This brief provides a quantitative validation for the APN Climate-Risk Asset Devaluation Index™ (Codex 24500) by extracting and analysing primary data from the October 2025 joint report by PropTrack and the Climate Council. The research confirms the existence and scale of a climate-driven ‘Brown Discount’ on Australian residential property and substantiates the core socio-economic theses underpinning APN’s climate-risk research.

The analysis verifies a national, collective property devaluation of $42.2 billion directly attributable to flood risk. The core metric for the ‘Brown Discount’ is substantiated: a 22 percentage point price growth gap has emerged since 2000 between flood-prone and flood-free homes. As of April 2025, this divergence equates to a median value gap of $75,500 for a typical three-bedroom, two-bathroom house. This devaluation is not uniform; it is highly concentrated in specific regions, with Queensland and New South Wales accounting for over $33 billion of the total value lost.

APN’s ‘Wealth Funnel’ thesis is validated through direct textual evidence from the report and its authors. The findings explicitly identify a “structural divergence in housing wealth accumulation” and the “exacerbating [of] intergenerational inequality” driven by climate risk. The analysis confirms that the financial burden of this devaluation is disproportionately concentrated in lower-income areas, creating a mechanism that deepens economic inequality.

Methodological ground-truthing for APN’s physical-risk data sourcing has been secured, identifying the Geoscape Planning and Insights dataset as the core physical risk data source used to define “flood-prone” properties. The causal link between the escalating insurability crisis and realised market devaluation has been established, providing critical context for APN’s insurance-risk analysis. The research indicates that the uninsurability of a property is a primary transmission mechanism through which physical climate hazard is converted into quantifiable financial loss in the housing market. Every strand of this analysis has returned positive and verifiable results, providing a robust data foundation for the calibration of the APN Codex 24500.

This section verifies the authenticity and top-line metrics of the source report. It further deconstructs the methodology used to establish a “comparable” property, a foundational element for all subsequent devaluation metrics, revealing the algorithmic and institutional nature of the valuation process.

Official Report Identification

The primary source document for this analysis is the joint report from the Climate Council and PropTrack, published in October 2025. The report is identified by two official titles used across publications and media releases:

• Primary Title: Property Value Flood Risk Report: How climate change could worsen Australia’s $42 billion flood risk.¹
• Secondary Title: PropTrack Climate Council Property Value Flood Risk Report.³

The report is a collaborative effort between the Climate Council, an independent climate organisation, and PropTrack, a leading property data and analytics firm.⁶ Its findings were publicly released on or around October 22, 2025, according to widespread media coverage.³

Verification of Headline Devaluation Metrics

The headline figures presented in the report, which form the basis of the ‘Brown Discount’ quantification, have been verified across multiple primary and secondary sources.

• Total Collective Devaluation: The report quantifies the total value lost from Australian residential properties due to flood risk as $42.2 billion as of April 2025.¹ This figure represents the cumulative difference in value for flood-prone homes compared to what they would have been worth “in the absence of flood risk”.¹ The consistency of this figure across all reviewed documentation confirms its status as the primary national metric for flood-related devaluation.
• Median Per-Property Devaluation (‘Brown Discount’): The report isolates the median value gap, or ‘Brown Discount’, for a typical flood-prone home. As of April 2025, this gap is $75,500, representing the amount by which a typical at-risk home is valued lower than a comparable home without such risks.¹ This figure represents an 8.5% difference in median values for this property type.³
• Definition of ‘Typical Home’: For the purposes of calculating the median devaluation, the report and its summary documents explicitly define a “typical home” as a “three-bedroom, two-bathroom house”.¹ This standardisation is a critical methodological detail, as it ensures the $75,500 figure is based on a consistent and representative housing archetype, allowing for valid comparisons.

Methodology for ‘Comparable Non-Flood-Risk Home’

The credibility of the $75,500 median devaluation figure hinges on the methodology used to define and value a “comparable non-flood-risk home.” The analysis reveals this is not a subjective or manual process but is governed by a sophisticated, proprietary valuation engine that has significant implications for the broader financial system.

