JP2002140463A - Soil contaminated land evaluation method and depreciation assessment system and method by stigma - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide an collective land evaluation method based on contamination purification costs or STIGMA or the like. SOLUTION: This method for evaluating the value of a target land whose soil is contaminated comprises a first step for assessing the value of the target land while assuming that the soil is not contaminated, a second step for selecting a method for purifying the contaminated soil, and for calculating purification costs, a third step for assessing the depreciation of the value of the target land by an STIGMA, and a fourth step for evaluating the value of the target land whose soil is contamination based on the results obtained in the first to third steps.

Description

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0001]

[0001] The present invention relates to a soil-contaminated land evaluation method and STI for evaluating the value of soil-contaminated land.
The present invention relates to a method for assessing depreciation by GMA.

[0002]

2. Description of the Related Art In recent years, the movement of real estate liquidation has become active, and the market value evaluation of real estate has become active along with this. On the other hand, environmental problems such as soil contamination of land have been gaining social importance. Under such circumstances, it has become necessary to evaluate the property in consideration of the influence of soil pollution when evaluating the property. When conducting an evaluation taking into account the effects of soil contamination, it is necessary to first determine the possibility of soil contamination in the target area, and to properly determine the value of the soil-contaminated area. Under such circumstances, there has been a need for an evaluation method capable of correctly reflecting the decrease due to pollution in the value of real estate.

[0003]

However, there has been a case in the past where the depreciation of land due to pollution has been individually evaluated.
A comprehensive evaluation method that takes into account the cost of remediation and STIGMA (stigmatism caused by pollution or its effects) has not been established yet. This is due to the fact that, in the past, the need for assessment of depreciation due to pollution was not so strong, and even if there was a possibility of soil contamination, it was often necessary to carry out specific investigations.

The present invention has been made in order to solve the above-mentioned problems, and provides a comprehensive land evaluation method that takes into account the cost of pollution control, STIGMA, and the like.

[0005]

According to the first aspect of the present invention, there is provided a method for evaluating the value of a target site having soil contamination, wherein the first method evaluates the value of the target site as having no soil contamination. A second step of selecting a method for purifying the contaminated soil and calculating a purification cost;
A third step of assessing the depreciation of the value of the target site by GMA, and a fourth step of evaluating the value of the target site with soil contamination based on the results obtained in the first to third steps And a method for evaluating a soil-contaminated area.

According to a second aspect of the present invention, there is provided a method for assessing the depreciation by STIGMA of the value of a target site having soil contamination, the method comprising acquiring information on the type and amount of harmful substances contained in soil. And a second step of obtaining information on the method, cost, and time period for remediating the contaminated soil; a third step of obtaining information on the state of government response to the target area; A fourth step of acquiring information on the reaction, a fifth step of acquiring information on the most effective use application as a use of the target place, a sixth step of acquiring information on a price level of the target place, S other than the information obtained in the first to sixth steps
A seventh step of obtaining information on factors that can form TIGMA, and the information obtained in the first to seventh steps are each scored, and based on the sum of these scores, a target area having soil contamination is determined. The value of STIGM
Eighth step of assessing depreciation by A. A method of assessing depreciation by STIGMA.

According to a third aspect of the present invention, there is provided a system for assessing the depreciation by STIGMA of the value of a target land having soil contamination, wherein the use of the land around the target land including the target land is determined.
Input means for inputting the check results of the above check items, standard depreciation rate determining means for determining a standard depreciation rate by STIGMA in accordance with the use of the surrounding land input to the input means, A standard depreciation rate correcting means for obtaining a total score from the check results input to the means and correcting the standard depreciation rate determined by the standard depreciation rate determining means according to the total score; and a correction by the standard depreciation rate correcting means. And output means for outputting a subsequent depreciation rate. The invention according to claim 4 is a method for assessing the depreciation by STIGMA of the value of a target site having soil contamination, wherein the STI is determined according to the use of surrounding land including the target site.
A first step of determining a standard depreciation rate by GMA;
A second step of correcting the standard depreciation rate determined in the first step in accordance with the total score obtained from the check results of one or more check items. . Claim 5
According to the invention described in the above, when only a part of the target place is contaminated, the value corrected in the second step is further corrected according to the range of the target place which is covered by STIGMA. If there is a difference between the step and the use of the land around the target site and the most effective use of the target site itself, the value corrected in the third step is further corrected according to the difference. A fourth step, a fifth step of correcting the value corrected in the fourth step according to the number of years elapsed after completion of the purification of the target area, and a value corrected in the fifth step, The method according to claim 4, further comprising: a sixth step of correcting according to a factor other than the factors in the second to fifth steps.
This is a method of assessing depreciation by TIGMA. According to a sixth aspect of the present invention, a value of a target site having soil contamination obtained by the evaluation method of the first aspect, and the value of the soil obtained by one or more evaluation methods other than the evaluation method of the first aspect. This is a soil-contaminated land evaluation method characterized by evaluating the value of a target land with final soil contamination based on the value of the target land with contamination.

