Academic literature on the topic 'Property trusts, Australia'

Purpose– Investment in Australia’s property market, whether directly or indirectly through Australian real estate investment trusts (A-REITs), grew remarkably since the 1990s. The degree of segregation between the property market and other financial assets, such as shares and bonds, can influence the diversification benefits within multi-asset portfolios. This raises the question of whether direct and indirect property investments are substitutable. Establishing how information transmits between asset classes and impacts the predictability of returns is of interest to investors. The paper aims to discuss these issues.Design/methodology/approach– The authors study the linkages between direct and indirect Australian property sectors from 1985 to 2013, with shares and bonds. This paper employs an Autoregressive Fractionally Integrated Moving Average (ARFIMA) process to de-smooth a valuation-based direct property index. The authors establish directional lead-lag relationships between markets using bi-variate Granger causality tests. Johansen cointegration tests are carried out to examine how direct and indirect property markets adjust to an equilibrium long-term relationship and short-term deviations from such a relationship with other asset classes.Findings– The authors find the use of appraisal-based property data creates a smoothing bias which masks the extent of how information is transmitted between the indirect property sector, stock and bond markets, and influences returns. The authors demonstrate that an ARFIMA process accounting for a smoothing bias up to lags of four quarters can overcome the overstatement of the smoothing bias from traditional AR models, after individually appraised constituent properties are aggregated into an overall index. The results show that direct property adjusts to information transmitted from market-traded A-REITs and stocks.Practical implications– The study shows direct property investments and A-REITs are substitutible in a multi-asset portfolio in the long and short term.Originality/value– The authors apply an ARFIMA(p,d,q) model to de-smooth Australian property returns, as proposed by Bond and Hwang (2007). The authors expect the findings will contribute to the discussion on whether direct property and REITs are substitutes in a multi-asset portfolio.

Purpose As one of the increasingly important alternative property sectors, data centres are a technology-focused property sector that is taking advantage of the growing investment intensity in technology-related infrastructure, against the backdrop of constant innovation and advancement in technology. The purpose of this paper is to assess the preliminary risk-adjusted performance and portfolio diversification benefits of data centre Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) in the USA, Australia and Singapore. The strategic implications going forward for data centres as an innovative property sector in the property investment space are also highlighted. Design/methodology/approach Using monthly total returns, the average annual return, annual risk, risk-adjusted performance and portfolio diversification benefits of data centre REITs in the USA, Australia and Singapore over 2016–2018 are assessed. Optimal asset allocation analysis is performed to investigate the value-added role of data centre REITs in a mixed-asset portfolio. Findings Data centre REITs delivered strong average annual return performance, outperforming the composite REITs in all three markets. This also sees data centre REITs being riskier than the overall REIT sector due to the non-traditional and maturing status of the data centre property sector. On a risk-adjusted basis, competitive performance was recorded for data centre REITs, with data centre REITs in the USA and Singapore outperforming their respective composite REITs. This performance is also delivered with significant portfolio diversification benefits with the stock market, resulting in data centre REITs contributing to the US mixed-asset portfolios across a diverse risk spectrum. Practical implications Institutional investors are now giving increased emphasis to alternative property sectors with better risk-return trade-offs. Improved performance and diversification benefits are achieved by supplementing existing property portfolios with non-traditional property sectors with counter-cyclical risk-return profiles, one of which is the data centre property sector. This sees data centres as an important alternative property sector, having technology-based drivers and being recognised as having a clear path towards institutionalisation with the major investors in the near future. Originality/value This paper is the first published empirical research analysis that specifically assessed the preliminary performance and diversification benefits of data centre REITs in the USA, Australia and Singapore. This research enables empirically validated, more informed and practical property investment decision making by institutional investors regarding the future strategic role of the data centre property sector as an innovative sector in the institutional property investment space.

