Decision theory and real estate development: a note on uncertainty

Real estate development appraisal is a quantification of future expectations. The appraisal model relies upon the valuer/developer having an understanding of the future in terms of the future marketability of the completed development and the future cost of development. In some cases the developer has some degree of control over the possible variation in the variables, as with the cost of construction through the choice of specification. However, other variables, such as the sale price of the final product, are totally dependent upon the vagaries of the market at the completion date. To try to address the risk of a different outcome to the one expected (modelled) the developer will often carry out a sensitivity analysis on the development. However, traditional sensitivity analysis has generally only looked at the best and worst scenarios and has focused on the anticipated or expected outcomes. This does not take into account uncertainty and the range of outcomes that can happen. A fuller analysis should include examination of the uncertainties in each of the components of the appraisal and account for the appropriate distributions of the variables. Similarly, as many of the variables in the model are not independent, the variables need to be correlated. This requires a standardised approach and we suggest that the use of a generic forecasting software package, in this case Crystal Ball, allows the analyst to work with an existing development appraisal model set up in Excel (or other spreadsheet) and to work with a predetermined set of probability distributions. Without a full knowledge of risk, developers are unable to determine the anticipated level of return that should be sought to compensate for the risk. This model allows the user a better understanding of the possible outcomes for the development. Ultimately the final decision will be made relative to current expectations and current business constraints, but by assessing the upside and downside risks more appropriately, the decision maker should be better placed to make a more informed and “better”.

The uncertainty of valuation

Valuation is often said to be “an art not a science” but this relates to the techniques employed to calculate value not to the underlying concept itself. Valuation is the process of estimating price in the market place. Yet, such an estimation will be affected by uncertainties. Uncertainty in the comparable information available; uncertainty in the current and future market conditions and uncertainty in the specific inputs for the subject property. These input uncertainties will translate into an uncertainty with the output figure, the valuation. The degree of the uncertainties will vary according to the level of market activity; the more active a market, the more credence will be given to the input information. In the UK at the moment the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) is considering ways in which the uncertainty of the output figure, the valuation, can be conveyed to the use of the valuation, but as yet no definitive view has been taken apart from a single Guidance Note (GN5, RICS 2003) stressing the importance of recognising uncertainty in valuation but not proffering any particular solution. One of the major problems is that Valuation models (in the UK) are based upon comparable information and rely upon single inputs. They are not probability based, yet uncertainty is probability driven. In this paper, we discuss the issues underlying uncertainty in valuations and suggest a probability-based model (using Crystal Ball) to address the shortcomings of the current model.

Uncertainty and feasibility studies: an Italian case study

Uncertainty affects all aspects of the property market but one area where the impact of uncertainty is particularly significant is within feasibility analyses. Any development is impacted by differences between market conditions at the conception of the project and the market realities at the time of completion. The feasibility study needs to address the possible outcomes based on an understanding of the current market. This requires the appraiser to forecast the most likely outcome relating to the sale price of the completed development, the construction costs and the timing of both. It also requires the appraiser to understand the impact of finance on the project. All these issues are time sensitive and analysis needs to be undertaken to show the impact of time to the viability of the project. The future is uncertain and a full feasibility analysis should be able to model the upside and downside risk pertaining to a range of possible outcomes. Feasibility studies are extensively used in Italy to determine land value but they tend to be single point analysis based upon a single set of “likely” inputs. In this paper we look at the practical impact of uncertainty in variables using a simulation model (Crystal Ball ©) with an actual case study of an urban redevelopment plan for an Italian Municipality. This allows the appraiser to address the issues of uncertainty involved and thus provide the decision maker with a better understanding of the risk of development. This technique is then refined using a “two-dimensional technique” to distinguish between “uncertainty” and “variability” and thus create a more robust model.

