Nation & internation practices in decision support tools in road asset management

This document provides a review of international and national practices in investment decision support tools in road asset management. Efforts were concentrated on identifying analytic frameworks, evaluation methodologies and criteria adopted by current tools. Emphasis was also given to how current approaches support Triple Bottom Line decision-making. Benefit Cost Analysis and Multiple Criteria Analysis are principle methodologies in supporting decision-making in Road Asset Management. The complexity of the applications shows significant differences in international practices. There is continuing discussion amongst practitioners and researchers regarding to which one is more appropriate in supporting decision-making. It is suggested that the two approaches should be regarded as complementary instead of competitive means. Multiple Criteria Analysis may be particularly helpful in early stages of project development, say strategic planning. Benefit Cost Analysis is used most widely for project prioritisation and selecting the final project from amongst a set of alternatives. Benefit Cost Analysis approach is useful tool for investment decision-making from an economic perspective. An extension of the approach, which includes social and environmental externalities, is currently used in supporting Triple Bottom Line decision-making in the road sector. However, efforts should be given to several issues in the applications. First of all, there is a need to reach a degree of commonality on considering social and environmental externalities, which may be achieved by aggregating the best practices. At different decision-making level, the detail of consideration of the externalities should be different. It is intended to develop a generic framework to coordinate the range of existing practices. The standard framework will also be helpful in reducing double counting, which appears in some current practices. Cautions should also be given to the methods of determining the value of social and environmental externalities. A number of methods, such as market price, resource costs and Willingness to Pay, are found in the review. The use of unreasonable monetisation methods in some cases has discredited Benefit Cost Analysis in the eyes of decision makers and the public. Some social externalities, such as employment and regional economic impacts, are generally omitted in current practices. This is due to the lack of information and credible models. It may be appropriate to consider these externalities in qualitative forms in a Multiple Criteria Analysis. Consensus has been reached in considering noise and air pollution in international practices. However, Australia practices generally omitted these externalities. Equity is an important consideration in Road Asset Management. The considerations are either between regions, or social groups, such as income, age, gender, disable, etc. In current practice, there is not a well developed quantitative measure for equity issues. More research is needed to target this issue. Although Multiple Criteria Analysis has been used for decades, there is not a generally accepted framework in the choice of modelling methods and various externalities. The result is that different analysts are unlikely to reach consistent conclusions about a policy measure. In current practices, some favour using methods which are able to prioritise alternatives, such as Goal Programming, Goal Achievement Matrix, Analytic Hierarchy Process. The others just present various impacts to decision-makers to characterise the projects. Weighting and scoring system are critical in most Multiple Criteria Analysis. However, the processes of assessing weights and scores were criticised as highly arbitrary and subjective. It is essential that the process should be as transparent as possible. Obtaining weights and scores by consulting local communities is a common practice, but is likely to result in bias towards local interests. Interactive approach has the advantage in helping decision-makers elaborating their preferences. However, computation burden may result in lose of interests of decision-makers during the solution process of a large-scale problem, say a large state road network. Current practices tend to use cardinal or ordinal scales in measure in non-monetised externalities. Distorted valuations can occur where variables measured in physical units, are converted to scales. For example, decibels of noise converts to a scale of -4 to +4 with a linear transformation, the difference between 3 and 4 represents a far greater increase in discomfort to people than the increase from 0 to 1. It is suggested to assign different weights to individual score. Due to overlapped goals, the problem of double counting also appears in some of Multiple Criteria Analysis. The situation can be improved by carefully selecting and defining investment goals and criteria. Other issues, such as the treatment of time effect, incorporating risk and uncertainty, have been given scant attention in current practices. This report suggested establishing a common analytic framework to deal with these issues.