[0008]

DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS A procedure for evaluating a soil contaminated area according to one embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to flowcharts shown in FIGS. FIGS. 1 to 4 are continuous flowcharts, and symbols “〜” in the flowcharts represent points that are connected across the drawings. For example, the reference numeral in FIG. 1 means that it follows the reference numeral in FIG. Further, reference numerals such as S1 in the following text represent steps in the flowchart.

First, an evaluation method applicable to the target site is examined in order to evaluate the target site where the soil is contaminated (S1). Next, it is determined whether the development method or the profit reduction method (DCF method, etc.) can be applied as an evaluation method (S2). As a result of determination, application is not possible (NO)
If it is found, the process proceeds to step S3. The case where the application is not possible is a case where the target site is a small-scale site, and such a target site is used as, for example, a detached residential area.

If the result of determination in step S2 is that the development method or DCF method can be applied (YES), the flow proceeds to step S4. The case where application is possible is the case where the target site is a large-scale site, and since such a target site is used as a multipurpose or commercial site, it is necessary to formulate a development plan. To formulate a development plan is to consider the most suitable use for the target area.

[0011] On the other hand, in order to evaluate soil contamination of a target site, information on a method of purifying contaminated soil in the target site is required. Therefore, first, information on the purification method is collected (S5). Next, how much to purify during the period that can be spent for purification,
The cost spent on purification is monitored (S6). The collected and monitored information is input to the "standard purification cost assessment system" (S7), the standard purification method (standard method for purifying the target area) is determined, and the standard purification period and standard purification are performed. The cost is assessed (S8). Note that the “standard” here means an optimal one for each target place. Assume that the evaluation result of the standard purification cost is (B).

Here, "standard purification cost assessment system"
Will be described briefly. There are usually several ways to clean contaminated soil in the target area. Among these, those that are most suitable for the development plan after purification of the target area, such as cost, period, degree of purification, etc., should be adopted as a standard purification method for evaluation of soil contaminated areas. For this reason, the “standard purification cost assessment system” determines the optimal standard purification method for the target area based on the information on the purification method, and furthermore, the standard purification period and the standard purification cost when this standard purification method is used. Assess

The procedure following step S3 will be described below. In step S3, the value is evaluated assuming that the target site has no soil contamination. As an evaluation method, a general evaluation method such as a cost method, a transaction case comparison method, and a profit return method is used. The result of the assessment in this step is (A).

Then, it is determined whether or not (A)> (B) (S9). As a result of the determination, if it is found that (A)> (B) is not satisfied (NO), that is, the purification cost (B) is equal to or more than the value (A) of the target site when it is assumed that there is no soil contamination. If it is determined that there is, the target site is determined to have no marketability (S10). In this case, although there is no marketability, it is recognized that the owner uses the target land, so that an evaluation based on provisional use and current use is examined (S32). This is because a method of use that does not perform full-scale purification, for example, a method of taking measures to prevent the spread of pollution to the outside of the site, and temporarily using the device in a parking lot is considered.

As a result of the determination in step S9,
If it is found that (A)> (B) (YES),
In other words, if it is determined that the value (A) of the target site assuming that there is no soil contamination is larger than the purification cost (B), data for assessing STIGMA (stigma) is collected (S11). ). At this time, a data sheet for STIGMA assessment and a manual are used.

