Search results

This survey explores the application of real options theory to the field of health economics. The integration of options theory offers a valuable framework to address these challenges, providing insights into healthcare investments, policy analysis and patient care pathways.

This research employs the real options theory, a financial concept, to delve into health economics challenges. Through a systematic approach, three distinct models rooted in this theory are crafted and analyzed. Firstly, the study examines the value of investing in emerging health technology, factoring in future advantages, associated costs and unpredictability. The second model is patient-centric, evaluating the choice between immediate treatment switch and waiting for more clarity, while also weighing the associated risks. Lastly, the research assesses pandemic-related government policies, emphasizing the importance of delaying decisions in the face of uncertainties, thereby promoting data-driven policymaking.

Three different real options models are presented in this study to illustrate their applicability and value in aiding decision-makers. (1) The first evaluates investments in new technology, analyzing future benefits, discount rates and benefit volatility to determine investment value. (2) In the second model, a patient has the option of switching treatments now or waiting for more information before optimally switching treatments. However, waiting has its risks, such as disease progression. By modeling the potential benefits and risks of both options, and factoring in the time value, this model aids doctors and patients in making informed decisions based on a quantified assessment of potential outcomes. (3) The third model concerns pandemic policy: governments can end or prolong lockdowns. While awaiting more data on the virus might lead to economic and societal strain, the model emphasizes the economic value of deferring decisions under uncertainty.

This research provides a quantified perspective on various decisions in healthcare, from investments in new technology to treatment choices for patients to government decisions regarding pandemics. By applying real options theory, stakeholders can make more evidence-driven decisions.

Decisions about patient care pathways and pandemic policies have direct societal implications. For instance, choices regarding the prolongation or ending of lockdowns can lead to economic and societal strain.

The originality of this study lies in its application of real options theory, a concept from finance, to the realm of health economics, offering novel insights and analytical tools for decision-makers in the healthcare sector.

We discuss recent developments in real options theory and its applications to strategic management research, examine the potential difficulties in implementing real options in theory and practice, and propose several areas for future research. Our review shows that real options theory has provided substantial insights into investment and exit decisions as well as into the choice of investment modes. In addition, extant research studies have contributed significantly to our understanding of whether and how organizations can benefit from real options. Future research that addresses difficulties in applications will further advance both real options theory and practice in strategic management. We call for future generations of research to enhance the impact of real options as an emerging dominant conceptual lens in strategic management.

The purpose of this paper is to construct option pricing models for real estate development by considering and incorporating institutional arrangements, direct interactions and financial constraints in the model. It extends the application of real option theory from the framework borrowed from financial option pricing, and considers the case where a development company has restrictions from outside environment and financial constraint. It explores the effects of these additional practical factors on real asset project value and development timing. This paper makes contributions to bridge the theoretical models and practical applications.

Real estate development is modelled in the binomial option pricing framework with the considerations of time‐to‐build, foregone rent if delaying, institutional environment and capital budgeting. The investment timings are derived from the models and sensitivity analysis is conducted to explore the effects of these factors.

Apart from the factors in traditional option pricing theory, this paper confirms that the contractual covenants, positive synergies between properties and financial status of the firm, which enhance or restrict real flexibility embedded in the development land, influence project value and investment timing. Numerical examples illustrate the effects of these factors. It is argued that the valuation of real options should place emphasis on industry‐specific characteristics and start from the perspective of the firm rather than individual options.

The models constructed in this paper and the results can be directly used in the practical real estate development.

This paper incorporates many practical factors in real estate development which are not investigated in previous studies. It values the option project from the firm perspective rather than project perspective as previous studies. It also shows the effects of institutional arrangement and firm factors on project value and development timing.

Real options available to developers and leading to an active and dynamic development of real estate assets are numerous. The purpose of the article is twofold. First, a conceptual framework is proposed as a practical aid for recognizing and understanding some frequently recurring combinations of options (such as deferral and expansion options). Based on the definition and classification of real options available in real estate markets, a comprehensive valuation tool for quantifying the value of those options embedded in a real estate development project is thus developed using a portfolio view.

Based on standard option pricing techniques, the proposed conceptual methodology is validated by applying it to an actual case of an investment for the construction of a new, multi‐purpose building in the semi‐central zone of the urban area of Rome (Italy).

Based on a static land value of €34.7 million, a waiting mode (deferral option) at an early stage of developing a property accounts for 16 percent of the expanded land value of the project, with 8 percent of such value being contributed by the expansion option. A real options valuation of the options portfolio available to a real estate developer enables increasing the project value by 31.1 percent as opposed to a traditional DCF analysis. In line with financial options theory, values of real options increase as volatility rises.

The case‐based analysis highlights that: flexibility in real estate development may create additional value enabling real estate developers or funds to react to market trends as new information arrives and uncertainty on fundamental factors (e.g. property prices) unfolds; the extra value added by managerial flexibility is neglected by DCF/NPV techniques; contrary to the common criticism on its lack of rigor, option valuation theory is suitable for appraising real estate assets; a portfolio approach is crucial when multiple real options exist.

Active management of real estate investments in response to changing property market and technology conditions confers operating flexibility and strategic value to appraisal of development projects beyond what is traditionally captured by a DCF model. An options approach to valuing and managing real estate development may change the developer's perspective altogether. Based on the combination of an original classification and a portfolio view of options existing in real estate markets, a real options framework for assessing the value of strategic flexibility incorporated in a greenfield development project (also accounting for potential option interactions) is designed.

The purpose of this study is first to evaluate whether real options analysis (ROA) is suitable for valuing green building certificates, and second to calculate the real option value of a green certificate in a typical office building setting. Green buildings are demonstrated as one of the most profitable climate mitigation actions. However, no consensus exists among industry professionals about how green buildings and specifically green building certificates should be valued.