Protecting the most vulnerable in consumer credit transactions

There are two key ways in which the Australian Uniform Consumer Credit Code seeks to protect consumers in relation to consumer credit transactions. The first is by means of disclosure regulation where information is required to be disclosed to the consumer before the credit contract is entered into and the second is by way of “safety net” provisions, where contracts can be varied or set aside in the event of hardship, a finding that the transaction was unjust, or a finding of unconscionable fees or charges. This article explores the limitations of both of these means of protection, particularly in the case of vulnerable, low-income consumers. In order to highlight the inadequacies of these forms of consumer protection and the need for regulatory reform, we draw on interviews conducted with 30 low-income consumers who had recently signed a credit contract, focusing on their understanding of information disclosed in the contract, as well as their responses to hypothetical unfair terms and their understanding of their rights, for example in the event of an unjust transaction. These interviews were conducted as part of a joint research project between Brotherhood of St Laurence and Griffith University’s Centre for Credit and Consumer Law, funded by Consumer Affairs Victoria.

Innovative Practices in the Australian Built Environment Sector : An Information Resource for Industry

PROJECT BRIEF Information provided by the Built Environment Industry Innovation Council as background to this project includes the following information on construction and innovation within the industry. • The construction industry contributes around $67 billion to GDP and employs around 970,000 and generates exports of nearly $150 million. • The industry has one of the lowest innovation rates of any industry in Australia, ranking third last across all Australian industries in terms of its proportion of business expenditure on innovation, and second last in terms of the proportion of income generated from innovation (ABS, 2006). • Key innovation challenges include addressing energy and water use efficiency, and housing costs in preparing for the implementation of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. The sector will need to build its capability and capacity to deliver the technical and operational expertise required.The broader Built Environment Innovation Project aims to address the following two objectives: 1. Identify current innovative practice across the Built Environment industry. 2. Develop a knowledge exchange strategy for this information to be disseminated to all industry stakeholders. Industry practice issues are critical to the built environment industry’s ability to innovate, and the BRITE project from the CRC for Construction Innovation has previously undertaken work to identify the key factors that drive innovation. Part 1 of the current project aims to extend this work by conducting a stocktake of current and emerging innovative practices within the built environment industry. Part 2 of the project addresses the second of these objectives, that is, to recommend a knowledge exchange strategy for promoting the wider uptake of innovative practices that makes the information identified in Part 1 of the study (on emerging innovative practices) accessible to Australian built environment industry stakeholders. The project brief was for the strategy to include a mechanism to enable this information resource to be updated as new initiatives/practices are developed. A better understanding of the built environment industry’s own knowledge infrastructure also has the potential to enhance innovation outcomes for the industry. This project will develop a coordinated knowledge exchange strategy, informed by the best available information on current innovation practices within the industry and suggest directions for gaining a better understanding of: the industry contexts that lead to innovative practices; the industry (including enterprise and individual) drivers for innovation; and appropriate knowledge exchange pathways for delivering future industry innovation. A deliverable of Part 2 will be a recommendation for a knowledge exchange strategy to accelerate adoption of innovative practices in the built environment industry, including resource implications and how such a recommendation could be taken forward as an ongoing resource.

Current rural valuation practice : a survey of valuers and agribusiness managers on farm management and sustainable rural land use

Over the past 20 years the nature of rural valuation practice has required most rural valuers to undertake studies in both agriculture (farm management) and valuation, especially if carrying out valuation work for financial institutions. The additional farm financial and management information obtained by rural valuers exceeds that level of information required to value commercial, retail and industrial by the capitalisation of net rent/profit valuation method and is very similar to the level of information required for the valuation of commercial and retail property by the Discounted Cash Flow valuation method. On this basis the valuers specialising in rural valuation practice have the necessary skills and information to value rural properties by an income valuation method, which can focus on the long term environmental and economic sustainability of the property being valued. This paper will review the results of an extensive survey carried out by rural property valuers in Australia, in relation to the impact of farm management on rural property values and sustainable rural land use. A particular focus of the research relates to the increased awareness of the problems of rural land degradation in Australia and the subsequent impact such problems have on the productivity of rural land. These problems of sustainable land use have resulted in the need to develop an approach to rural valuation practice that allows the valuer to factor the past management practices on the subject rural property into the actual valuation figure. An analysis of the past farm management and the inclusion of this data into the valuation methodology provides a much more reliable indication of farm sustainable economic value than the existing direct comparison valuation methodology.

