Motivation, rationale and key results from the GERBILS Saharan dust measurement campaign

The Geostationary Earth Radiation Budget Intercomparison of Longwave and Shortwave radiation (GERBILS) was an observational field experiment over North Africa during June 2007. The campaign involved 10 flights by the FAAM BAe-146 research aircraft over southwestern parts of the Sahara Desert and coastal stretches of the Atlantic Ocean. Objectives of the GERBILS campaign included characterisation of mineral dust geographic distribution and physical and optical properties, assessment of the impact upon radiation, validation of satellite remote sensing retrievals, and validation of numerical weather prediction model forecasts of aerosol optical depths (AODs) and size distributions. We provide the motivation behind GERBILS and the experimental design and report the progress made in each of the objectives. We show that mineral dust in the region is relatively non-absorbing (mean single scattering albedo at 550 nm of 0.97) owing to the relatively small fraction of iron oxides present (1–3%), and that detailed spectral radiances are most accurately modelled using irregularly shaped particles. Satellite retrievals over bright desert surfaces are challenging owing to the lack of spectral contrast between the dust and the underlying surface. However, new techniques have been developed which are shown to be in relatively good agreement with AERONET estimates of AOD and with each other. This encouraging result enables relatively robust validation of numerical models which treat the production, transport, and deposition of mineral dust. The dust models themselves are able to represent large-scale synoptically driven dust events to a reasonable degree, but some deficiencies remain both in the Sahara and over the Sahelian region, where cold pool outflow from convective cells associated with the intertropical convergence zone can lead to significant dust production.

German open ended funds: was there a valuation problem?

In late 2005, a number of German open ended funds suffered significant withdrawals by unit holders. The crisis was precipitated by a long term bear market in German property investment and the fact that these funds offered short term liquidity to unit holders but had low levels of liquidity in the fund. A more controversial suggestion was that the crisis was exacerbated by a perception that the valuations of the fund were too infrequent and inaccurate. As units are priced by reference to these valuations with no secondary market, the valuation process is central to the process. There is no direct evidence that these funds were over-valued but there is circumstantial evidence and this paper examines the indirect evidence of the process to see whether the hypothesis that valuation is an issue for the German funds holds any credibility. It also discusses whether there is a wider issue for other funds of this nature or whether it is a parochial problem confined to Germany. The conclusions are that there is reason to believe that German valuation processes make over-valuation in a recession more likely than in other countries and that more direct research into the German valuation system is required to identify the issues which need to be addressed to make the valuation system more trusted.

Property funds: how much diversification is enough?

t is well known that when assets are randomly-selected and combined in equal proportions in a portfolio, the risk of the portfolio declines as the number of different assets increases without affecting returns. In other words, increasing portfolio size should improve the risk/return trade-off compared with a portfolio of asset size one. Therefore, diversifying among several property funds may be a better alternative for investors compared to holding only one property fund. Nonetheless, it also well known that with naïve diversification although risk always decreases with portfolio size, it does so at a decreasing rate so that at some point the reduction in portfolio risk, from adding another fund, becomes negligible. Based on this fact, a reasonable question to ask is how much diversification is enough, or in other words, how many property funds should be included in a portfolio to minimise return volatility.