A review of property mass valuation models

• Main Authors: Jahanshiri, Ebrahim, Buyong, Taher, Mohamed Shariff, Abdul Rashid
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Universiti Putra Malaysia Press 2011
• Online Access: http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/18179/1/09%20Pg%2023-30.pdf; http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/18179/; http://www.pertanika.upm.edu.my/Pertanika%20PAPERS/JST%20Vol.%2019%20%28S%29%20Oct.%202011/09%20Pg%2023-30.pdf

Mass valuation of properties is important for purposes like property tax, price indices construction, and understanding market dynamics. There are several ways that the mass valuation can be carried out. This paper reviews the conventional MRA and several other advanced methods such as SAR, Kriging, GWR, and MWR. SAR and Kriging are good for modeling spatial dependence while GWR and MWR are good for modeling spatial heterogeneity. The difference between SAR and Kriging is the calculation of weights. Kriging weights are based on the spatial dependence or so called the semi-variogram analysis of the price data whereas the weights in SAR are based on the spatial contiguity between the sample data. MWR and GWR are special types of regression where study region is subdivided into local sections to increase the accuracy of prediction through neutralizing the heterogeneity of autocorrelations. MWR assigns equal weights for observations within a window while GWR uses distance decay functions. The merits and drawbacks of each method are discussed.