Here, STIGMA (stigmatism) refers to a portion of depreciation of land due to contamination of soil and the like other than what is embodied in purification costs and the like. Negative consequences of environmental awareness, and negative effects that indicate the risks that remain, even after complete environmental cleanup has taken place.

Next, a depreciation assessment system based on STIGMA is applied (S12), and the depreciation rate based on STIGMA is assessed. Then, (A) × (depreciation rate)> (A) −
It is determined whether or not (B) is satisfied (S13). That is, the reduction of the value of the target site by the STIGMA is compared with the value of the target site obtained by subtracting the purification cost (B).
When it is found that (A) × (depreciation rate)> (A) − (B) (YES), that is, STIG
If the reduction of the value of the target site by MA is greater than the value of the target site less the purification cost (B),
This target location is considered to have no marketability (S10). In this case, although there is no marketability, it is recognized that the owner uses the target land, so that an evaluation based on provisional use and current use is examined (S32).

As a result of the determination in step S13,
(A) × (depreciation rate)> not (A)-(B) (NO)
If it is determined that the value of the target site after decontamination cost (B) is equal to or greater than the reduction of the value of the target site by STIGMA, the depreciation amount (C) by STIGMA is (A) × (Depreciation rate) is calculated (S14). Then, the comprehensive depreciation (D) is determined by the expert (S15). Usually, the total depreciation (D) is calculated by the formula (D) = (B) + (C).

Then, it is determined whether or not (A)> (D) (S16). As a result of the determination, when it is found that (A)> (D) is not satisfied (NO), that is, the total depreciation (D) is the value (A) of the target land when it is assumed that there is no soil contamination. ), It is determined that the target site has no marketability (S17). In this case, although there is no marketability, it is recognized that the owner uses the target land, so that an evaluation based on provisional use and current use is examined (S32).

As a result of the determination in step S16,
If it is found that (A)> (D) (YES),
In other words, if it is found that the value of the target site (A) assuming that there is no soil contamination is greater than the total depreciation (D), the cost- The value is determined to be (A)-(D) (S18). The cost-based approach referred to here is a method of deriving the value of soil-contaminated land by a process of subtracting the depreciation due to soil contamination (sum of purification costs and depreciation by STIGMA) from the value as if there was no soil pollution. I do. In addition, if transaction cases that can grasp the status of pollution can be collected, the value of the contaminated area can be directly assessed by the transaction case comparison method (S18a). Further, the value of the contaminated land is directly assessed by the profit return method that takes into account the factors of the soil contaminated land (S18b). The soil contaminated area factor mentioned here means a rent or the like that reflects the purification cost and STIGMA. Then, the value of the soil contaminated area by the cost method approach obtained in step S18 and
At step 18a, the final value is obtained by combining the value of the soil-contaminated area obtained by the transaction case comparison method and the value of the soil-contaminated area obtained by the profit return method at step S18b. That is, the price calculated by a plurality of methods is adjusted (S1
8c), determine the value of the final soil contaminated area (S18)
d). Adjustment of the estimated price by multiple methods, for example,
A computer loaded with a program for realizing the functions of the "standard purification cost assessment system" and "STIGMA depreciation assessment system" displays estimated prices by multiple methods on a computer, and humans look at the displayed prices. Judgment is made by determining the reliability of the method that has calculated these prices, and determining the final value centering on the price obtained by the most reliable method. Note that the above-described step S1
2 "STIGMA Depreciation Assessment System"
Is used to assess the depreciation of the target location, but is also used for assessing the depreciation of the transaction case used in the transaction case comparison method in step S18a. Thus, the depreciation of the target location by STIGMA and the depreciation of the transaction case by STIGMA can be obtained, so that even if these depreciations are at different levels, it is possible to compare the target location with the transaction case. , Directly assess the value of the target area.

Hereinafter, the procedure following step S4 will be described. In step S4, a development plan is formulated for the target site which is a large-scale site. In addition, depending on the purification method, it is necessary to formulate a development plan in consideration of the equipment arrangement required for purification. From the viewpoint of time and cost, it is necessary to pay particular attention to this point when purifying while developing.

