MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4400830124 · doi:10.15396/eres2024-088

Price Impact of Climate Risk on Commercial Real Estate

2024· article· en· W4400830124 on OpenAlexaff
Abdullah Yavaş, David Scofield, Lingxiao Li, Fang Lü

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersReal Estate Research Institute
KeywordsReal estateBusinessNatural resource economicsEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceEconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study how hurricane-related climate risk affects the commercial real estate (CRE) market using hurricane Sandy as an example. We introduce an ex-post climate risk measurement for CRE assets by supplementing a sample of CRE transactions in the New York Metropolitan Area before and post Sandy with a dataset containing detailed assessments of the severity of the storm-related damage and flooding. Among the four major types of CRE assets including offices, retail stores, warehouses, and apartments, we only document a significant and negative price impact by Sandy to offices, whereas no significant effect on the value of other CRE types. Specifically, we find robust evidence that unaffected office assets surrounded by severely damaged properties within proximity experienced a significant price penalty for four years following the storm. Meanwhile, we did not find any significant price impact on unaffected office assets with moderately damaged properties or flooded properties nearby. Additionally, it seems that the documented price penalty to unaffected office assets located in most severely damaged neighborhoods is mainly driven by a decline in building occupancy. We attribute the differential impact of Sandy on office and other CRE to the increase in remote work for office employees triggered by Sandy. We also note that the absence of any impact of Sandy on other CRE, including apartments, compared to significant and negative impact on single family homes reported in earlier studies (Fang et al. 2023) is an indication of more rational expectations and pricing in the commercial space.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHousing Market and Economics→French-language works237,207→