Discounted cash flow: accounting for uncertainty

Valuation is the process of estimating price. The methods used to determine value attempt to model the thought processes of the market and thus estimate price by reference to observed historic data. This can be done using either an explicit model, that models the worth calculation of the most likely bidder, or an implicit model, that that uses historic data suitably adjusted as a short cut to determine value by reference to previous similar sales. The former is generally referred to as the Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) model and the latter as the capitalisation (or All Risk Yield) model. However, regardless of the technique used, the valuation will be affected by uncertainties. Uncertainty in the comparable data available; uncertainty in the current and future market conditions and uncertainty in the specific inputs for the subject property. These input uncertainties will translate into an uncertainty with the output figure, the estimate of price. In a previous paper, we have considered the way in which uncertainty is allowed for in the capitalisation model in the UK. In this paper, we extend the analysis to look at the way in which uncertainty can be incorporated into the explicit DCF model. This is done by recognising that the input variables are uncertain and will have a probability distribution pertaining to each of them. Thus buy utilising a probability-based valuation model (using Crystal Ball) it is possible to incorporate uncertainty into the analysis and address the shortcomings of the current model. Although the capitalisation model is discussed, the paper concentrates upon the application of Crystal Ball to the Discounted Cash Flow approach.

Solar signal propagation: the role of gravity waves and stratospheric sudden warmings

We use a troposphere‐stratosphere model of intermediate complexity to study the atmospheric response to an idealized solar forcing in the subtropical upper stratosphere during Northern Hemisphere (NH) early winter. We investigate two conditions that could influence poleward and downward propagation of the response: (1) the representation of gravity wave effects and (2) the presence/absence of stratospheric sudden warmings (SSWs). We also investigate how the perturbation influences the timing and frequency of SSWs. Differences in the poleward and downward propagation of the response within the stratosphere are found depending on whether Rayleigh friction (RF) or a gravity wave scheme (GWS) is used to represent gravity wave effects. These differences are likely related to differences in planetary wave activity in the GWS and RF versions, as planetary wave redistribution plays an important role in the downward and poleward propagation of stratospheric signals. There is also remarkable sensitivity in the tropospheric response to the representation of the gravity wave effects. It is most realistic for GWS. Further, tropospheric responses are systematically different dependent on the absence/presence of SSWs. When only years with SSWs are examined, the tropospheric signal appears to have descended from the stratosphere, while the signal in the troposphere appears disconnected from the stratosphere when years with SSWs are excluded. Different troposphere‐stratosphere coupling mechanisms therefore appear to be dominant for years with and without SSWs. The forcing does not affect the timing of SSWs, but does result in a higher occurrence frequency throughout NH winter. Quasi‐Biennial Oscillation effects were not included.

Are conventions solutions to uncertainty? Contrasting visions of social coordination

In recent years, there has been an increase in research on conventions motivated by the game-theoretic contributions of the philosopher David Lewis. Prior to this surge in interest, discussions of convention in economics had been tied to the analysis of John Maynard Keynes's writings. These literatures are distinct and have very little overlap. Yet this confluence of interests raises interesting methodological questions. Does the use of a common term, convention, denote a set of shared concerns? Can we identify what differentiates the game theoretic models from the Keynesian ones? This paper maps out the three most developed accounts of convention within economics and discusses their relations with each other in an attempt to provide an answer.

The impact of uncertainty in satellite data on the assessment of flood inundation models

The performance of flood inundation models is often assessed using satellite observed data; however these data have inherent uncertainty. In this study we assess the impact of this uncertainty when calibrating a flood inundation model (LISFLOOD-FP) for a flood event in December 2006 on the River Dee, North Wales, UK. The flood extent is delineated from an ERS-2 SAR image of the event using an active contour model (snake), and water levels at the flood margin calculated through intersection of the shoreline vector with LiDAR topographic data. Gauged water levels are used to create a reference water surface slope for comparison with the satellite-derived water levels. Residuals between the satellite observed data points and those from the reference line are spatially clustered into groups of similar values. We show that model calibration achieved using pattern matching of observed and predicted flood extent is negatively influenced by this spatial dependency in the data. By contrast, model calibration using water elevations produces realistic calibrated optimum friction parameters even when spatial dependency is present. To test the impact of removing spatial dependency a new method of evaluating flood inundation model performance is developed by using multiple random subsamples of the water surface elevation data points. By testing for spatial dependency using Moran’s I, multiple subsamples of water elevations that have no significant spatial dependency are selected. The model is then calibrated against these data and the results averaged. This gives a near identical result to calibration using spatially dependent data, but has the advantage of being a statistically robust assessment of model performance in which we can have more confidence. Moreover, by using the variations found in the subsamples of the observed data it is possible to assess the effects of observational uncertainty on the assessment of flooding risk.