‘Inherited commitments’: do changes in ownership affect corporate social responsibility (CSR) at African gold mines?

This paper critically examines the issue of ‘inherited corporate social responsibility’ in the gold mining industry, focusing specifically on the case of sub-Saharan Africa, a region plagued with excessive corruption, rampant poverty and weak governance. Whilst there appears to be little incentive to proactively engage with communities and implement cutting-edge environmental policies in the region, mine managers argue otherwise, highlighting a number of reasons for embracing corporate social responsibility (CSR). After briefly reviewing the philosophical underpinnings of CSR, the paper provides an in-depth analysis of these arguments, in the process, underscoring how tenuous the case for CSR in the extractive industries, and gold mining more specifically, is in the context of sub-Saharan Africa. Following a change in ownership, new management faces few pressures to embrace CSR in its entirety and therefore, more often than not, finds itself in a position to implement programs and policies of its choice. More research is needed that further popularizes the issue of ‘inherited CSR’ in the gold mining sector and extractive industries more generally.

Ownership, occupation and risk: a view of the City of London office market

Office returns in the City of London are more volatile than in other UK markets. This volatility may reflect fluctuations in capital flows associated with changing patterns of ownership and the growing linkage between real estate and financial markets in the City. Using current and historical data, patterns of ownership in the City are investigated. They reveal that overseas ownership has grown markedly since 1985, that owners are predominantly FIRE-sector firms and that there are strong links between ownership and occupation. This raises concerns about future volatility and systemic risk in a market strongly influenced by the cyclical behaviour and shocks of the international financial system.

Ownership Advantages in Cross-border Real Estate Development: Some Evidence from European Markets

Drawing upon European industry and country case studies, this paper investigates the scope and drivers of cross-border real estate development. It is argued that the real estate development process encompasses a diverse range of activities and actors. It is inherently localised, the production process is complex and emphermal, and the outputs are heterogeneous. It analyses a transactions database of European real estate markets to provide insights into the extent of, and variations in, market penetration by non-domestic real estate developers. The data were consistent with the expectation that non-domestic real estate developers from mature markets would have a high level of market penetration in immature markets. Compared to western European markets, the CEE real estate office sales by developers were dominated by US, Israeli and other EU developers. This pattern is consistent with the argument that non-domestic developers have substantial Dunning-type ownership advantages when entering immature real estate markets. However, the data also suggested some unexpected patterns. Relative to their GDP, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, Netherlands and Israel accounted for large proportions of sales by developers. All are EU countries (except Israel) with small, open, affluent, highly traded economies. Further, the data also indicate that there may be a threshold where locational disadvantages outweigh ownership advantages and deter cross-border real estate development.

Analysis of the intermediate housing market mechanism in the UK

Government policies have backed intermediate housing market mechanisms like shared equity, intermediate rented and shared ownership (SO) as potential routes for some households, who are otherwise squeezed between the social housing and the private market. The rhetoric deployed around such housing has regularly contained claims about its social progressiveness and role in facilitating socio-economic mobility, centring on a claim that SO schemes can encourage people to move from rented accommodation through a shared equity phase and into full owner-occupation. SO has been justified on the grounds of it being transitional state, rather than a permanent tenure. However SO buyers may be laden with economic cost-benefit structures that do not stack up evenly and as a consequence there may be little realistic prospect of ever reaching a preferred outcome. Such behaviours have received little empirical attention as yet despite, the SO model arguably offers a sub-optimal solution towards homeownership, or in terms of wider quality of life. Given the paucity of rigorous empirical work on this issue, this paper delineates the evidence so far and sets out a research agenda. Our analysis is based on a large dataset of new shared owners, observing an information base that spans the past decade. We then set out an agenda to further examine the behaviours of the SO occupants and to examine the implications for future public policy based on existing literature and our outline findings. This paper is particularly opportune at a time of economic uncertainty and an overriding ‘austerity’ drive in public funding in the UK, through which SO schemes have enjoyed support uninterruptedly thus far.

International investment, ownership and risk in the City of London office market: an analysis of trends 1972-1997

Office returns in the City of London are more volatile than in other UK markets. This volatility may reflect fluctuations in capital flows associated with changing patterns of ownership and the growing linkage between real estate and financial markets in the City. Using current and historical data, patterns of ownership in the City are investigated. They reveal that overseas ownership has grown markedly since 1985, that owners are predominantly FIRE sector firms and that there are strong links between ownership and occupation. This raises concerns about future volatility and systemic risk.

Access to the countryside of England and Wales: public/private partnership or the privatisation of public rights?

This paper examines the evolution of public rights of access to private land in England and Wales. Since the Eighteenth Century the administration and protection of these rights has been though a form of public/private partnership in which the judiciary, while maintaining the dominance of private property, have safeguarded de facto public access by refusing consistently to punish simple trespass. While this situation has been modified, principally by post-World War II legislation, to allow for some formalisation of access arrangements and consequent compensation to landowners in areas of high recreational pressure and low legal accessibility, recent policy initiatives suggest that the balance of the partnership has now shifted in favour of landowners. In particular, the new access payment schemes, developed by the UK Government in response to the European Commission's Agri-Environment Regulations, locate the landowner as the beneficiary of the partnership, financed by tax revenue and justified on the spurious basis of improved 'access provision'. As such the state, as the former upholder of citizen rights, now assumes the duplicitous position of underwriting private property ownership through the commodification of access, while proclaiming a significant improvement in citizens' access rights.

Partnership in the provision of recreational access: the reconstruction of the public interest in private land in England and Wales

This paper examines the evolution of public rights of access to private land in England and Wales. Since the Eighteenth Century the administration and protection of these rights has been though a form of public/private partnership in which the judiciary, while maintaining the dominance of private property, have safeguarded de facto public access by refusing consistently to punish simple trespass. While this situation has been modified, principally by post-World War II legislation, to allow for some formalisation of access arrangements and consequent compensation to landowners in areas of high recreational pressure and low legal accessibility, recent policy initiatives suggest that the balance of the partnership has now shifted in favour of landowners. In particular, the new access payment schemes, developed by the UK Government in response to the European Commission's Agri-Environment Regulations, identify the landowner as the beneficiary of the partnership, financed by tax revenue and justified on the spurious basis of improved 'access provision'. As such the State, as the former upholder of citizen rights, now assumes the duplicitous position of underwriting private property ownership through the commodification of access, while proclaiming a significant improvement in citizens' access rights.

Recent trends in UK Government policy on the provision and management of leisure facilities

Since the first election victory of the Thatcher administration in 1979, Britain has witnessed a cultural transformation from the municipal socialism of the post-World War 2 Welfare State to a form of post-industrial entrepreneurialism. This has had a profound effect on all aspects of civil society, not least the redefinition of the role of active leisure from the 1950s evocation of 'Sport For All' to the market rationality of the 1980s. The transformation has signalled a shift from government support for active leisure as an element of citizen rights to the use of leisure to promote the government's interest in legitimating a new social order based not on rights but on means. Thus access to active living is no longer a societal goal for all, but a discretionary consumer good, the consumption of which signifies 'active' citizenship. It furthermore signifies differentiation from the growing mass of 'deviants' who are unwilling or unable to embrace this new construction of citizenship and are, therefore, increasingly denied access to active living and, hence, active citizenship.