Next, assuming that there is no soil contamination in the target site, the value is evaluated (S19). Evaluation methods include general evaluation methods such as the development method, DCF method,
The cost method and the transaction case comparison method are used. The result of the assessment in this step is (Y).

At the same time as the processing in step S19, the "standard purification cost assessment system" determines the standard purification method and assesses the standard purification cost (S19).
7) The value of the target site is assessed by applying an evaluation method in consideration of purification costs and the like (S20). As the assessment method, a development method, a DCF method (profit return method), a cost method, a transaction case comparison method, and the like are used. Let the result of the assessment in this step be (Z).

In some cases, step S
In step 20, the value incorporating STIGMA, that is, the value of the soil-contaminated area reflecting the depreciation due to STIGMA may be directly assessed (S20a). In other words, among the methods used in step S20, the development method and the DCF method can be weighed by allocating the purification cost over a period of time. Therefore, the reflection of the depreciation by STIGMA is executed in a step after this step. Without weighing in the application of the technique in this step. In addition, if transaction cases that can grasp the status of pollution can be collected, the value of the contaminated area can be directly assessed by the transaction case comparison method.

The development method is an assessment method in the case where the target land is a large-scale land. For example, when a plan for developing an apartment in the target land which is a large-scale land is planned, a long-term (for example, 2 to 2) This is a method of allocating income and expenses generated during the process of developing an apartment over a period of three years) to determine the value attributed to the target area. In this method, in terms of income, the sale price is set including the factor of being a soil-contaminated area, and the cost for purification and monitoring of soil contamination is included and the purification cost is deducted at a stretch. Can be assessed.

In the profit return method (DCF method, etc.), the rent is set lower than in the case where there is no soil pollution, and the purification cost is used as an expenditure. It can be reflected in value.
Alternatively, the depreciation due to soil contamination can be reflected in the value of the target land by using a numerical value in consideration of the soil contaminated land in the return rate and the discount rate of DCF.

Further, the processing in steps S7 and S20 may be performed on the basis of a plurality of development plans in some cases. In other words, when there are a plurality of candidates for the development plan (use of the target area), for each case, the standard purification method is determined and the standard purification cost is assessed, and the value of the target area considering the purification cost An assessment needs to be made.

Next, data for STIGMA assessment is collected (S21). At this time, a data sheet for STIGMA assessment and a manual are used. Next, "ST
IGMA Depreciation Assessment System ”is applied (S2
2) The depreciation rate by STIGMA is assessed (S2)
3). For this assessment, for example, a program for realizing the function of the “STIGMA depreciation assessment system” is recorded on a computer-readable recording medium, and the program recorded on this recording medium is read by a computer system and executed. This is done by: The following methods A to D are used for this assessment. A. B. Depreciation assessment by comprehensive devaluation model based on STIGMA formation factors C. Devaluation assessment based on questionnaire surveys such as CVM Depreciation assessment based on hedonic method Depreciation assessment based on other evaluation criteria, precedents, etc. That is, focusing on A among the above methods A to D,
An assessment is made by weighing B, C, and D, and the depreciation rate is determined. The “STIGMA devaluation system” including these methods will be described later in detail.

Next, it is determined whether or not (Y) × (depreciation rate)> (Z) (S24). That is, STIGM
The reduction in the value of the target site due to A is compared with the reduction in the value of the target site due to purification costs and the like. As a result of the judgment, (Y)
× (depreciation rate)> (Z) (YES), that is, if the reduction of the value of the target site by STIGMA is greater than the value of the target site less purification costs, etc. This target area has no marketability (S
25). In this case, although there is no marketability, it is recognized that the owner uses this land, and evaluation of the provisional use and the evaluation based on the current use is examined next (S3).
3).

As a result of the determination in step S24,
When it is determined that (Y) × (depreciation rate)> (Z) is not satisfied (NO), that is, when the value of the target site, after deducting the purification cost, is equal to or more than the reduction of the value of the target site by STIGMA. Is the depreciation by STIGMA (X)
Is calculated by the formula (Y) × (depreciation rate) (S26).