Can Risk Management boost the supply of Affordable Housing Development and Management?

A shortage of affordable housing is a major problem in Australia today. This is mainly due to the limited supply of affordable housing that is provided by the non-government housing sector. Some private housing developers see the provision of affordable housing for lower income people as a high risk investment which offers a lower return than broader market-based housing. The scarcity of suitable land, a limited government ‘subsidy’, and increasing housing costs have not provided sufficient development incentives to encourage their investment despite the existing high demand for affordable housing. This study analyses the risk management process conducted by some private and not-for-profit housing providers in South East Queensland, and draws conclusions about the relationship between risk assessments/responses and past experiences. In-depth interviews of selected non-government housing providers have been conducted to facilitate an understanding of their approach to risk assessment/response in developing and in managing affordable housing projects. These developers use an informal risk management process as part of their normal business process in accordance with industry standards. A simple qualitative matrix has been used to analyse probability and impacts using a qualitative scale - low, medium and high. For housing providers who have considered investing in affordable housing but have not yet implemented any such projects, affordable housing development is seen as an opportunity that needs to be approached with caution. The risks associated with such projects and the levels of acceptance of these are not consistently identified by current housing providers. Many interviewees agree that the recognition of financial risk and the fear of community rejection of such housing projects have restrained them from committing to such investment projects. This study suggests that implementing improvements to the risk mitigation and management framework may assist in promoting the supply of affordable housing by non-government providers.

Risk-assessment practices in the private rental sector : implications for low-income renters (Final Report)

