Different risk measures: different portfolio compositions?

Traditionally, the measure of risk used in portfolio optimisation models is the variance. However, alternative measures of risk have many theoretical and practical advantages and it is peculiar therefore that they are not used more frequently. This may be because of the difficulty in deciding which measure of risk is best and any attempt to compare different risk measures may be a futile exercise until a common risk measure can be identified. To overcome this, another approach is considered, comparing the portfolio holdings produced by different risk measures, rather than the risk return trade-off. In this way we can see whether the risk measures used produce asset allocations that are essentially the same or very different. The results indicate that the portfolio compositions produced by different risk measures vary quite markedly from measure to measure. These findings have a practical consequence for the investor or fund manager because they suggest that the choice of model depends very much on the individual’s attitude to risk rather than any theoretical and/or practical advantages of one model over another.

Internal rents and corporate property management: a study into the use of internal rents in UK corporate organisations

Research in the late 1980s showed that in many corporate real estates users were not fully aware of the full extent of their property holdings. In many cases, not only was the value of the holdings unknown, but there was uncertainty over the actual extent of ownership within the portfolio. This resulted in a large number of corporate occupiers reviewing their property holdings during the 1990s, initially to create a definitive asset register, but also to benefit from an more efficient use of space. Good management of corporately owned property assets is of equal importance as the management of other principal resources within the company. A comprehensive asset register can be seen as the first step towards a rational property audit. For the effective, efficient and economic delivery of services, it is vital that all property holdings are utilised to the best advantage. This requires that the property provider and the property user are both fully conversant with the value of the property holding and that an asset/internal rent/charge is made accordingly. The advantages of internal rent charging are twofold. Firstly, it requires the occupying department to “contribute” an amount to the business equivalent to the open market rental value of the space that it occupies. This prevents the treating of space as a free good and, as individual profit centres, each department will then rationalise its holdings to minimise its costs. The second advantage is from a strategic viewpoint. By charging an asset rent, the holding department can identify the performance of its real estate holdings. This can then be compared to an internal or external benchmark to help determine whether the company has adopted the most efficient tenure pattern for its properties. This paper investigates the use of internal rents by UK-based corporate businesses and explains internal rents as a form of transfer pricing in the context of management and responsibility accounting. The research finds that the majority of charging organisations introduced internal rents primarily to help calculate true profits at the business unit level. However, less than 10% of the charging organisations introduced internal rents primarily to capture the return on assets within the business. There was also a sizeable element of the market who had no plans to introduce internal rents. Here, it appears that, despite academic and professional views that internal rents are beneficial in improving the efficient use of property, opinion at the business and operational level has not universally accepted this proposition.

Plant and invertebrate resources for farmland birds in pastoral landscapes

On 16 UK livestock holdings within pastoral landscapes, we investigated the provision of plant and invertebrate resources for farmland birds in spring barley and winter wheat cereal-based whole crop silages as alternatives to maize and grass silages. The benefits of low input barley systems were also investigated; barley fields were subjected to two separate herbicide sub-treatments on a split-field design (high input broad-spectrum or low input narrow spectrum herbicides). The abundance of plant resources and invertebrates was assessed for three growing seasons during summer and winter for each crop type. The study clearly demonstrated the value of spring barley for the provision of plant resources when compared to the other silage cropping systems, whilst invertebrate responses were variable. No differences in plant and invertebrate resources were found between the barley treatments. Throughout the year, forage maize afforded the lowest provision of resources for farmland birds, and because it is likely that maize will continue to be grown in pastoral areas, the value of this habitat needs to be improved if farmland birds are to benefit. To provide plant and invertebrate resources for farmland birds in pastoral landscapes we strongly advocate the growing of spring sown barley whole-crop silage followed by over-wintering stubbles. © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Spatial concentration in institutional industrial real estate investment in the England and Wales

In two recent papers Byrne and Lee (2006, 2007) examined the geographical concentration of institutional office and retail investment in England and Wales at two points in time; 1998 and 2003. The findings indicate that commercial office portfolios are concentrated in a very few urban areas, whereas retail holdings correlate more closely with the urban hierarchy of England and Wales and consequently are essentially ubiquitous. Research into the industrial sector is very much less developed, and this paper therefore makes a significant contribution to understanding the structure of industrial property investment in the UK. It shows that industrial investment concentration is between that of retail and office and is focussed on LAs with high levels of manual workers in areas with smaller industrial units. It also shows that during the period studied the structure of the sector changed, with greater emphasis on the distributional element, for which location is a principal consideration.