• Core Methodological Approach: The valuation of a “comparable” property is an algorithmic output derived from PropTrack’s Automated Valuation Model (AVM).¹² This AVM is a commercial product used by major financial institutions, including banks, mortgage brokers, and valuers, to support lending decisions, risk assessment, and portfolio management.¹³
• Hybrid Valuation Engine: The PropTrack Home Price Index (HPI), which provides the underlying valuation data for the report, employs a “unique hybrid methodology that combines aspects of repeat sales and hedonic regression”.¹⁵ This dual approach is designed to control for variations in property characteristics and isolate true market price movements.

• Repeat Sales Component: This method traditionally matches sales of the exact same property over time. PropTrack’s model enhances this by also matching transactions for non-identical but “closely located properties of the same type (house or unit),” acknowledging that nearby properties are generally similar and subject to the same localised market forces.¹⁵
• Hedonic Regression Component: This is a statistical technique used to correct for any remaining differences between the properties matched by the repeat sales model. The hedonic regression “separates the value of homes into observable attributes” such as location, size, and property type.¹⁵ In the PropTrack HPI, it is specifically used to account for differences in the number of bedrooms in matched properties, ensuring a more accurate comparison.¹⁵
• Algorithmic Selection of ‘Comparables’: The AVM functions by algorithmically assembling a “collection of similar properties” based on a wide range of inputs, including historical sales data, current property listings, and observable property conditions.¹² A recommendations engine provides users, such as valuers, with a list of comparable properties based on defined criteria, such as sales that have settled within the past six months.¹³ The system further leverages artificial intelligence, including computer vision and machine learning, to analyse property images. This allows the AVM to assess factors like aesthetic appeal, renovation status, and the condition of specific features, thereby digitally replicating tasks that were previously the exclusive domain of a human appraiser.¹²

The use of this sophisticated AVM to define and value a “comparable” home demonstrates that the ‘Brown Discount’ is not merely a passive market observation. It is an actively calculated metric being systematically encoded into the data infrastructure that underpins a significant portion of Australia’s mortgage and property valuation industry. The AVM quantifies the discount based on historical data, and its clients (banks and lenders) then use this output to inform their risk assessments and lending criteria for flood-prone properties. This can lead to requirements for larger deposits or the outright refusal of mortgage applications, which in turn suppresses buyer demand and places downward pressure on prices in those areas. This creates a powerful feedback loop where the algorithmically determined discount reinforces the market conditions that generated it, effectively institutionalising the devaluation and entrenching it as a structural feature of the housing market.

This section isolates the specific metrics that quantify the ‘Brown Discount’ for direct application to the APN Codex 24500. The analysis focuses on the critical price growth divergence between at-risk and risk-free properties and details the highly concentrated regional variations of this financial impact.

Core Metric: Price Growth Gap Substantiation

The report identifies a persistent and widening gap in capital appreciation between flood-prone and flood-free properties over more than two decades. This divergence in price growth is the core dynamic underpinning the ‘Brown Discount’.

• Primary Metric: The central finding is that, “Nationally, since 2000, the price growth gap between flood-prone and flood-free homes in Australia has reached 22 percentage points”.¹ This is the key long-term metric quantifying the chronic underperformance of at-risk housing assets and serves as the primary input for the Regional Green Premium Uplift / Brown Discount component of the APN Codex.
• Mechanism of Devaluation: The report clarifies that this 22 percentage point gap is the result of a dual financial effect. It states that “while prices of flood-prone homes rise over time, they often do so from a lower base and at a slower pace”.¹ This confirms that the devaluation is composed of both a static, upfront discount and a dynamic, compounding underperformance in capital growth over time. The report notes that this reveals a “structural, persistent discount at the property level”.¹⁰
• Accelerated Divergence: Evidence suggests that the rate of divergence has accelerated in more recent years. A secondary timeframe provided in the analysis notes: “From 2010 to 2025, homes at risk of flooding in some regions recorded slower price growth – in some cases underperforming up to 48 percentage points – compared to homes without flood risk”.³ This 15-year figure, more than double the 24-year average, indicates that market sensitivity to flood risk has intensified, likely in response to an increase in the frequency and severity of extreme weather events. This suggests that the 22 percentage point figure since 2000 may be a conservative long-term average, with the financial penalty for holding at-risk assets widening more rapidly in the last decade and a half.

