The Role of Proximity in Foreclosure Externalities: Evidence from Condominiums

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte.

Sales of Distressed Residential Property: What Have We Learned from Recent Research?

“…Also, while REO properties have a negative impact on nearby houses for sale, the effect is only slightly more pronounced than that of non-REO sales. Fisher, Lambie-Hanson, and Willen (2015) find that a foreclosed condo leads to a 2.5 percent reduction in sales price for a condo in the same association and at the same address, while it has virtually no price effect for a condo in the same association but at a different address. Because condos in the same association can be considered close substitutes, the authors conclude that the foreclosure causes a price decline through a disamenity effect rather than a supply effect.…”

Learning Geographical Distribution of Vacant Houses Using Closed Municipal Data: A Case Study of Wakayama City, Japan

“…Recent pieces of research have taken advantage of closed data such as mortgage deeds (Fisher et al, 2015) and building registration (Baba, Hino, 2019), which articulate the characteristics of vacant housing. Some significant data sources 1 The background map is created using digital residential map by Zenrin Co. LTD and Digital Map (Basic Geospatial Information) by Geospatial Information Authority of Japan.…”

Neighborhood price externalities of foreclosure rehabilitation: an examination of the Neighborhood Stabilization Program

“…Properties with a larger degree of deterioration or blight (Fisher et al, 2015), longer foreclosure processes (Zhang et al, 2015;Daneshvary and Clauretie, 2012), and lower relative home values (Zhang and Leonard, 2014) have all been found to be associated with larger neighborhood price externalities compared to other properties in the same urban housing market. This suggests that foreclosure rehabilitation programs might be expected to produce positive neighborhood price externalities at least as great as the average local negative price externalities associated with foreclosure because they target for rehabilitation foreclosed properties in the most vulnerable neighborhoods and with the poorest conditions.…”