valuation research topics

Valuation Studies

Announcements

Two new theme calls open.

New Valuation Studies Themes Calls for papers open. General informaiton here .

Theme call 4: Valuing Energy: unpacking value in energy resources, technologies and processes (call here ).

Theme call 5: Comparing, Categorizing, Valuating: Entangled Modes of Ordering (call here ).

Issue 10(1) is out!

Valuation Studies  sets out to offer an academic platform for research and debate on the problem of valuation. Valuation indeed stands as a crucial  problem  for the social sciences and the humanities today, in more than one way. Understanding the tensions, determinants, contexts and effects of valuation practices appears indeed as a decisive requirement for the understanding of how our world is constructed, transformed or fractured. An interdisciplinary approach is required in order to investigate the technical cultures, the political imaginaries, the historical processes, the methodological problems and the institutional settings that shape the ways in which things are valued, and to identify relevant shifts, controversies and struggles. Sociological, anthropological, cultural, political, semiotic, historiographic, legal, institutional, critical, organisational approaches to the study of valuation phenomena are needed in order to establish tractable, actionable interdisciplinary knowledge on valuation as a problem.

Valuation Studies ISSN: 2001-5992

Editorial: Property valuation – methods and models: Property valuation research – make a contribution

Journal of Property Investment & Finance

ISSN : 1463-578X

Article publication date: 2 August 2021

Issue publication date: 5 August 2021

French, N. (2021), "Editorial: Property valuation – methods and models: Property valuation research – make a contribution", Journal of Property Investment & Finance , Vol. 39 No. 5, p. 425. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPIF-08-2021-180

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2021, Emerald Publishing Limited

Welcome to this special themed issue on property valuation – methods and models. This was not an issue that was advertised as a special issue; it is a coincidental collection of papers submitted to a regular issue on the same topic. And that brings me to the central theme of this editorial, the importance of property valuation as a research topic and the ebb and flow of the subject over time. When Andrew Baum started this journal back in 1982, it was called “The Journal of Valuation,” and all the papers were on the topic of practical applied valuations. This issue mirrors the same types of papers; articles that are directly relevant to the property valuation profession.

There is an appetite for such research and, looking at the download numbers for the journal, valuation papers have always in the top ten downloads each year every year. It is therefore surprising that when you look at the majority of authors of these papers, they are the same names that have been publishing on the topic for the last 20 or 30 years. So where are the young researchers on the topic? Where is the next generation of valuer academics and scribes? Who is going to carry the mantle going forward?

There is an opportunity for a young academic to take this topic and make it their own. Back in 1981, in the UK, there was no real literature on the topic apart from the short, albeit insightful, short briefings in the weekly Estates Gazette. The Journal of Valuation was the both the catalyst and outlet for a wealth of articles that helped the valuation profession establish itself as a learned vocation. And, with two name changes since, this is still true of the Journal of Property Investment & Finance . But we need new young authors.

So if you want to establish a career for yourself and you want to build on the library of the literature that is now at your fingertips, do so. Make a contribution.

Related articles

We’re listening — tell us what you think, something didn’t work….

Report bugs here

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Join us on our journey

Platform update page.

Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

Questions & More Information

Answers to the most commonly asked questions here

Valuation: Measuring and Managing the Value of Companies, 7th edition

At the crossroads of corporate strategy and finance lies valuation. This book enables everyone, from the budding professional to the seasoned manager, to excel at measuring and maximizing shareholder and company value.

John Wiley & Sons, 2020 | Tim Koller, Marc Goedhart, David Wessels

Valuation: Measuring and Managing the Value of Companies , celebrating 30 years in print, is now in its seventh edition (John Wiley & Sons, June 2020). Carefully revised and updated, this edition includes new insights on topics such as digital; environmental, social, and governance issues; and long-term investing, as well as fresh case studies.

Clear, accessible chapters cover the fundamental principles of value creation, analysis and forecasting of performance, capital structure and dividends, valuation of high-growth companies, and much more. Financial Times calls the book “one of the practitioners’ best guides to valuation.”

This book provides useful information, such as the following, for financial professionals in any location:

• complete, detailed guidance on every crucial aspect of corporate valuation
• explanation of the strategies, techniques, and nuances of valuation that every manager needs to know
• details on both core and advanced valuation techniques and management strategies

In addition, the book’s companion website provides more information on key issues in valuation, including through videos, discussions of trending topics, and real-world valuation examples from capital markets.

Valuation: Measuring and Managing the Value of Companies is a handbook that can help managers, investors, and students understand how to foster corporate health and create value for the future—goals that have never been more timely.