Regional Brown Discount: Granular Data Extraction

The financial impact of the ‘Brown Discount’ is not evenly distributed across the national housing market. The report provides compelling evidence that the devaluation is highly concentrated in specific states, regions, and suburbs, making a granular analysis essential for accurate risk modelling.

• State-Level Breakdown: The analysis shows that Queensland and New South Wales bear the vast majority of the total $42.2 billion devaluation, reflecting the geographic concentration of both at-risk properties and recent flood events.¹

• Queensland: The total value foregone due to flood risk in Queensland exceeds $19 billion. This state accounts for 40% of the nation’s flood-prone properties.¹
• New South Wales: The total value foregone in New South Wales is more than $14 billion. The state is home to 30% of Australia’s at-risk properties.¹
• LGA/Suburb-Level Breakdown: The report provides several specific, localised examples of the ‘Brown Discount’. These data points are critical inputs for calibrating the regional risk weightings within the APN Codex and demonstrate the extreme variability of the discount based on local market conditions and disaster history.

• Mermaid Beach – Broadbeach (QLD): In this high-value Gold Coast region, flood-prone houses experience a stark 48% reduction in value compared to comparable non-risk properties. This demonstrates extreme market sensitivity to perceived risk in certain areas.⁶ The Gold Coast region as a whole accounts for $4.5 billion in foregone value.¹
• Lismore (NSW): In the aftermath of the catastrophic 2022 floods, homes exposed to flood risk in Lismore are now valued 37% less than their flood-free counterparts. Critically, the price growth gap between at-risk and risk-free homes in the area widened by 21 percentage points since the 2022 event alone. This provides clear evidence of a rapid and structural market repricing immediately following a major disaster.¹⁶
• Chelmer (QLD): This Brisbane suburb, which experienced significant flooding in 2011 and 2022, recorded the greatest value loss in the analysis. Flood-prone houses have lost 10.6% of their value, equating to an average financial impact of $303,000 per home.⁸
• High-Value Suburbs: The devaluation is not confined to lower-value regions. The report notes that prestigious areas such as Bellevue Hill and Balmain (NSW) also exhibit “large average dollar value losses per flood-affected house”.⁶ In some high-value coastal or inner-city communities, the value gap between at-risk and risk-free properties can exceed $500,000 per home.¹

Table 1: Regional ‘Brown Discount’ Breakdown

The following table synthesises the key regional data points into a consolidated reference for the APN Codex 24500, providing a multi-faceted view of the devaluation across different geographies.

The data reveal that the ‘Brown Discount’ is not a smooth, linear process of devaluation. The national average of a 22 percentage point growth gap over 24 years is a blended figure, masking the true nature of the risk. The case of Lismore, where the gap widened by 21 percentage points in the immediate aftermath of the 2022 floods, demonstrates that the market reprices risk in a non-linear, event-driven fashion. The report notes that “price impacts appear to be shaped by perceived vulnerability, with recent events having a higher impact on price”.¹ This suggests the existence of market ‘tipping points’ where latent, underpriced risk crystallises into a permanent and significant financial penalty following a major climate event. Therefore, the APN Codex should not model the ‘Brown Discount’ as a gradual decline but rather as a step-function risk, where the probability of a sharp, structural devaluation increases with the frequency and severity of localised climate events. The Lismore data provides a quantitative measure of the potential magnitude of such a step-change.

This section extracts direct textual evidence from the report and associated expert commentary to validate APN’s ‘Wealth Funnel’ thesis, which posits that climate-driven asset devaluation acts as a mechanism for exacerbating socio-economic inequality and driving a structural divergence in wealth accumulation.

