It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Despite increasing risks from sea-level rise (SLR) and storms, US coastal communities continue to attract relatively high-income residents, and coastal property values continue to rise. To understand this seeming paradox and explore policy responses, we develop the Coastal Home Ownership Model (C-HOM) and analyze the long-term evolution of coastal real estate markets. C-HOM incorporates changing physical attributes of the coast, economic values of these attributes, and dynamic risks associated with storms and flooding. Resident owners, renters, and non-resident investors jointly determine coastal property values and the policy choices that influence the physical evolution of the coast. In the coupled system, we find that subsidies for coastal management, such as beach nourishment, tax advantages for high-income property owners, and stable or increasing property values outside the coastal zone all dampen the effects of SLR on coastal property values. The effects, however, are temporary and only delay precipitous declines as total inundation approaches. By removing subsidies, prices would more accurately reflect risks from SLR but also trigger more coastal gentrification, as relatively high-income owners enter the market and self-finance nourishment. Our results suggest a policy tradeoff between slowing demographic transitions in coastal communities and allowing property markets to adjust smoothly to risks from climate change.
Subsidies for coastal management and tax advantages for high-income property owners dampen the negative effects of climate risks on coastal property values. Without subsidies or tax advantages market prices better reflect climate risks, but coastal gentrification could accelerate.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details


1 UNC Wilmington, Department of Physics and Physical Oceanography, Wilmington, USA (GRID:grid.217197.b) (ISNI:0000 0000 9813 0452); UNC Wilmington, Center for Marine Science, Wilmington, USA (GRID:grid.217197.b) (ISNI:0000 0000 9813 0452)
2 Duke University, Nicholas School of the Environment, Durham, USA (GRID:grid.26009.3d) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 7961); Duke University, Department of Economics, Durham, USA (GRID:grid.26009.3d) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 7961)
3 UNC Wilmington, Department of Physics and Physical Oceanography, Wilmington, USA (GRID:grid.217197.b) (ISNI:0000 0000 9813 0452); Duke University, Nicholas School of the Environment, Durham, USA (GRID:grid.26009.3d) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 7961)
4 The Ohio State University, Department of Agricultural, Environmental, and Development Economics, Columbus, USA (GRID:grid.261331.4) (ISNI:0000 0001 2285 7943)
5 University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Athens, USA (GRID:grid.213876.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 738X)