Abstract Investment in REITs has become significant in recent years due to the stability and sustainable performance of the investment. A study on the management perspective is very important but this perspective is very limited. Asset management will derive from the profit optimization of the investment. Therefore, it is important to assess asset management strategies to ensure the sustainable performance of the assets. This paper aims to assess asset management strategies among matured REIT companies in developed countries in comparison with Malaysian REIT companies from the perspective of the managers. This research employed qualitative analyses by using content analysis techniques. A total of 41 REIT companies from the United States (US), Japan, Singapore, Australia and Malaysia were assessed. The analyses focused on the similarities and differences between the strategy framework identified in the literature review and the strategies adopted by global REITs and Malaysian REITs under review. The study will enable all REIT stakeholders to become well-informed on global REIT asset management that will derive the maximum profit from the investment. The success of developed countries’ REITs will provide guidelines for Malaysian REITs to adopt the best practice of strategic asset management from REITs in mature markets. Furthermore, this study is one of few papers that have discussed the issue of strategic property investment, particularly focusing on REITs.

This article argues that the Australia–United States Free Trade Agreement (AUSFTA) selectively recognises and affirms international conventions and agreements that promote the narrow economic self-interests of powerful groups. It does this whilst disregarding those international instruments — including the Convention on Biological Diversity and the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity — that seek to recognise and promote the cultural and intellectual property rights of Indigenous people. Although AUSFTA does make some concessions for Indigenous interests by providing negative exemptions from the chapters dealing with trade in services, government procurement and investment, these concessions are relatively weak in the face of the Agreement's pursuit of free trade. Using the model of Chapter 19, which imposes positive obligations on the United States and Australia to promote environmental interests, it is proposed that future Australian FTAs should enunciate positive obligations for Australia's Indigenous people.

In the context of Listed Property Trusts (LPTs), three strategic investment issues have received considerable prominence in recent years. This thesis focuses on both the quantitative and qualitative aspects of these three strategic investment issues. 1/ the role of international property in LPTs 2/ the effect of stapled-securities management structure 3/ the performance of property securities funds. The three investment issues are assessed in some detail. The findings of the research suggest that the addition of international LPTs in the Australian LPT portfolio has resulted in significant diversification gains. The findings of the mixed-asset portfolio analysis suggest adding international LPTs to the Australian mixed-asset portfolio.Portfolio performance improved considerably. Mixed-asset portfolio performance is further enhanced when direct property is included. It is evident from the study that the property research discussed has led to the development of new LPT methodologies and a fuller understanding of the investment dynamics of the LPT sector in Australia.
Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

The purpose of this dissertation is to determine whether size and book value to market value (BV/MV) effects dominate the property effects in the return generating process for Listed Property Trusts (LPTs) in Australia.The study endeavours to answer a critical question regarding listed property investment vehicles. That is, are they stocks or property? The approach, however, differs from previous studies in that it avoids utilising direct property data because of the inherent valuation-smoothing problems.Instead, it develops unique specialised indices for LPTs by size and BV/MV ratios. The analyses are conducted in four different ways. Amongst other findings, it is suggested that the two well known stock market effects, namely size and BV/MV effects, are significant in LPT returns. As such, by way of inference, it is suggested that property effects in LPT returns are subsumed under the effects of these two factors. The findings support the hybrid-asset hypothesis for LPTs; that is, LPTs are an asset class of its own, sharing to an extent, the characteristics of both shares and property direct.
Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