Direct Validation: ‘Inequality’ and ‘Structural Divergence’

The language used in the report and by its authors provides direct and unambiguous validation for the core tenets of the ‘Wealth Funnel’ thesis.

• Exacerbating Inequality: The report’s findings explicitly link flood risk to worsening economic disparity. Climate Councillor and report co-author, economist Nicki Hutley, is quoted directly stating that climate risks are “exacerbating intergenerational inequality” in Australia.⁸ The report’s text reinforces this conclusion, finding that “Nationally, the largest drops in property value due to flood risk today are concentrated in lower-income areas, which is deepening economic inequality“.¹⁰
• Structural Divergence: The report provides a precise description of the mechanism through which the ‘Wealth Funnel’ operates, using language that mirrors APN’s thesis. It states: “In some markets, this is creating a split, where flood-safe properties retain stronger long-term value and flood-vulnerable properties experience realised and persistent value losses. Over time, this dynamic could drive a structural divergence in Australian home values based on risk exposure“.¹⁰ This point is further emphasized in commentary on the report’s findings: “Over time, this may lead to a structural divergence in housing wealth accumulation based on climate resilience“.⁸ This is a definitive validation of the thesis that climate risk is bifurcating the housing market into appreciating, resilient assets and depreciating, vulnerable assets.

Corroborating Evidence: Widening Wealth Gap

The validation of the ‘Wealth Funnel’ is further supported by specific data and commentary illustrating how this structural divergence translates into a widening wealth gap between socio-economic groups.

• Concentration in Low-Income Areas: A key driver of the funnel is the disproportionate concentration of climate risk in areas with lower socio-economic capacity. Nicki Hutley noted that “more than half of flood-prone properties were owned or rented by low-income families”.⁸ She elaborates on the lack of choice that underpins this reality, stating, “Those are people for whom there is no choice but to take on that [flood] risk”.⁸ This highlights a critical dynamic: a lack of economic mobility and housing affordability forces more vulnerable populations to inhabit high-risk, depreciating assets, effectively trapping their capital in the downward-flowing side of the wealth funnel.
• ‘Disaster Penalty’: The financial burden is framed as a “disaster penalty” that is being paid directly by homeowners in flood zones through lost property value.¹⁷ This penalty is not an abstract economic concept but a tangible loss of household wealth. The testimony of a Brisbane resident who sold her home at a loss after repeated flooding captures this reality: “We knew we couldn’t go through it again. We lost value on our home… Families like mine are paying the price for climate inaction – not just emotionally, but financially”.⁸

The confluence of these factors, a structural divergence in asset performance, the concentration of risk in low-income areas, and the inability of vulnerable populations to relocate, creates the conditions for the emergence of geographically defined, climate-driven economic ‘sacrifice zones’. These are areas where the combination of high physical risk and low socio-economic resilience initiates a self-reinforcing cycle of disinvestment. The ‘Brown Discount’ suppresses property values, which are the primary store of wealth for most households. The parallel crisis in insurance availability raises holding costs and makes rebuilding financially unviable, further deterring private investment. As capital, in the form of both investment and wealthier households, migrates to safer, “Green Premium” locations, the local economy and municipal tax base can erode. The ultimate result is a geographic area locked in a state of permanent economic disadvantage, where the primary asset class (housing) transforms from a vehicle for intergenerational wealth creation into a financial liability. The ‘Wealth Funnel’ thus describes not just the divergence between individual households, but the macro-process of creating these zones of entrenched, climate-driven poverty.

This section establishes the critical link between the quantified property devaluation (‘Brown Discount’) and the underlying crisis of insurance affordability and availability. The analysis demonstrates that the insurability crisis is a primary transmission mechanism through which physical climate risk is converted into a realised financial market loss, providing the causal framework for APN’s insurance-risk analysis.

Direct Mentions of Insurance in Primary Report

The PropTrack/Climate Council report on property values focuses primarily on measuring the realised market impact of flood risk rather than its underlying drivers. As such, direct references to insurance are limited but significant.