Agricultural tenancy reform: the end of law; or a new popular culture?

This paper applies a reading of the postmodernisation of law to the incremental reform of agricultural holdings legislation over the last century. In charting the shifting legal basis of agricultural tenancies, from ‘black letter’ positivism to the cultural contextuality of sumptuary law, the paper theorises that the underlying political imperative has been allied to the changing significance of property ownership and use. Rather than reflecting the long-term official desire to maintain the let sector in British agriculture, however, the paper argues that this process has had other aims. In particular, it has been about an annexation of law to legitimise the retention of landowner power while presenting a rhetorical ‘democratisation’ of farming, away from its plutocratic associations and towards a new narrative of ‘depersonalised’ business.

Agricultural tenancies: implied surrender and regrant and the operation of the Agricultural Tenancies Act 1995

Agricultural tenancies arising after 1st September 1995 are mostly governed by the Agricultural Tenancies Act 1995. As such, tenants under this Act do not benefit from the degree of protection conferred on tenancies already in existence, which remain under the Agricultural Holdings Act 1986. Section 4 of the 1995 Act seeks to protect those tenancies which subsequently inadvertently undergo a surrender and regrant and which would otherwise lose the protection of the 1986 Act. This paper seeks to investigate, by relating recent case law and statute to the situation of agricultural tenancies, the occasions where surrender and regrant might occur and whether in such instances the protection of the 1986 Act will be lost.

The future of the tenanted sector in British agriculture: a review of the proposals for change

The impending decline of the tenanted sector in British agriculture has been forecast for many years. Much debate has surrounded the issues and ensuing legislation has repeatedly attempted to stave-off what some view as the inevitable demise of tenant farmers. Following a flurry of activity after the Northfield Report of 1979 and culminating in the Agricultural Holdings Acts of 1984 and 1986, the debate has recently been fuelled by a strongly pro-market lobby. With the public support of successive Ministers of Agriculture, this lobby has advocated a rejection of the former state intervention in the landlord/tenant relationship in favour of freedom of contract, an option that now appears increasingly likely to reach the statute books. This paper reviews the significant elements of the debate, attempting to explain the principal reasons for the failure of earlier legislation and the primary shortcomings of the current emphasis of consultation. The paper concludes that while there are some significant legislative disincentives to letting land, the freeing-up of contracts in isolation from other, non-contractual issues, will not result in the increase in lettings purportedly desired by the Ministers and their acolytes.

Succession to farm tenancies: future imperfect?

Until the law was amended in 1984, the tenants of agricultural holdings enjoyed security of tenure for life, plus the prospect of two family successions to their tenancies, virtually guaranteeing a tenant- farming family at least three generations occupation of a holding. The orthodox view has been that any transfers of interests that took place before the passing of the Act which introduced the scheme in 1976 would not count towards the inherent 'totting-up' process. The 1993 High Court judgement in Saunders v Ralph has raised serious questions as to the validity of that assertion. This paper seeks to identify the key legal provisions involved and to highlight the problems that may result from the case.

Computing Markowitz efficient frontiers using a spreadsheet optimiser

Markowitz showed that assets can be combined to produce an 'Efficient' portfolio that will give the highest level of portfolio return for any level of portfolio risk, as measured by the variance or standard deviation. These portfolios can then be connected to generate what is termed an 'Efficient Frontier' (EF). In this paper we discuss the calculation of the Efficient Frontier for combinations of assets, again using the spreadsheet Optimiser. To illustrate the derivation of the Efficient Frontier, we use the data from the Investment Property Databank Long Term Index of Investment Returns for the period 1971 to 1993. Many investors might require a certain specific level of holding or a restriction on holdings in at least some of the assets. Such additional constraints may be readily incorporated into the model to generate a constrained EF with upper and/or lower bounds. This can then be compared with the unconstrained EF to see whether the reduction in return is acceptable. To see the effect that these additional constraints may have, we adopt a fairly typical pension fund profile, with no more than 20% of the total held in Property. The paper shows that it is now relatively easy to use the Optimiser available in at least one spreadsheet (EXCEL) to calculate efficient portfolios for various levels of risk and return, both constrained and unconstrained, so as to be able to generate any number of Efficient Frontiers.

