

What drives households to buy flood insurance? New evidence from Georgia

The “Gift” That Keeps on Giving: Global Warming Meets the Common Law

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About