The research design of the study involves a theoretical part and an empirical part. In the theoretical part, option characteristics of green building certificates are identified and a contemporary real option valuation method is proposed for application. In the empirical part, the application is demonstrated in an embedded multiple case study design. Two different building cases (with and without green certificate) with eight independent cash flow valuations by eight industry professionals are used as data set for eight valuation case studies and analyses. Additionally, cross-case analysis is executed for strengthening the analysis.

The paper finds that green certificates have several characteristics similar to real options and supports the idea of using ROA in valuing a green certificate. The paper also explains how option pricing theory and discounted cash flow (DCF) method deal with uncertainty and what shortcomings of DCF could be overcome by ROA. The results show that a mean real option value of 985,000 (or 8.8 per cent premium to the mean property value) was found for a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Platinum certificate in the Finnish property market. The main finding of the paper suggests that the contemporary real option valuation methods are appropriate to assess the monetary value and the uncertainty of a green building certificate.

This is the first study to argue that option-pricing theory can be used for valuing green building certificates. The identification of the option characteristics of green building certificates and demonstration of the ROA in an empirical case makes questions whether the current mainstream investment analysis approaches are the most suitable methods for valuing green building certificates.

Real option valuation is capable of accounting for uncertainties in residential development projects but still lacks practical adoption due to limited evidence to support application of the theory in practice. The purpose of this paper is to use option valuation to value staging option embedded in residential projects and compare with results from DCF to determine which of the two methods delivers superior results.

The fuzzy payoff method (FPOM), a real options model that uses scenario planning approach to generate a range of figures, from which a single-numerical value is computed for decision-making.

The results showed that the use of a range of figures was able to represent uncertainties to a higher degree of accuracy than the static DCF. As a result, the FPOM was able to capture about 3 per cent of the value of the project that was missed by the DCF. The staging option offers an opportunity to abandon unprofitable phases of a project, thereby limiting downside losses. Thus, real option models are practically applicable to cases in property sector.

Residential property developers must consider flexibility in financial feasibility evaluation of development because of the embedded value in uncertain property projects. It is important to account for optionality in financial evaluation of property projects for value maximisation.

The FPOM has been used for the first time to evaluate a horizontal phasing of a residential development project.

The continuous need for change in corporate real estate spaces warrants consideration of flexibility in new space design. To help decision makers invest more effectively in physical infrastructure and its ability to evolve, a formal method of identifying and valuing flexibility is developed. A model, based on real options techniques for valuing managerial flexibility, is constructed to answer the following question: how much is it worth to invest in a space that could be renovated to office space for a specified renovation cost in the future? Decision makers can use the option valuation results to determine whether the initial design and construction costs to achieve flexibility are justifiable. The transparent model is intended to be accessible to design teams in practice. It is an improvement on net present value and first‐cost based decision‐making techniques in that it explicitly accounts for uncertainty and for the ability of managers to make a rational future decision (between renting and renovating). The model considers three sources of uncertainty: the market price of rent for office space (as measured by volatility); date of space need; and amount of space need. Input values and/or probability distributions are needed for these variables. The model is constructed using a binomial lattice technique and Monte Carlo simulation. Results are given in a format that allows for comparison with cost estimates of physical architectural designs. For example, in a case study where current five‐year office‐space leases are estimated at US$98 per square foot and 0.39 annual volatility and the mean amount of space needed in the future is 50 per cent of the total, the real options valuation suggests that it is worth up to US$40 per square foot in initial investment expenses to achieve a space that could be renovated to office space for US$25 per square foot within the next eight years. The concept of addressing risk through ‘flexible design’ and analysing the value of flexibility is pertinent to judicious management of any new building project that is subject to uncertain future conditions.

This paper proposes a discrete time real options model with time‐dependent and serial correlated return process for a real estate development problem with waiting options. Based on a Martingale condition, the paper claims to be able to relax many unrealistic assumptions made in the typical real option pricing methodology. Our real option model is a new one without assuming the return process as “Ito Process”, specifically, without assuming a geometric Brownian motion. We apply the model to the condominium market in Tokyo metropolitan area in the period 1971‐1997 and estimate the value of waiting to invest in 1998‐2007. The results partly provide realistic estimates of the parameters and show the applicability of our model.

This paper categorizes and critiques the empirical research strategies that have been employed to test real options theory. Existing research has sought to detect valuable options in firms’ strategic investments as well as to investigate the payoffs from these investments. Our review highlights some of the evidence that has accumulated in recent years for real options theory. We flag some of the most important challenges and tradeoffs associated with the use of different empirical research approaches for testing real options theory in strategic management. The paper concludes by offering a number of research priorities to advance the theory by probing its descriptive validity as well as by addressing its normative aspirations to bridge corporate finance and strategy.

Perhaps the most difficult objection raised by skeptics of the real options approach concerns the apparent lack of market transactions that would verify that real options have actual value. Although there are no organized exchanges with publicly disclosed prices, there are nevertheless several mechanisms for buying and selling real options. Observing these could offer important advantages in the quest for enhancing the role of real options in financial decision making:•demonstrate that real options can indeed add value•in some cases even gain a sense of the amount of value added by real options•offer expert appraisers methods for improved estimation of the value of a business when real options are part of the organizational capital

The most frequently used method for buying or selling real options occurs when a product that includes real options is sold to customers (often at a premium above the price of a comparable product that does not include real options). Real options that are part of the organizational capital of a business are part of the package in an acquisition (or minority equity position). In this chapter we examine several cases of such transactions.