Commentary on an example of a tenancy agreement for an agricultural holding

This paper sets out an example of a standard agricultural tenancy, being one creating a tenancy from year to year and consequently covered by the agricultural holdings legislation. A facing-page commentary gives a clause-by-clause analysis of the agreement, the implications of each provision being discussed in the light of the law of contract, agricultural holdings legislation and, where appropriate, subsequent caselaw.

Marriage value and scarcity in agricultural rents: a discussion of the findings in Childers v Ankers

Formal statutory guidance to arbitrators involved in settling disputes over rents for agricultural holdings is contained in the Agricultural Holdings Act 1986. The particular features of the agricultural letting market raise valuation problems which the Act itself has failed to satisfactorily address, most notably the degree to which marriage value and scarcity should be taken into account. The 1995 Court of Appeal case of Childers v Anker addresses several of the key issues. This paper seeks to explore the findings and practical implications of the case for rental valuers and arbitrators. It argues that sitting tenants may be seriously disadvantaged by the court's judgements, not least by having to pay rents on review which reflect elements of marriage value and possibly scarcity value.

The future returns for property required by UK pension funds

In the 1970s Real Estate represented over 17% of the average pension funds total assets. Today such funds hold less than 4%, a figure not seen since the 1960s. This reduction in Real Estate holdings is mainly attributable to the relatively poor performance of Real Estate against other asset classes since the 1980s. Whether pension funds will increase their holding at any point in the future depends therefore on the expected return of Real Estate by comparison with that required to justify a particular asset holding. Using the technique of Modern Portfolio Theory (MPT), this paper assesses the required return that Real Estate would have to offer to justify a 15% holding in a mixed asset portfolio. This figure and the risk/return characteristics of the major asset classes is taken from survey data. Under a number of scenarios it is found that Real Estate can play a part in a mixed asset portfolio at the 15% level. In some cases however, the expected returns of Real Estate are not sufficient to justify a weight of 15% in this asset.

Required returns for real estate in UK pension fund portfolios

The position of Real Estate within a multi-asset portfolio has received considerable attention recently. Previous research has concentrated on the percentage holding property would achieve given its risk/return characteristics. Such studies have invariably used Modern Portfolio Theory and these approaches have been criticised for both the quality of the real estate data and problems with the methodology itself. The first problem is now well understood, and the second can be addressed by the use of realistic constraints on asset holdings. This paper takes a different approach. We determine the level of return that Real Estate needs to achieve to justify an allocation within the multi asset portfolio. In order to test the importance of the quality of the data we use historic appraisal based and desmoothed returns to examine the sensitivity of the results. Consideration is also given to the Holding period and the imposition of realistic constraints on the asset holdings in order to model portfolios held by pension fund investors. We conclude, using several benchmark levels of portfolio risk and return, that using appraisal based data the required level of return for Real Estate was less than that achieved over the period 1972-1993. The use of desmoothed series can reverse this result at the highest levels of desmoothing although within a restricted holding period Real Estate offered returns in excess of those required to enter the portfolio and might have a role to play in the multi-asset portfolio.

Testing the statistical significance of sector & regional diversification

The question as to whether it is better to diversify a real estate portfolio within a property type across the regions or within a region across the property types is one of continuing interest for academics and practitioners alike. The current study, however, is somewhat different from the usual sector/regional analysis taking account of the fact that holdings in the UK real estate market are heavily concentrated in a single region, London. As a result this study is designed to investigate whether a real estate fund manager can obtain a statistically significant improvement in risk/return performance from extending out of a London based portfolio into firstly the rest of the South East of England and then into the remainder of the UK, or whether the manger would be better off staying within London and diversifying across the various property types. The results indicating that staying within London and diversifying across the various property types may offer performance comparable with regional diversification, although this conclusion largely depends on the time period and the fund manager’s ability to diversify efficiently.