Then, a comprehensive depreciation (W) is determined by the expert (S27). Normally, the total depreciation (W) is equal to the depreciation (X) by STIGMA. Further, it is determined whether or not (Z)> (W). As a result of the determination, it is not (Z)> (W) (N
O), that is, the total depreciation (W) is the value of the target site (Z) in consideration of the purification cost and the like.
If it is determined that the above is the case, the target site has no marketability (S28). In this case, although there is no marketability, it is recognized that the owner uses the target land, so that an evaluation based on provisional use and current use is examined (S33). On the other hand, (Z)>
(W) (YES), that is, when the value (Z) of the target site in consideration of the purification cost and the like is larger than the total depreciation (W), The value of the soil contaminated area by the cost method is determined to be (Z)-(W) (S29). In step S20a described above, the development method and the profit return method (D
When the value of the soil contaminated area is directly assessed by the CF method and the transaction case comparison method, the value of the soil contaminated area directly obtained in step S20a and the value of the soil based on the cost approach obtained in step S29 are determined. Combine with the value of the contaminated area to make the final conclusion. That is, the price calculated by a plurality of methods is adjusted (S29a), and the final value of the soil contaminated area is determined (S29b). Adjustment of the estimated price by a plurality of methods can be performed, for example, by using a “standard purification cost assessment system” or “STIGMA depreciation assessment system”
The computer that has loaded the program to realize the functions of the above functions displays estimated prices by multiple methods, humans look at the displayed prices, judge the reliability of the methods that estimated these prices, This is done by determining the final value, centering on the price obtained by a reliable method. Note that “STIG” in step S22 described above.
The MA-based depreciation assessment system assesses the depreciation of soil-contaminated land, but can also be used for assessing the depreciation of rents and the like under the Development Act and the rent under the Income Return Act.

Next, a method for assessing depreciation by STIGMA using the above-mentioned "devaluation system by STIGMA" will be described in detail. As described above, the following methods A to D are used for this assessment. A. B. Depreciation assessment by comprehensive devaluation model based on STIGMA formation factors C. Devaluation assessment based on questionnaire surveys such as CVM Depreciation assessment based on hedonic method Depreciation assessment based on other evaluation criteria, precedents, etc. Specifically, focusing on A among the above methods A to D,
An assessment is made by comparing B, C, and D.

First, the method A, that is, the devaluation assessment by a comprehensive devaluation assessment model based on the STIGMA formation factor will be described. This method uses the following items (1) to
This is a method in which data relating to (7) is collected according to a manual, a score (point) is assigned to each item, the score for each item is totaled, and a total depreciation is assessed based on the total. This method, that is, a method of assessing depreciation based on a score, analyzes a plurality of instances of contamination and normalizes the analysis results.

(1) Types and Amounts of Hazardous Substances Data on the types and amounts of harmful substances contained in the soil at the target site are collected, and by referring to the table shown in FIG. Determine the score for this item. (2) Remediation method, cost, and period As a method for purifying the soil in the target area, a method that purifies the maximum technically possible is used, and a method that purifies the minimum environmental standard value for the time being. There is a case where a method is performed. In this case, the classification includes whether the adopted purification method can appeal to the local residents or the like. Also, there are various cases regarding how much the cost / time of purification is required. The score of this item is determined based on these cases.

(3) Government Response For the case of the target area, a classification is made as to whether or not there is an ordinance, a summary, or a track record, and the score of this item is determined based on these classifications. (4) Media Regarding the case in the target area,
If it is an article, categorize it according to the national or regional version, or the number of times the article has been published. In addition, whether the program has been broadcast on a television or not, if it has been broadcast, in a news program, other programs, or the number of times the program has been broadcast is classified. Furthermore, whether the article has become an article of a magazine or not, if it has become an article, the number of times the article has been made is classified according to the number of times. Then, the score of this item is determined based on the above cases.

(5) Use of land The case is classified according to the purpose of use of the target land. That is, the cases are classified according to whether they are residential (residential district), commercial (commercial district), or industrial (industrial district). This is because, for example, if the target site is used for residential use, soil contamination and STIGMA due to soil contamination will be disliked more than for industrial use. Furthermore, in the case of a residential type, a case is classified according to whether it is a high-class detached residential area, a normal residential area, or a mixed residential / commercial area. Then, the score of this item is determined based on the above cases. (6) Price level Case classification is performed according to the price level of the target land, and the score of this item is determined based on this case classification. Land with higher prices has the meaning of purification. (7) Others In addition, a factor is determined for factors that can form STIGMA, and a score is determined.

