Search results

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

With growing interdependence between financial markets, the goal of this paper is to examine the dynamic interdependence between corporate equity and public real estate markets for the USA and a select group of seven European developed economies under a cross-country framework in crisis and boom market conditions. Dynamic interdependence is related to four measures of market linkages of “correlation, spillover, connectedness and causality”.

This study adopts a four-step investigation. The authors first estimate “time-varying variance–covariance spillovers and implied correlations” modeled with the bivariate BEKK-MGARCH methods. Second, the methods of Diebold and Yilmaz (2012, 2014) measure the conditional volatility spillover-connectedness effects across the corporate equity and public real estate markets based on a decomposition of the forecast error variance. Third, the authors implement nonlinear bivariate and multivariate causality tests to understand the lead-lag dynamics of the two asset markets' returns, volatilities and net directional volatility connectedness across different sample periods. Finally, the authors conclude the study by providing a portfolio hedging analysis.

The authors find that corporate equity and public real estate are moderately interdependent to the extent that their diversification benefits increases in the longer term. Moreover, the authors find increased corporate equity-public real estate causal dependence of the market groups of the European and international portfolios during the GFC and INTERCRISIS periods. The nonlinear causality test findings indicate that the joint information of asset markets can be a useful source of prediction for future innovation of market risks. Additionally, policy makers may also be able to employ conditional volatility and volatility connectedness as two other measures to manage market stability in the cross-asset market dependence during highly volatile periods.

One major take away from this academic research is since international portfolio investors are not only concerned the long-term price relationship but also the correlation structure and volatility spillover-connectedness, the conditional BEKK modeling, generalized risk connectedness analysis and nonlinear causal dependence explorations from this multi-country study can shed fresh light on the nature of market interdependence and magnitude of volatility connectedness effects in a multi-portfolio framework.

The hedging performance analysis for portfolio diversification and risk management indicates that industrial stocks (“pure” equities) are valuable assets that can improve the hedging performance of a well-diversified corporate equity-public real estate portfolio during crisis periods. For policymakers, the findings provide important information about the nature of causal links and predictability during the crisis and asset-market boom periods. They can then equip with this information to manage and coordinate market stability in cross corporate equity-real estate relationships effectively.

Although traditional research has in general reported at least a moderate degree of relationship between the two asset markets, investors' knowledge of stock-public real estate market linkage is somewhat inadequate and confine mostly to broad stocks (i.e. stocks that are exposed to public real estate influence) in a single-country context. In this paper, the authors examine the interdependence dynamics in a multi-country (multi-portfolio) context. A clear understanding their changing market relationships in a multi-country context is of crucial importance for portfolio investors, financial institutions and policy makers. Moreover, since the authors use an orthogonal stock market index, the authors allow global investors to understand the potential diversification benefits from stock markets that are beyond the public real estate market under different market conditions.

The Howard Shuttering Contractors case throws considerable light on the importance which the tribunals attach to warnings before dismissing an employee. In this case the tribunal took great pains to interpret the intention of the parties to the different site agreements, and it came to the conclusion that the agreed procedure was not followed. One other matter, which must be particularly noted by employers, is that where a final warning is required, this final warning must be “a warning”, and not the actual dismissal. So that where, for example, three warnings are to be given, the third must be a “warning”. It is after the employee has misconducted himself thereafter that the employer may dismiss.