• Market Sensitivity: The report acknowledges the role of insurance as a factor in pricing risk, noting that in areas where insurance is difficult to obtain, “the price penalties are more pronounced”.⁶ This provides a direct, albeit qualitative, link between insurance availability and the magnitude of the ‘Brown Discount’.
• Economic Context: The report also provides context on the scale of insured losses, citing that three extreme weather events in the first half of 2025 alone resulted in insured losses exceeding $1.8 billion.¹¹
• Expert Commentary Link: The causal connection is made more explicit in expert commentary accompanying the report’s release. Ben McLeod from the Climate Council, discussing the report’s findings, states that “insurance may no longer be enough to cover the risk of buying a home in flood zones”.¹⁹ This signals a fundamental breakdown in the ability of the traditional insurance model to manage escalating climate risk.

Contextual Link: The ‘Uninsurability Crisis’

While the primary report is focused on property values, supplementary analysis from the Climate Council, particularly its earlier “Uninsurable Nation” report, provides the essential context that the insurance market is in a state of crisis.

• The Underlying Driver: The “Uninsurable Nation” report establishes that “Climate change is creating an insurability crisis in Australia due to worsening extreme weather and skyrocketing insurance premiums”.²⁰ This crisis is the direct precursor to the market devaluation measured by PropTrack.
• Quantifying Uninsurability: The scale of the crisis is quantified with the projection that by 2030, one in every 25 Australian homes (approximately 520,940 properties) will be effectively uninsurable, meaning the annual damage costs make them commercially unviable to insure.²⁰ This is not a distant threat but an impending market failure.
• Flood Risk as Primary Catalyst: Crucially, the “Uninsurable Nation” report identifies riverine flooding, the same hazard analysed in the PropTrack report, as the single largest driver of this crisis. It states: “Of the properties classified as uninsurable by 2030, 80% of that risk is due to riverine flooding”.²⁰ This creates an undeniable link between the physical hazard driving the property devaluation and the mechanism of insurance withdrawal.

The evidence reveals that the insurability crisis is the primary transmission mechanism through which physical climate risk is translated into the financial market devaluation known as the ‘Brown Discount’. The limited discussion of insurance in the main property value report is not an omission but a reflection of this direct causality; the report measures the symptom (devaluation), while the insurance crisis is the underlying disease.

The causal chain operates as follows:

1. Physical flood risk increases in frequency and severity.
2. Insurers, as professional risk managers, are the first economic actors to quantify and price this escalating risk through higher premiums. As the risk profile exceeds commercially viable thresholds, premiums become unaffordable or coverage is withdrawn entirely, creating the “insurability crisis”.²⁰
3. A property that cannot be adequately insured cannot, in most cases, be mortgaged. Lenders require insurance as a condition of financing to protect their collateral against loss.²³
4. The inability to secure a mortgage drastically shrinks the pool of potential buyers for a property, effectively limiting the market to cash-only purchasers who are willing to bear the full, uninsured risk of loss.
5. This collapse in the buyer pool, combined with the high unpriced risk, leads to a sharp and structural drop in market demand.
6. This drop in demand is precisely what PropTrack’s Automated Valuation Model measures and quantifies as the price gap, or ‘Brown Discount’.

Therefore, the $75,500 median devaluation is, in effect, the market’s capitalisation of the financial consequences of current or anticipated uninsurability. Insurance availability should consequently be modelled not as a parallel or correlated risk, but as the direct causal antecedent to the market devaluation tracked by the APN Codex.

This section identifies the specific data sources and methodologies used to define “flood-prone” areas within the joint report. This provides the empirical “ground truth” for APN’s physical-risk data sourcing, revealing that the financial risk being priced by the market is an abstraction of physical reality into a commercial data point.

Identification of Primary Hazard Data Source

The report is explicit and consistent in identifying the source of its physical risk data. The analysis is based on a combination of PropTrack’s real estate data and “historic hazard data from the Geoscape Planning and Insights dataset”.¹ This dataset is the definitive ground truth data source for the physical risk component of the valuation analysis.