The concept "beneficial use" plays a pivotal role in South African water law reform. It forms the foundation of the mechanism to make water use rights available for the reform of the allocation of water use entitlements. The mechanism involves that water use rights that were unexercised in the two years before the promulgation of the National Water Act 36 of 1998 are not defined as existing lawful water uses. Where the concept "beneficial use" is utilised to cancel unexercised water use rights, it can cause potential hardship. Some people whose rights have been cancelled believe that they should be able to rely on the property clause in section 25 of the Constitution of 1996 to either have the legislation declared unconstitutional or to demand compensation. Section 25 of the Constitution of 1996 prohibits the arbitrary deprivation of property and states that property may only be expropriated for a public purpose or in the public interest, subject to compensation. Section 25(4) states, however, that the public interest includes the nation's commitment to land reform and to reforms to bring about equitable access to all South Africa's natural resources. It is clear from this that reforms to bring about access to water are allowed by the property clause. One of the main questions discussed in this thesis was whether section 32 of the National Water Act 36 of 1998 that made more water available for distribution for reform purposes by cancelling unexercised water user rights, leads to an arbitrary deprivation or an expropriation of property. It should be noted that section 32 of the National Water Act did not constitute an arbitrary deprivation of property, as sufficient reason exists for water law reform. A possible constitutional challenge based on the lack of due process of law because of the retrospective operation of the section may possibly be averted because of the existence of section 33 of the National Water Act. Section 33 of the Act mitigates hardship by allowing unexercised water uses to be declared existing lawful water uses in certain circumstances where a good reason for the non–exercise of the water use right existed. Even in cases where section 33 does not prevent section 32 from being regarded as an arbitrary deprivation of property because there still was not a proper procedure, the government will probably be able to show that the limitation in section 32 is, in terms of section 36(1) of the Constitution of 1996, reasonable and justifiable in an open and democratic society. Despite the fact that section 25(1) prohibits arbitrary deprivations, it does not prohibit the government from regulating competing rights to use water even though some people may be negatively affected by the regulation. Because the Minister merely acts as public trustee of the nation's water resources on behalf of the national government in terms section 3(1) of the National Water Act, it cannot be claimed that the government acquired the cancelled water use rights. A claim that compensation should be paid for an expropriation of property will therefore not succeed. Compensation is only payable in terms of section 22(6) and section 22(7) of the National Water Act 36 of 1998 for a loss of existing water entitlements, such as existing lawful water uses or existing licences. A court should thus consider interpreting section 25 by providing for compensation where an individual was unfairly burdened and was therefore denied the protection of the equality clause in section 9 of the Constitution when his unexercised water use rights were cancelled by section 32. The concept "beneficial use" currently restricts the content of the water use entitlement existing in terms of section 4 of the National Water Act 36 of 1998. The loss of the entitlement when inter alia a licence for an existing lawful water use is refused, is not protected by the payment of compensation when water is used in an unfair or disproportionate manner, because such utilisation would not be regarded to be beneficial use. It became apparent that in terms of the current water law dispensation in South Africa, the possibility of compensation for an amendment of a water use licence and the refusal of a licence for an existing lawful water use implies that a water use entitlement is a right in property. The fact that section 22(7) of the National Water Act states that the amount of the compensation must be determined in accordance with section 25(3) of the Constitution implies that the legislature also recognises that a water use entitlement is constitutional property. Section 22(7) of the National Water Act underlines the basic premises of the National Water Act by subjecting the amount of the compensation that is payable to the same limitations that restrict the entitlement to use the water. The stipulations of section 22(7) draw the attention to the fact that the exercise of both existing lawful water uses and water use licences as rights in property is subject to basic principles of the National Water Act such as the Reserve and the concepts "public trusteeship" and "beneficial use" of the water resources. The fact that compensation is only payable when there has been severe prejudice to the economic viability of an undertaking implies that water use entitlements have to be exercised at the time of the application for the compensation to be payable. The concept "beneficial use" – in the sense that a water use must not be wasteful or polluting and in the sense that only water use entitlements that are being exercised are protected – thus restricts the water use entitlement as a property right. During the research, American and Australian water law reform and their interpretation of their property clauses were compared to water law reform in South Africa and the South African property clause. Furthermore, Australian policy to encourage more beneficial water use by the trade in water entitlements or allocations, was also discussed. South Africans will likely in future be encouraged to trade in water use entitlements or allocations. The objective with allowing the trade in water use entitlements or allocations is to encourage people to rather use water for uses with a high value instead of uses with a lower value. In this way the concept "beneficial use" may be broadened to include water allocation or entitlement trading. However, it was argued that a disproportionate impact on third parties would mean that water allocation or entitlement trading would in some cases not be regarded as beneficial use anymore.
Thesis (LL.D.)--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2011.

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter begins with a definition of fiduciary relationships as presented by a retired judge of the High Court of Australia, Sir Anthony Mason. According to Mason, the relationship is a ‘concept in search of a principle’. Fiduciary relationships are voluntary, and some relationships, such as solicitor–client, are well recognized as fiduciary in nature. However, fiduciary relationships can arise in a wide variety of situations. A fiduciary owes a duty of loyalty to his or her principal, always acting in the best interests of said principal. Fiduciary obligations are strict, and any profits made by the fiduciary in breach must be disgorged to his or her principal. Where the profits are made from property that rightfully belonged to the trust, a constructive trust may be imposed upon the profits.