This report focuses on risk-assessment practices in the private rental market, with particular consideration of their impact on low-income renters. It is based on the fieldwork undertaken in the second stage of the research process that followed completion of the Positioning Paper. The key research question this study addressed was: What are the various factors included in ‘risk-assessments’ by real estate agents in allocating ‘affordable’ tenancies? How are these risks quantified and managed? What are the key outcomes of their decision-making? The study builds on previous research demonstrating that a relatively large proportion of low-cost private rental accommodation is occupied by moderate- to high-income households (Wulff and Yates 2001; Seelig 2001; Yates et al. 2004). This is occurring in an environment where the private rental sector is now the de facto main provider of rental housing for lower-income households across Australia (Seelig et al. 2005) and where a number of factors are implicated in patterns of ‘income–rent mismatching’. These include ongoing shifts in public housing assistance; issues concerning eligibility for rent assistance; ‘supply’ factors, such as loss of low-cost rental stock through upgrading and/or transfer to owner-occupied housing; patterns of supply and demand driven largely by middle- to high-income owner-investors and renters; and patterns of housing need among low-income households for whom affordable housing is not appropriate. In formulating a way of approaching the analysis of ‘risk-assessment’ in rental housing management, this study has applied three sociological perspectives on risk: Beck’s (1992) formulation of risk society as entailing processes of ‘individualisation’; a socio-cultural perspective which emphasises the situated nature of perceptions of risk; and a perspective which has drawn attention to different modes of institutional governance of subjects, as ‘carriers of specific indicators of risk’. The private rental market was viewed as a social institution, and the research strategy was informed by ‘institutional ethnography’ as a method of enquiry. The study was based on interviews with property managers, real estate industry representatives, tenant advocates and community housing providers. The primary focus of inquiry was on ‘the moment of allocation’. Six local areas across metropolitan and regional Queensland, New South Wales, and South Australia were selected as case study localities. In terms of the main findings, it is evident that access to private rental housing is not just a matter of ‘supply and demand’. It is also about assessment of risk among applicants. Risk – perceived or actual – is thus a critical factor in deciding who gets housed, and how. Risk and its assessment matter in the context of housing provision and in the development of policy responses. The outcomes from this study also highlight a number of salient points: 1.There are two principal forms of risk associated with property management: financial risk and risk of litigation. 2. Certain tenant characteristics and/or circumstances – ability to pay and ability to care for the rented property – are the main factors focused on in assessing risk among applicants for rental housing. Signals of either ‘(in)ability to pay’ and/or ‘(in)ability to care for the property’ are almost always interpreted as markers of high levels of risk. 3. The processing of tenancy applications entails a complex and variable mix of formal and informal strategies of risk-assessment and allocation where sorting (out), ranking, discriminating and handing over characterise the process. 4. In the eyes of property managers, ‘suitable’ tenants can be conceptualised as those who are resourceful, reputable, competent, strategic and presentable. 5. Property managers clearly articulated concern about risks entailed in a number of characteristics or situations. Being on a low income was the principal and overarching factor which agents considered. Others included: - unemployment - ‘big’ families; sole parent families - domestic violence - marital breakdown - shift from home ownership to private rental - Aboriginality and specific ethnicities - physical incapacity - aspects of ‘presentation’. The financial vulnerability of applicants in these groups can be invoked, alongside expressed concerns about compromised capacities to manage income and/or ‘care for’ the property, as legitimate grounds for rejection or a lower ranking. 6. At the level of face-to-face interaction between the property manager and applicants, more intuitive assessments of risk based upon past experience or ‘gut feelings’ come into play. These judgements are interwoven with more systematic procedures of tenant selection. The findings suggest that considerable ‘risk’ is associated with low-income status, either directly or insofar as it is associated with other forms of perceived risk, and that such risks are likely to impede access to the professionally managed private rental market. Detailed analysis suggests that opportunities for access to housing by low-income householders also arise where, for example: - the ‘local experience’ of an agency and/or property manager works in favour of particular applicants - applicants can demonstrate available social support and financial guarantors - an applicant’s preference or need for longer-term rental is seen to provide a level of financial security for the landlord - applicants are prepared to agree to specific, more stringent conditions for inspection of properties and review of contracts - the particular circumstances and motivations of landlords lead them to consider a wider range of applicants - In particular circumstances, property managers are prepared to give special consideration to applicants who appear worthy, albeit ‘risky’. The strategic actions of demonstrating and documenting on the part of vulnerable (low-income) tenant applicants can improve their chances of being perceived as resourceful, capable and ‘savvy’. Such actions are significant because they help to persuade property managers not only that the applicant may have sufficient resources (personal and material) but that they accept that the onus is on themselves to show they are reputable, and that they have valued ‘competencies’ and understand ‘how the system works’. The parameters of the market do shape the processes of risk-assessment and, ultimately, the strategic relation of power between property manager and the tenant applicant. Low vacancy rates and limited supply of lower-cost rental stock, in all areas, mean that there are many more tenant applicants than available properties, creating a highly competitive environment for applicants. The fundamental problem of supply is an aspect of the market that severely limits the chances of access to appropriate and affordable housing for low-income rental housing applicants. There is recognition of the impact of this problem of supply. The study indicates three main directions for future focus in policy and program development: providing appropriate supports to tenants to access and sustain private rental housing, addressing issues of discrimination and privacy arising in the processes of selecting suitable tenants, and addressing problems of supply.

Current rural valuation practice : a survey of NSW valuers and agribusiness managers

Despite the advances that have been made in relation to the valuation of Commercial, Industrial and retail property, there has not been the same progress in relation to the valuation of rural property. Although number of rural property valuations also require the valuer to carry out a full analysis of the economic performance of the farming operations, as well as the long term environmental viability of the farm, this information is rarely used to assess the value of the property, nor is it even used for a secondary valuation method. Over the past 20 years the nature of rural valuation practice has required most rural valuers to undertake studies in both agriculture (farm management) and valuation, especially if carrying out valuation work for financial institutions. The additional farm financial and management information obtained by rural valuers exceeds that level of information required to value commercial, retail and industrial by the capitalisation of net rent/profit valuation method and is very similar to the level of information required for the valuation of commercial and retail property by the Discounted Cash Flow valuation method. On this basis the valuers specialising in rural valuation practice have the necessary skills and information to value rural properties by an income valuation method. Although the direct comparison method of valuation has been sufficient in the past to value rural properties the future use of the method as the main valuation method is limited and valuers need to adopt an income valuation method as at least a secondary valuation method to overcome the problems associated with the use of direct comparison as the only rural property valuation method, especially in view of the impact that farm technical, financial and environmental .management can have on rural property values. This paper will review the results of an extensive survey carried out by rural property valuers and agribusiness managers in NSW, in relation to the impact of farm management on rural property values and rural property valuation practice.

