Does a property‐specific environmental health risk create a “neighborhood” housing price stigma? Arsenic in private well water
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the impact of arsenic contamination of groundwater on sale prices of residential properties and bare land transactions in two Maine towns, Buxton and Hollis, that rely on private wells to supply their drinking water. Prompted by tests of well water by the state of Maine, media attention focused on the communities in 1993 and 1994 when 14% of private wells were found to have arsenic concentrations exceeding the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency standard of 0.05 mg/L. Households could mitigate the serious health risks associated with arsenic ingestion by purchasing bottled water or by installing a reverse osmosis home treatment system. Our results indicate that the initial arsenic finding in 1993 led to significant, but temporary, 2 year decreases in property prices. This is a much shorter effect on prices than has been observed for Superfund sites, where prices can be depressed for a decade. These results suggest that a property‐specific contamination incident that is treatable may not have a long‐lasting effect on sale prices, but further research is needed to confirm if the dissipation of the price effect was actually due to the installation of in‐home water treatment systems or due to the dissipation of perceived risk once the media coverage stopped.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".