Bügl, R; Leimgruber, C; Hüni, G R and Scholz, R W (2009) Sustainable property funds: Financial stakeholders' views on sustainability criteria and market acceptance. Building Research & Information, 37(3), pp. 246-263. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
Sustainable property (real estate) funds (S-REFs) have started to enter international finance markets. An investigation in the German-speaking parts of Switzerland examined two key questions: (1) the sustainability criteria that institutional real estate investors and real estate fund (REF) suppliers regard as important for the market success of S-REFs; and (2) how they assess the market acceptance of such funds. Focus groups were conducted to define sustainability components for S-REFs from a market success perspective. A questionnaire study was then undertaken to assess the two key questions. Factor analysis identified four independent sustainability factors: (1) building materials and energy; (2) expenses, return, and flexibility; (3) green space design; and (4) landscape and natural ecology. In the factor analysis, the set of criteria relating to sustainable social infrastructure did not form an independent factor. In total, 76% of the responding institutional investors decided on an S-REF investment, and 38% reported accepting return shortfalls against the REF benchmark. The market acceptance of S-REFs by institutional investors depends on cognitive drivers, institutional context, age, and family status of investors. These results can inform the design of S-REFs, marketing strategies, and sustainability ratings.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | key financial stakeholders; market acceptance; responsible property investment; sustainability criteria; sustainable real estate funds |
| Index terms: | strategy, ecology, investor, focus group, property investment, markets, international finance, Switzerland, market acceptance, real estate, building material, marketing, investigation, factor analysis, questionnaire |
| Subjects: | business, data collection methods, real estate economics, building materials, economic analysis, environmental science, financial management, management, Geography, sociology, market analysis, statistical analysis |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Procurement, Sustainability, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Design Practice, Urban Studies |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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