Next, another example of the method A, that is, the depreciation assessment based on the comprehensive devaluation assessment model based on the STIGMA formation factor will be described with reference to FIG. This example
When assessing the overall depreciation rate, this method is based on the land use purpose, which is actually higher in weight. This method is also performed, for example, by causing a computer to read and execute a program for realizing the function of the “STIGMA devaluation system”. In this method, the overall depreciation rate is assessed according to the following procedure. For this reason, the above-mentioned program has a function (means) for realizing the operation of each step (1) to (6) in the following procedure. For example, a standard depreciation rate determining means for realizing the operation of step (1), a standard depreciation rate correcting means for realizing the operation of step (2), and the like are provided.

(1) Determination of Standard Depreciation Rate for Each Use First, a standard depreciation rate A (%) according to STIGMA is determined according to the use of land, and this value is used as a base value in the following calculation. . Specifically, a table in which a standard depreciation rate A (%) is associated with each land use in advance is described in the standard depreciation rate determining means of the above program, and the standard depreciation rate is determined using this table. The rate determining means obtains a standard depreciation rate A (%) corresponding to the use from the land use. (2) Correction based on total score rate Next, the standard depreciation rate correction means of the above program obtains a total score rate based on check results obtained from a plurality of check items, and calculates a correction coefficient from the obtained total score rate. Determine k. A plurality of categories that can be assumed as a result of the check are provided for each check item (item), and a score (score) corresponding to each category is determined. Therefore, if it is known which category the check result of each check item (item) belongs to, the score obtained from each check item (item) is determined. As a procedure for determining the correction coefficient k, first, from all check items (items),
Check items (items) corresponding to the evaluation target place are extracted, and the extracted check items are sent to the standard depreciation rate correcting means. Then, the standard depreciation rate correction means sums up the maximum points for each of the extracted check items (items), and sets this total point as the maximum score. Next, the check items (items) extracted above that correspond to the evaluation target place are checked, and the check results are sent to the standard depreciation rate correction means. Then, the standard depreciation rate correcting means applies the result of the check to the category, and obtains a score obtained from each check item (item). Then, the scores obtained from the respective check items (items) corresponding to the evaluation target place are totaled, and the total score is set as a total score. And
The standard depreciation rate correcting means divides the above-mentioned total score by the above-mentioned maximum score to obtain a total score rate. Then, using the table shown in FIG. 6, a correction coefficient k corresponding to the obtained total score rate is obtained. Then, the obtained correction coefficient k is converted to the standard depreciation rate A.
(%) Is defined as C (%). Examples of the above check items include the status of pollution, the degree of pollution, types of pollutants, groundwater use, pollution time, purification method, whether or not to monitor, and the details of monitoring (planned) period,
Land size (area), pollution awareness, etc. Each of the above operations is specifically executed by a computer. For example, the above-described table for obtaining the correction coefficient k shown in FIG. 6 is described in advance in the above-described program. Read it on your computer,
By executing, the correction coefficient k is obtained. (3) Range Covered by STIGMA In the case where only a part of the target site is contaminated, a correction coefficient D indicating the ratio of the contaminated portion to the entire target site, that is, the range covered by STIMMA is obtained. Then, a value obtained by multiplying the obtained correction coefficient D by the above-mentioned C (%) is defined as E (%). (4) Correction by the most effective use The correction coefficient F in the case where the land use in the surrounding area of the target land is different from the most effective use is obtained. That is, the base value (standard depreciation rate A) in (1) is determined according to what kind of land use is made in the area including the target land, rather than the use of the target land itself. Therefore, when the land use in the surrounding area of the target land is different from the most effective use of the target land, the correction is performed here. Specifically, a value obtained by multiplying the correction coefficient F by the above E (%) is represented by G (%).
And (5) Correction based on the number of years elapsed after completion of purification After the purification, since the depreciation by STIGMA is considered to gradually decrease, the depreciation rate is corrected based on the number of years elapsed. Specifically, first, according to the purpose of the land,
A standard diminishing period for depreciation by STIGMA is obtained, and the obtained standard diminishing period is corrected according to check items such as the status of pollution and the mobility of residents in the area. And
The correction coefficient H is determined according to the ratio of the number of years elapsed to the reduced period after the correction. Then, a value obtained by multiplying the determined correction coefficient H by the above G (%) is defined as I (%). (6) Compensation based on comprehensive examination Finally, compensation is performed based on factors other than the above. For example, a fraction adjustment (rounding the fraction) of the obtained value is performed here. Specifically, a value obtained by multiplying the correction coefficient J by the above I (%) is defined as an overall depreciation rate K (%).

