Purpose -This paper summarises the main research findings from a detailed, qualitative set of structured interviews and case studies of private finance initiative (PFI) schemes in the UK, which involve the construction of built facilities. The research, which was funded by the Foundation for the Built Environment, examines the emergence of PFI in the UK. Benefits and problems in the PFI process are investigated. Best practice, the key critical factors for success, and lessons for the future are also analysed. Design/methodology/approach -The research is based around 11 semi-structured interviews conducted with stakeholders in key PFI projects in the UK. Findings -The research demonstrates that value for money and risk transfer are key success criteria. High procurement and transaction costs are a feature of PFI projects, and the large-scale nature of PFI projects frequently acts as barrier to entry.Research limitations/implications -The research is based on a limited number of in-depth case study interviews. The paper also shows that further research is needed to find better ways to measure these concepts empirically. Practical implications -The paper is important in highlighting four main areas of practical improvement in the PFI process: value for money assessment; establishing end-user needs; developing competitive markets and developing appropriate skills in the public sector. Originality/value -The paper examines the drivers, barriers and critical success factors for PFI in the UK for the first time in detail and will be of value to property investors, financiers, and others involved in the PFI process.

Heritage tourism depends on a physical resource based primarily on listed buildings and scheduled monuments. Visiting or staying in a historic building provides a rich tourism experience, but historic environments date from eras when access for disabled people was not a consideration. Current UK Government policy now promotes social inclusion via an array of equal opportunities, widening participation and anti‐discrimination policies. Historic environments enjoy considerable legislative protection from adverse change, but now need to balance conservation with public access for all. This paper discusses the basis of research being undertaken by The College of Estate Management funded by the Mercers Company of London and the Harold Samuel Trust. It assesses how the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act has changed the legal obligations of owners/operators in managing access to listed buildings in tourism use. It also examines the key stakeholders and power structures in the management of historic buildings and distinguishes other important players in the management process.

PurposeThis paper seeks to summarise the main research findings from a detailed, qualitative set of structured interviews and case studies of Real Estate Partnership (REP) schemes in the UK, which involve the construction of built facilities. The research, which was funded by the Foundation for the Built Environment, examines the evolution of REPs in the UK and in Europe. The paper also aims to analyse best practice, critical factors for success, and lessons for the future.Design/methodology/approachThe research in this paper is based around ten semi‐structured interviews conducted with senior representatives from corporate occupiers, property consultants, legal practices and REP service providers.FindingsThe research in the paper demonstrates that REPs are particularly suited to the UK, where lease lengths are relatively long, and the level of corporate real estate owner‐occupation is often higher than elsewhere. It also shows that further research is needed to examine the future shape and form of the UK REP market.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper is based on a limited number of in‐depth case study interviews. The paper shows that further research is needed to find better ways to examine REPs empirically.Practical implicationsThe paper is important in highlighting a number of main issues in developing REPs: identifying with occupier's objectives; risk transfer and size of contract; and developing appropriate innovation and skills.Originality/valueThe paper examines the drivers, barriers and critical success factors (at strategic and operational levels) for REPs in the UK in detail and will be of value to property managers, facilities managers, investors, financiers, and others involved in the REP process.

Property is a key resource for the delivery of public services and needs to be managed well. The previous Conservative government had a conviction that better value public services could be delivered by harnessing private sector expertise and, since the late 1980s, embarked on an unprecedented level of competitive tendering. This procurement method had extended to the appointment of property consultants, but the system encountered difficulties which research by the College of Estate Management (CEM) sought to explain. The research, undertaken in 1995 and 1996, involved interviews and major questionnaire surveys covering managers and property professionals in the public and private sectors, leading to recommendations about changes to practice and policy. This paper traces developments in local government, by comparison with central government, from before the advent of compulsory competitive tendering (CCT) for property services in April 1996 through to the latest changes proposed by the new Labour government after May 1997. It concludes that competition is an important management tool, but recommends greater flexibility in the way procurement is implemented.

The UK experienced widespread and disastrous flood events in 2007 and 2010, and the future incidence of flooding is predicted to increase. Understandably much media attention and research has focused on the impacts on people, their homes and jobs, and the future implications for flood risk insurance that has been a feature of the UK market. Research on flood risk and property undertaken at the College of Estate Management in 2006 found very little literature covering the effect of flooding on commercial property and the risks to property investment. Property is an important diversification asset in investment portfolios that underpins pensions, insurance and savings plans. Investors surveyed reported undertaking flood risk assessments in conjunction with property acquisitions, but none reviewed the flood risk status of property held in their portfolio, although they monitored other aspects of building performance. This is now changing and the IPD sustainable property index has introduced flood risk monitoring. This paper is based on research in 2010-2011 that examines the process of due diligence for flood risk adopted by commercial property investors to identify risks, inform purchase decisions and devise subsequent actions geared to mitigating and managing flood risk. Case studies illustrate the process, derived from interviews with major investment funds, their professional advisers and other stakeholder representatives, including environmental consultants, valuers, solicitors, lenders and the insurance industry. The paper explores the challenges to investment decision making and property valuation, given continuing uncertainties associated with flood risk predictions. The case is made for further research to establish the extent of UK investment property potentially at risk from flooding, the degree of risk to which it is exposed and to inform the way in which the risk is translated into valuation. Property represents about 4% of total investment assets under management in the UK (and 2.8% in the institutional market), but is significant in absolute terms given a market value estimated by IMA at £4.4trn. About 20% by value is in central London, known to be one of the most at risk cities globally for flooding-but there is otherwise no clear picture of where and how much commercial investment property could be at risk. This paper makes the case for finding out.