The true cost and performance of individual residential property investment and the implication on real estate agency practice

Investment in residential property in Australia is not dominated by the major investment institutions in to the same degree as the commercial, industrial and retail property markets. As at December 2001, the Property Council of Australia Investment Performance Index contained residential property with a total value of $235 million, which represents only 0.3% of the total PCA Performance Index value. The majority of investment in the Australian residential property market is by small investment companies and individual investors. The limited exposure of residential property in the institutional investment portfolios has also limited the research that has been undertaken in relation to residential property performance. However the importance of individual investment in residential property is continuing to gain importance as both individuals are now taking control of their own superannuation portfolios and the various State Governments of Australia are decreasing their involvement in the construction of public housing by subsidizing low-income families into the private residential property market. This paper will: • Provide a comparison of the cost to initially purchase residential property in the various capital city residential property markets in Australia, and • Analyse the true cost and investment performance of residential property in the main residential property markets in Australia based on a standard investment portfolio in each of the State capital cities and relate these results to real estate marketing and agency practice.

The role of rural land in mixed asset investment portfolios

Rural land has not always been considered as a major long-term investment with both institutional investors and absentee owners in countries such as U.K. and Australia. Although rural land is included in both single asset and mixed asset portfolios in the U.S, it is not at the same levels as either commercial or industrial property. Rural land occupies over 50% of the total area of Australia, and comprises over 115,000 economic farm properties (excludes rural residential, hobby farms and rural lifestyle blocks. However, less than 1.6% of the total economic farm numbers are actually owned by corporate or institutional investors. This low level of corporate involvement in the Australian rural property market has limited both the investment performance research and inclusion of this rural land type in both property and mixed asset investment portfolios. In the U.S. rural land is also the most extensive real estate type based on total area occupied. The United States Department of Agriculture statistics (1998) show that in 1997 there were 2.06 million farms in the U.S., covering 968 million acres, with a total value of $912 billion and generating an annual income of $202 billion. The level of corporate ownership of farms in the U.S. is also higher than the level of corporate farm ownership in Australia. This high level of institutional ownership in rural land in U.S has provided the opportunity for the rural property asset class to be analysed in relation to it’s investment performance and possible role in a mixed asset or mixed property investment portfolio.

Comparing subjective and objective measures of health : Evidence from hypertension for the income/health gradient

Economists rely heavily on self-reported measures to examine the relationship between income and health. We directly compare survey responses of a self-reported measure of health that is commonly used in nationally representative surveys with objective measures of the same health condition. We focus on hypertension. We find no evidence of an income/health greadient using self-reported hypertension but a sizeable gradient when using objectively measured hypertension. We also find that the probability of a false negative reporting is significantly income graded. Our results suggest that using commonly available self-reported chronic health measures might underestimate true income-related inequalities in health.

Relative income, happiness, and utility : an explanation for the Easterlin paradox and other puzzles

The well-known Easterlin paradox points out that average happiness has remained constant over time despite sharp rises in GNP per head. At the same time, a micro literature has typically found positive correlations between individual income and individual measures of subjective well-being. This paper suggests that these two findings are consistent with the presence of relative income terms in the utility function. Income may be evaluated relative to others (social comparison) or to oneself in the past (habituation). We review the evidence on relative income from the subjective well-being literature. We also discuss the relation (or not) between happiness and utility, and discuss some nonhappiness research (behavioral, experimental, neurological) related to income comparisons. We last consider how relative income in the utility function can affect economic models of behavior in the domains of consumption, investment, economic growth, savings, taxation, labor supply, wages, and migration.