As shown in FIG. 6, it is possible to calculate the depreciation rate of the target area after purification as well as the depreciation rate before purification. In the calculation of the depreciation rate before purification, the correction coefficient k in the table used in step (2) is a larger (enhanced) value than in the calculation of the depreciation rate after purification.

Next, the method B, that is, the depreciation assessment based on a questionnaire survey such as CVM will be described. CVM
Means virtual market valuation method and is called Contigent Valuation
Abbreviation for Method. This is an evaluation method for non-market goods and services, and is a method of conducting surveys using questionnaires. That is, the evaluation is performed by asking the respondent of the current environment state and the virtual state, and asking about the willingness to pay for the state change between them and the amount of compensation for acceptance. As for this CVM, the United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NO
Since there is a guideline of AA), a reliable evaluation can be realized according to the guideline.

Next, the depreciation assessment based on the method C, that is, the hedonic method (Hedonic Price Model) will be described. The hedonic law seeks to capture the value of the environment reflected in real estate prices such as land and housing. According to this method, for example, a regression model that describes the transaction price of a house or a site based on land area, traffic conditions, location conditions, and environmental factors can be used to calculate the change in the price of a house or site with respect to a marginal change in environmental attributes. I can understand. However, this method can be used only when sufficient data can be collected for both masses.

Next, the method of D, that is, other evaluation criteria
A description will be given of a depreciation assessment based on a precedent. For example, as another evaluation criterion, the Land Bureau of Land
There are disparities in the accessibility to dangerous facilities and treatment facilities such as gas tanks and sewage treatment plants. In addition, examples of precedent include the ratio of damages to the transaction amount in the case where it is known after purchase that the property is a condominium property that has committed suicide or a condominium property where a gangster moves in.

In the above-described procedure for evaluating the soil contaminated area,
Changes due to revision of environmental standards, improvement of purification methods, etc.
"Standard purification cost assessment system" and "STIGMA"
By updating a part of the “depreciation assessment system”.

In addition, at least a part of the above-described procedures for evaluating the soil-contaminated area, for example, a “standard purification cost assessment system” or a “STIGMA depreciation assessment system”
A program for realizing the function of the is recorded on a computer-readable recording medium, and the program recorded on this recording medium is read by a computer system,
Executing the above procedure may execute the above-described procedure for evaluating the soil-contaminated area. Here, the “computer system” includes an OS and hardware such as peripheral devices. The “computer-readable recording medium” is a flexible disk, a magneto-optical disk,
A portable medium such as an OM or a CD-ROM, or a storage device such as a hard disk built in a computer system. Further, the "computer system" includes an input device (input means) and a display device (output means). The input device referred to here is, for example, a keyboard or a mouse, and the display device is a CRT (Cathod R).
ay Tube) display and liquid crystal display. For example, the use of land required for determining the standard depreciation rate and the check results of check items required for correcting the standard depreciation rate are input to the input device. Then, the input device sends the use of the land and the check result to a program in the computer. Specifically, the land use is sent to the standard depreciation rate determining means of the program, and the check result is sent to the standard depreciation rate correcting means. The display device displays, for example, the depreciation rate corrected by the standard depreciation rate correction unit.

[0045]

According to the present invention, the value of a soil-contaminated area can be comprehensively and appropriately evaluated in a situation where real estate liquidation, securitization, market value evaluation, and the like are active. In other words, by using the depreciation assessment standard for pollution established through multiple case studies, the assessment of the depreciation rate due to contamination, which has conventionally been made individually based on the empirical judgment of the assessor, without sufficient information, Can be realized with higher objectivity and at a low cost for a short period of time.

