Performance drivers of UK unlisted property funds

An unlisted property fund is a private investment vehicle which aims to provide direct property total returns and may also employ financial leverage which will accentuate performance. They have become a far more prevalent institutional property investment conduit since the early 2000’s. Investors have been primarily attracted to them due to the ease of executing a property exposure, both domestically and internationally, and for their diversification benefits given the capital intensive nature of constructing a well diversified commercial property investment portfolio. However, despite their greater prominence there has been little academic research conducted on the performance and risks of unlisted property fund investments. This can be attributed to a paucity of available data and limited time series where it exists. In this study we have made use of a unique dataset of institutional UK unlisted non-listed property funds over the period 2003Q4 to 2011Q4, using a panel modelling framework in order to determine the key factors which impact on fund performance. The sample provided a rich set of unlisted property fund factors including market exposures, direct property characteristics and the level of financial leverage employed. The findings from the panel regression analysis show that a small number of variables are able to account for the performance of unlisted property funds. These variables should be considered by investors when assessing the risk and return of these vehicles. The impact of financial leverage upon the performance of these vehicles through the recent global financial crisis and subsequent UK commercial property market downturn was also studied. The findings indicate a significant asymmetric effect of employing debt finance within unlisted property funds.

Does watershed development implemented through public private partnership empower women? A case review from Rajasthan, Western India

This paper critically examines the impact of the ‘Guidelines for Hariyali’ – a rural watershed development policy launched in Rajasthan, Western India which has been implemented through a Public Private Partnership (PPP) – for local communities. In 2003, the Government of India launched the ‘Guidelines’ (a comprehensive Integrated Wastelands Development Programme and Drought Prone Areas Programme and Desert Development Programme), the purpose of which is to restore ecological balance by harnessing, conserving and developing natural resources in drought-prone and arid rural areas for the benefit of villages. In the particular case-study area, the policy has been implemented through institutional linkages between a corporation and the government with the aim of sharing responsibilities for finances, planning, implementation and monitoring, the end goal being to enhance the livelihoods of rural households. The analysis focuses specifically on how the ‘Guidelines’ have affected the livelihoods of Rajasthani women, drawing upon findings from focus groups with men and women in the project catchment area, as well as interviews with key actors at public and private sector institutions. Findings reveal that there are significant gaps between policy objectives and the realities on the ground, particularly in the context of women's accessibilities and entitlements. The paper also broadens understanding of how PPPs, if implemented properly, could empower women in the area of watershed management across rural South Asia.

Varieties of capitalism and investments in human capital

This paper explores the relationship between national institutional archetypes and investments in training and development. A recent trend within the literature on comparative capitalism has been to explore the nature and extent of heterogeneity within the coordinated market economies (CMEs) of Europe. Based on a review of the existing comparative literature on training and development, and comparative firm-level survey evidence of differences in training and development practices, we both support and critique existing country clusters and argue for a more nuanced and flexible categorization.

A copyright exception for private copying in the United Kingdom

This paper discusses the proposed copyright exception for private copying in the UK in the aftermath of the Hargreaves Review. It explores the options by which the exception shall retain a realistic scope without significantly impacting on the interests of the rightholders and addresses the concept of possible harm that may arise due to private copying. It concludes that an exception for copying of content legally owned by an individual to another medium or device for private use corresponds to consumers’ reasonable expectations without causing more than minimal harm to the rightholders’ interests and without requiring an accompanying introduction of a fair compensation scheme.

Commercial real estate and equity market bubbles: are they contagious to REITs?

This paper uses a regime-switching approach to determine whether prices in the US stock, direct real estate and indirect real estate markets are driven by the presence of speculative bubbles. The results show significant evidence of the existence of periodically partially collapsing speculative bubbles in all three markets. A multivariate bubble model is then developed and implemented to evaluate whether the stock and real estate bubbles spill over into REITs. The underlying stock market bubble is found to be a stronger influence on the securitised real estate market bubble than that of the property market. Furthermore, the findings suggest a transmission of speculative bubbles from the direct real estate to the stock market, although this link is not present for the returns themselves.

Lessons from the private finance initiative in the UK: benefits, problems and critical success factors

Purpose – This paper summarises the main research findings from a detailed, qualitative set of structured interviews and case studies of private finance initiative (PFI) schemes in the UK, which involve the construction of built facilities. The research, which was funded by the Foundation for the Built Environment, examines the emergence of PFI in the UK. Benefits and problems in the PFI process are investigated. Best practice, the key critical factors for success, and lessons for the future are also analysed. Design/methodology/approach – The research is based around 11 semi-structured interviews conducted with stakeholders in key PFI projects in the UK. Findings – The research demonstrates that value for money and risk transfer are key success criteria. High procurement and transaction costs are a feature of PFI projects, and the large-scale nature of PFI projects frequently acts as barrier to entry. Research limitations/implications – The research is based on a limited number of in-depth case study interviews. The paper also shows that further research is needed to find better ways to measure these concepts empirically. Practical implications – The paper is important in highlighting four main areas of practical improvement in the PFI process: value for money assessment; establishing end-user needs; developing competitive markets and developing appropriate skills in the public sector. Originality/value – The paper examines the drivers, barriers and critical success factors for PFI in the UK for the first time in detail and will be of value to property investors, financiers, and others involved in the PFI process.

