The role of simulation in intertemporal choices

One route to understanding the thoughts and feelings of others is by mentally putting one's self in their shoes and seeing the world from their perspective, i.e., by simulation. Simulation is potentially used not only for inferring how others feel, but also for predicting how we ourselves will feel in the future. For instance, one might judge the worth of a future reward by simulating how much it will eventually be enjoyed. In intertemporal choices between smaller immediate and larger delayed rewards, it is observed that as the length of delay increases, delayed rewards lose subjective value; a phenomenon known as temporal discounting. In this article, we develop a theoretical framework for the proposition that simulation mechanisms involved in empathizing with others also underlie intertemporal choices. This framework yields a testable psychological account of temporal discounting based on simulation. Such an account, if experimentally validated, could have important implications for how simulation mechanisms are investigated, and makes predictions about special populations characterized by putative deficits in simulating others.

Systematic property risk: quantifying UK property betas 1983-2005

The increased frequency in reporting UK property performance figures, coupled with the acceptance of the IPD database as the market standard, has enabled property to be analysed on a comparable level with other more frequently traded assets. The most widely utilised theory for pricing financial assets, the Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM), gives market (systematic) risk, beta, centre stage. This paper seeks to measure the level of systematic risk (beta) across various property types, market conditions and investment holding periods. This paper extends the authors’ previous work on investment holding periods and how excess returns (alpha) relate to those holding periods. We draw on the uniquely constructed IPD/Gerald Eve transactions database, containing over 20,000 properties over the period 1983-2005. This research allows us to confirm our initial findings that properties held over longer periods perform in line with overall market performance. One implication of this is that over the long-term performance may be no different from an index tracking approach.

Real estate portfolio construction and estimation risk

The use of MPT in the construction real estate portfolios has two serious limitations when used in an ex-ante framework: (1) the intertemporal instability of the portfolio weights and (2) the sharp deterioration in performance of the optimal portfolios outside the sample period used to estimate asset mean returns. Both problems can be traced to wide fluctuations in sample means Jorion (1985). Thus the use of a procedure that ignores the estimation risk due to the uncertain in mean returns is likely to produce sub-optimal results in subsequent periods. This suggests that the consideration of the issue of estimation risk is crucial in the use of MPT in developing a successful real estate portfolio strategy. Therefore, following Eun & Resnick (1988), this study extends previous ex-ante based studies by evaluating optimal portfolio allocations in subsequent test periods by using methods that have been proposed to reduce the effect of measurement error on optimal portfolio allocations.

Multiple-project discount rates for cost-benefit analysis in construction projects: A formal risk model for microgeneration renewable energy technologies

The traditional economic approach for appraising the costs and benefits of construction project Net Present Values involves the calculation of net returns for each investment option under different discount rates. An alternative approach consists of multiple-project discount rates based on risk modelling. The example of a portfolio of microgeneration renewable energy technology (MRET) is presented to demonstrate that risks and future available budget for re-investment can be taken into account when setting discount rates for construction project specifications in presence of uncertainty. A formal demonstration is carried out through a reversed intertemporal approach of applied general equilibrium. It is demonstrated that risk and the estimated available budget for future re-investment can be included in the simultaneous assessment of the costs and benefits of multiple projects.

A unifying framework for metrics for aggregating the climate effect of different emissions

Multi-gas approaches to climate change policies require a metric establishing ‘equivalences’ among emissions of various species. Climate scientists and economists have proposed four kinds of such metrics and debated their relative merits. We present a unifying framework that clarifies the relationships among them. We show, as have previous authors, that the global warming potential (GWP), used in international law to compare emissions of greenhouse gases, is a special case of the global damage potential (GDP), assuming (1) a finite time horizon, (2) a zero discount rate, (3) constant atmospheric concentrations, and (4) impacts that are proportional to radiative forcing. Both the GWP and GDP follow naturally from a cost–benefit framing of the climate change issue. We show that the global temperature change potential (GTP) is a special case of the global cost potential (GCP), assuming a (slight) fall in the global temperature after the target is reached. We show how the four metrics should be generalized if there are intertemporal spillovers in abatement costs, distinguishing between private (e.g., capital stock turnover) and public (e.g., induced technological change) spillovers. Both the GTP and GCP follow naturally from a cost-effectiveness framing of the climate change issue. We also argue that if (1) damages are zero below a threshold and (2) infinitely large above a threshold, then cost-effectiveness analysis and cost–benefit analysis lead to identical results. Therefore, the GCP is a special case of the GDP. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change uses the GWP, a simplified cost–benefit concept. The UNFCCC is framed around the ultimate goal of stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations. Once a stabilization target has been agreed under the convention, implementation is clearly a cost-effectiveness problem. It would therefore be more consistent to use the GCP or its simplification, the GTP.