[Brief description of the drawings]

FIG. 1 is a flowchart showing a procedure for evaluating a soil contaminated area according to an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 2 is a flowchart showing a procedure for evaluating a soil-contaminated area according to an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 3 is a flowchart showing a procedure for evaluating a soil-contaminated area according to an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 4 is a flowchart showing a procedure for evaluating a soil-contaminated area according to an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 5 is a diagram showing a table for determining a score based on the type and amount of harmful substances contained in soil at a target site.

FIG. 6 is a diagram showing another example of a depreciation assessment by a comprehensive devaluation assessment model based on STIGMA formation factors.

 ──────────────────────────────────────────────────続 き Continued on the front page (72) Inventor Masayuki Takishita 3-4-7 Nishishinjuku, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo Inside Kurita Kogyo Co., Ltd. (72) Inventor Yuji Hirota 1-3-2 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo Inside the Japan Real Estate Institute (72) Inventor Katsunori Sugawa 1-3-2 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo Inside the Japan Real Estate Institute (72) Inventor Shigeki Mitobe 1-3-2 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo F-term in the Japan Real Estate Institute (reference) 4D004 AA41 CA50 DA01 DA04 DA16 DA17

Claims (6)

[Claims] 1. A method for evaluating the value of a target site having soil contamination, the method comprising: evaluating the value of the target site as having no soil contamination.
And a second step of selecting a method for remediating the contaminated soil and calculating a remediation cost; and a third step of assessing the depreciation of the value of the target site by STIGMA.
And a fourth step of evaluating the value of a target site having soil contamination based on the results obtained in the first to third steps. . 2. The STI of the value of the target site with soil contamination
A method for assessing depreciation by GMA, comprising the steps of obtaining information on the type and amount of harmful substances contained in soil, and obtaining information on the method, cost and duration of cleaning up contaminated soil. 2nd step, 3rd step to obtain information on the state of government response to the target area, 4th step to obtain information about the response of the media to the target area, and the most effective use of the target area A fifth step of acquiring information on the price level of the target area, a sixth step of acquiring information on the price level of the target area, and a STIGMA other than the information acquired in the first to sixth steps. A seventh step of acquiring information on the factor; and scoring the information acquired in the first to seventh steps. Based on the sum of al the number, the value of target area where there is soil pollution, ST, characterized in that it comprises an eighth step of assessing the depreciation due STIGMA
IGMA devaluation method. 3. The STI of the value of the target site with soil contamination
A system for assessing depreciation by GMA, comprising: input means for inputting a use of a land including a target land and a check result of one or more check items; and a land which is input to the input means. Depending on the application,
Standard depreciation rate determining means for determining a standard depreciation rate by STIGMA; and obtaining a total score from the check results input to the input means, and calculating the standard depreciation rate determined by the standard depreciation rate determining means in accordance with the total score. A STIGMA devaluation system comprising: a standard depreciation rate correcting means for correcting; and an output means for outputting a depreciation rate corrected by the standard depreciation rate correcting means. 4. The STI of the value of the target area with soil contamination
This is a method for assessing depreciation by GMA, which is based on STIGMA according to the use of surrounding land including the target land.
And a second step of correcting the standard depreciation rate determined in the first step according to a total score obtained from check results of one or more check items. A method for assessing depreciation by STIGMA, comprising: 5. A third step of correcting the value corrected in the second step in a case where only a part of the target place is contaminated, further according to the range of the target place which is covered by STIGMA. If there is a difference between the use of the land around the target land and the most effective use of the target land itself, the value corrected in the third step is further corrected according to this difference. A fourth step, a fifth step of correcting the value corrected in the fourth step in accordance with the number of years elapsed after completion of the purification of the target area, and a value corrected in the fifth step. , The second
5. The STI according to claim 4, further comprising: correcting according to a factor other than the factor in the fifth step to the fifth step.
Depreciation assessment method by GMA. 6. The value of a target site having soil contamination determined by the evaluation method according to claim 1, and a target having soil contamination determined by one or more evaluation methods other than the evaluation method described in claim 1. A soil-contaminated land evaluation method characterized by evaluating the value of a target land having final soil contamination based on the value of the land.