Siew, R Y J (2015) Predicting the behaviour of Australian ESG reits using Markov chain analysis. Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, 20(3), pp. 252-267. ISSN 1366-4387
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to present the use of Markov chain to predict the behaviour of Australian real estate investment trusts (REITs) that are more highly valued in the areas of environmental, social and governance (ESG). Design/methodology/approach – For the empirical analysis, states is defined as the price interval between 10-day moving averages and daily closing prices. A total of 18 Australian ESG REITs were analysed. Findings – The results show that there is inconsistency in the probabilities obtained for REIT prices across all four states: 1 (= −$0.05), 2 ( < −$0.05 to < $0.05], 3 ($0.05 < to = $0.1] and 4 ( > $0.1). The findings suggest that price movements are occurring in a random fashion and that ESG REITs do not necessarily have more superior performance. Research limitations/implications – The scope of analysis is only from 2008 to 2014. This is attributed to the availability of the Experts in Responsible Investment Services dataset, which is used to determine the “greenness” of Australian REITs. Originality/value – This research is original, not just in terms of the scope of analysis but also the methodology presented has not been applied to analyse REITs data.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Australia; real estate; REITs; sustainability; property; Markov chain |
| Index terms: | real estate investment, movement, dataset, methodology, Australia, Markov chain, governance, real estate |
| Subjects: | health behaviours and lifestyles, business, mathematical modelling, economic analysis, real estate economics, Geography, research methods, data management |
| Topics: | Procurement, Governance, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Digital Applications, Urban Studies |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here