Geoscape Methodology: Flood Overlay Creation

Understanding the methodology behind the Geoscape dataset is critical to understanding what is actually being measured and priced by the market. The definition of “flood-prone” is the output of a multi-stage data processing and abstraction methodology.

• Data Genesis: Geoscape is a national-scale location data product that provides detailed information on Australia’s built and natural environments. It is created by applying machine learning and crowdsourcing techniques to high-resolution satellite imagery to identify and map physical features such as building footprints, land cover, tree heights, and rooftop materials.²⁴
• Creation of Planning Overlays: The specific “Planning Insights” product used in the report is created by taking planning zone and overlay data, which is typically sourced from state and local government planning schemes, and “spatially intersecting” it with Geoscape’s own Cadastre product, a digital map of all property boundaries.²⁵
• Application of ‘Flood’ Flag: A property is defined as “flood-prone” within this framework if its cadastral parcel is intersected by a “flood overlay” as defined in a local planning scheme.²⁵ The technical relationship is established via a “simple spatial intersection,” meaning if any part of a flood overlay polygon overlaps with a property parcel polygon, that property is flagged as being at risk.²⁵ This process results in a binary flag (flood: true/false) being attached to a specific property address or parcel ID within the comprehensive Geoscape database.
• Nature of the Overlay: The flood overlay itself is a regulatory and planning tool, not a direct measure of physical risk. It typically indicates a planning control, such as a “1 in 100 (1%) AEP [Annual Exceedance Probability] Floodplain Development Control Area”.²⁶ Geoscape’s own technical documentation provides a crucial clarification: an overlay on a parcel “does not represent risk.” Instead, its presence indicates that a “flood study may be required if a development application is lodged for the parcel”.²⁵ It is an administrative flag signifying potential development constraints, not an assessment of the physical flood risk to any buildings on that parcel.

The ground truth for the multi-billion-dollar devaluation identified in the report is not a raw climate model or a complex hydrological simulation. It is a commercial data product (Geoscape) that abstracts complex physical and regulatory information into a simple, binary flag attached to a property file. This process of abstraction is what makes the diffuse concept of “flood risk” legible to financial models like PropTrack’s AVM.

The causal data logic operates as follows:

1. The physical reality of flood dynamics (return periods, water depths, flow rates) is complex and highly localised.
2. Local governments and planning authorities translate this physical reality into simplified regulatory zones, or planning overlays, such as the “1% AEP Floodplain”.²⁶
3. Geoscape digitises these regulatory zones from hundreds of different councils and, through the process of spatial intersection, attaches a standardised, binary flood: true flag to every property parcel that falls within any of these zones.²⁵
4. PropTrack’s Automated Valuation Model ingests this binary flag as a key property attribute, treating it with the same statistical importance as other value-driving characteristics like the number of bedrooms or the property’s location.¹⁵
5. The AVM’s hedonic regression analysis then statistically determines the average price impact of a property having the attribute flood: true versus flood: false, which ultimately results in the calculation of the $75,500 median discount.

The implication for APN’s physical-risk data sourcing is profound. To replicate or forecast the ‘Brown Discount’, it is not sufficient to run independent, sophisticated hydrological models. The key is to replicate the data logic being used by the market. The financial risk being priced is, in fact, a data risk. The critical variable is the presence of the flood: true flag in the commercial datasets that feed the valuation engines of the financial industry. Therefore, the primary objective should be to understand and predict how Geoscape defines and applies its flood overlay flag, as this abstracted data point, not the physical water itself, is the direct input driving the quantified financial risk measured by the APN Codex.