Private climate change reporting: an emerging discourse of risk and opportunity?

Purpose – This paper aims to explore the nature of the emerging discourse of private climate change reporting, which takes place in one-on-one meetings between institutional investors and their investee companies. Design/methodology/approach – Semi-structured interviews were conducted with representatives from 20 UK investment institutions to derive data which was then coded and analysed, in order to derive a picture of the emerging discourse of private climate change reporting, using an interpretive methodological approach, in addition to explorative analysis using NVivo software. Findings – The authors find that private climate change reporting is dominated by a discourse of risk and risk management. This emerging risk discourse derives from institutional investors' belief that climate change represents a material risk, that it is the most salient sustainability issue, and that their clients require them to manage climate change-related risk within their portfolio investment. It is found that institutional investors are using the private reporting process to compensate for the acknowledged inadequacies of public climate change reporting. Contrary to evidence indicating corporate capture of public sustainability reporting, these findings suggest that the emerging private climate change reporting discourse is being captured by the institutional investment community. There is also evidence of an emerging discourse of opportunity in private climate change reporting as the institutional investors are increasingly aware of a range of ways in which climate change presents material opportunities for their investee companies to exploit. Lastly, the authors find an absence of any ethical discourse, such that private climate change reporting reinforces rather than challenges the “business case” status quo. Originality/value – Although there is a wealth of sustainability reporting research, there is no academic research on private climate change reporting. This paper attempts to fill this gap by providing rich interview evidence regarding the nature of the emerging private climate change reporting discourse.

Impression management, myth creation and fabrication in private social and environmental reporting: insights from Erving Goffman

This paper explores the nature of private social and environmental reporting (SER). From interviews with UK institutional investors, we show that both investors and investees employ Goffmanesque, staged impression management as a means of creating and disseminating a dual myth of social and environmental accountability. The interviewees’ utterances unveil private meetings imbued with theatrical verbal and physical impression management. Most of the time, the investors’ shared awareness of reality belongs to a Goffmanesque frame whereby they accept no intentionality, misrepresentation or fabrication, believing instead that the ‘performers’ (investees) are not intending to deceive them. A shared perception that social and environmental considerations are subordinated to financial issues renders private SER an empty encounter characterised as a relationship-building exercise with seldom any impact on investment decision-making. Investors spoke of occasional instances of fabrication but these were insufficient to break the frame of dual myth creation. They only identified a handful of instances where intentional misrepresentation had been significant enough to alter their reality and behaviour. Only in the most extreme cases of fabrication and lying did the staged meeting break frame and become a genuine occasion of accountability, where investors demanded greater transparency, further meetings and at the extreme, divested shares. We conclude that the frontstage, ritualistic impression management in private SER is inconsistent with backstage activities within financial institutions where private financial reporting is prioritised. The investors appeared to be in a double bind whereby they devoted resources to private SER but were simultaneously aware that these efforts may be at best subordinated, at worst ignored, rendering private SER a predominantly cosmetic, theatrical and empty exercise.

Impression management, fabrication and myth creation in private social and environmental reporting: insights from Erving Goffman

This paper explores the nature of private social and environmental reporting (SER). From interviews with UK institutional investors, we show that both investors and investees employ Goffmanesque, staged impression management as a means of creating and disseminating a dual myth of social and environmental accountability. The interviewees’ utterances unveil private meetings imbued with theatrical verbal and physical impression management. Most of the time, the investors’ shared awareness of reality belongs to a Goffmanesque frame whereby they accept no intentionality, misrepresentation or fabrication, believing instead that the ‘performers’ (investees) are not intending to deceive them. A shared perception that social and environmental considerations are subordinated to financial issues renders private SER an empty encounter characterised as a relationship-building exercise with seldom any impact on investment decision-making. Investors spoke of occasional instances of fabrication but these were insufficient to break the frame of dual myth creation. They only identified a handful of instances where intentional misrepresentation had been significant enough to alter their reality and behaviour. Only in the most extreme cases of fabrication and lying did the staged meeting break frame and become a genuine occasion of accountability, where investors demanded greater transparency, further meetings and at the extreme, divested shares. We conclude that the frontstage, ritualistic impression management in private SER is inconsistent with backstage activities within financial institutions where private financial reporting is prioritised. The investors appeared to be in a double bind whereby they devoted resources to private SER but were simultaneously aware that these efforts may be at best subordinated, at worst ignored, rendering private SER a predominantly cosmetic, theatrical and empty exercise.