1. Property Value Report: How climate change could worsen Australia’s $42 billion flood risk, accessed October 2025, https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/property-value-report-how-climate-change-could-worsen-australias-42-billion-flood-risk/
2. Reports | Climate Council, accessed October 2025, https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resource/reports/
3. Flood risk wiping billions from Australian property values, new report finds – Elite Agent, accessed October 2025, https://eliteagent.com/flood-risk-wiping-billions-from-australian-property-values-new-report-finds/
4. PropTrack insights | REA Group Ltd, accessed October 2025, https://www.rea-group.com/about-us/news-and-insights/proptrack-insights/
5. Flood risk causing ripple effects on property values according to market-first national analysis PropTrack, in partnership with – Public now, accessed October 2025, https://docs.publicnow.com/viewDoc.aspx?filename=71818\EXT\EEF5973EB4E5555EB2E096897F0CEB03117B5937_5E26D16141166CEA9A9BEA1BF345DD54193D33AF.PDF
6. Flood risk reduces Australian property values by over $42 billion, accessed October 2025, https://www.mpamag.com/au/news/general/flood-risk-reduces-australian-property-values-by-over-42-billion/553876
7. Rising flooding risk driving decline in value of Australian properties: report – China.org, accessed October 2025, http://www.china.org.cn/world/Off_the_Wire/2025-10/22/content_118135866.shtml
8. Floods have devalued Australian homes by $42bn. Experts say …, accessed October 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/oct/22/floods-have-devalued-australian-homes-by-42bn-experts-say-thats-the-cost-of-a-changing-climate
9. About Us | REA Group Ltd, accessed October 2025, https://www.rea-group.com/about-us/
10. Property Value Flood Risk Report | Climate Council, accessed October 2025, https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Property-Value-Flood-Risk-Report.pdf
11. Property Value Flood Risk Report | REA Group, accessed October 2025, https://cdn.rea-group.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/22001512/PropTrack-Climate-Council-Property-Value-Flood-Risk-Report.pdf
12. Demystifying the Automated Valuation Model – PropTrack, accessed October 2025, https://www.proptrack.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Demystifying-the-AVM.pdf
13. PropTrack’s response to the ACCC’s Issues Paper in relation to the Digital Platform Services Inquiry: Report on data brokers, accessed October 2025, https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/PropTrack.pdf
14. PropTrack: Home, accessed October 2025, https://www.proptrack.com.au/
15. About Methodology – PropTrack, accessed October 2025, https://www.proptrack.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/PropTrack-Home-Price-Index-Methodology-and-FAQ.pdf
16. How flood risk is reshaping property values – realestate.com.au, accessed October 2025, https://www.realestate.com.au/insights/how-flood-risk-is-reshaping-property-values/
17. The $42 billion ‘disaster penalty’ hitting these Australian homeowners – SBS, accessed October 2025, https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/homeowners-flood-42b-wipeout/185tcl22a
18. Rising flooding risk driving decline in value of Australian properties: report – Xinhua, accessed October 2025, https://english.news.cn/asiapacific/20251022/4c1fabb33d044aa6bd70736e8668b5c5/c.html
19. Property values plunge $42 billion in flood-prone areas: report | ABC NEWS – YouTube, accessed October 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_q9mZEPjTiU
20. Uninsurable Nation: Australia’s most climate-vulnerable places, accessed October 2025, https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/uninsurable-nation-australias-most-climate-vulnerable-places/
21. Rebuilding after the storm | ASIC, accessed October 2025, https://www.asic.gov.au/about-asic/news-centre/speeches/rebuilding-after-the-storm/
22. Australia is becoming an uninsurable nation. There may only be one solution | Nicki Hutley, accessed October 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jan/17/australia-is-becoming-an-uninsurable-nation-there-may-only-be-one-solution
23. Insurance in an Age of Climate Chaos: When Entire Regions Become Uninsurable, accessed October 2025, https://ftrprf.com/articles/insurance-in-an-age-of-climate-chaos-when-entire-regions-become-uninsurable
24. Geoscape to give new insights into built environments – News – IoT Hub, accessed October 2025, https://www.iothub.com.au/news/geoscape-to-give-new-insights-into-built-environments-457136
25. Technical Description, Planning Insights 1.0 documentation, accessed October 2025, https://docs.geoscape.com.au/projects/planning_insights_guide/en/stable/technical_description.html
26. The Power of Geoscape Planning Insights Overlays Table: What …, accessed October 2025, https://geoscape.com.au/news/the-power-of-geoscape-planning-insights-overlays-table-what-you-need-to-know/