Inside Valuation

With the authors, in the news, yahoo finance “on the move”, valuewalk’s value talks, the startup life, about the authors.

Tim Koller is a partner in McKinsey's Stamford, Connecticut, office, where he is a founder of McKinsey's Strategy and Corporate Finance Insights team, a global group of corporate-finance expert consultants. In his 35 years in consulting, Tim has served clients globally on corporate strategy and capital markets, mergers and acquisitions transactions, and strategic planning and resource allocation. He leads the firm's research activities in valuation and capital markets. Before joining McKinsey, he worked with Stern Stewart & Company and with Mobil Corporation. He received his MBA from the University of Chicago.

Marc Goedhart is a senior expert in McKinsey's Amsterdam office and an endowed professor of corporate valuation at Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University (RSM). Over the past 25 years, Marc has served clients across Europe on portfolio restructuring, M&A transactions, and performance management. He received his PhD in finance from Erasmus University.

David Wessels is an adjunct professor of finance at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. Named by Bloomberg Businessweek as one of America's top business school instructors, he teaches courses on corporate valuation and private equity at the MBA and executive MBA levels. David is also a director in Wharton's executive education group, serving on the executive development faculties of several Fortune 500 companies. A former consultant with McKinsey, he received his PhD from the University of California at Los Angeles.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Building a Business
• Published: 27 December 2019

BUILDING A BUSINESS

Integrating scientific considerations into R&D project valuation

• Saco J. de Visser 1 ,
• Adam F. Cohen 2 &
• Marcel J. H. Kenter 3  

Nature Biotechnology volume  38 ,  pages 14–18 ( 2020 ) Cite this article

3322 Accesses

5 Citations

6 Altmetric

Metrics details

Traditional valuation approaches rarely take into account scientific considerations specific to a R&D project. A question-based approach using real options offers a solution.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 print issues and online access

195,33 € per year

only 16,28 € per issue

Buy this article

• Purchase on Springer Link
• Instant access to full article PDF

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Bogdan, B. & Villiger, R. Valuation in Life Sciences, A Practical Guide (Springer-Verlag, 2007)

Stewart, J. J., Allison, P. N. & Johnson, R. S. Nat. Biotechnol. 19 , 813–817 (2001).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Kola, I. & Landis, J. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 3 , 711–715 (2004).

Johal, S. S., Oliver, P. & Williams, H. C. J. Med. Mark. 8 , 101–112 (2008).

Article   Google Scholar  

Pietzsch, J. B., Shluzas, L. A., Paté-Cornell, M. E., Yock, P. G. & Linehan, J. H. J. Med. Dev. 3 , 021004-1–021004-15 (2009).

Google Scholar  

ICH Expert Working Group. ICH Harmonised Tripartite Guideline: General Considerations for Clinical Trials E8 , Step 4 version (International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use, 1997).

Huchzermeier, A. & Loch, C. H. Manag. Sci. 47 , 85–101 (2001).

Harrison, M. H. & Lerer, L. Nat. Biotechnol. 29 , 223 (2002).

Stewart, J. J. Nat. Biotechnol. 29 , 223–224 (2002).

Villiger, R. & Bogdan, B. Drug Discov. Today 9 , 552–553 (2004).

Nichols, N. Harv. Bus. Rev. 72 , 89–99 (1994).

Hartmann, M. & Ali Hassan, A. Res. Policy 35 , 343–354 (2006).

Evers, R. et al. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 96 , 291–295 (2014).

Dolgos, H. et al. Drug Discov. Today 21 , 517–526 (2016).

Kenter, M. J. H. & Cohen, A. F. Lancet 368 , 1387–1391 (2006).

de Visser, S. A Question Based Approach to Drug Development . PhD Thesis, Leiden Univ. (Leiden, the Netherlands, 2003).

Cohen, A. F., Burggraaf, J., van Gerven, J. M. A., Moerland, M. & Groeneveld, G. J. Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 55 , 55–74 (2015).

Zhang, S. & Babovic, A. Decis. Support Syst. 51 , 119–129 (2011).

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (ZonMw), The Hague, the Netherlands

Saco J. de Visser

Centre for Human Drug Research (CHDR InnoS), Leiden, the Netherlands

Adam F. Cohen

Paul Janssen Futurelab, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands

Marcel J. H. Kenter

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saco J. de Visser .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary materials.

Supplementary Figs. 1 and 2 and Supplementary Table 1

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

de Visser, S.J., Cohen, A.F. & Kenter, M.J.H. Integrating scientific considerations into R&D project valuation. Nat Biotechnol 38 , 14–18 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-019-0358-x

Download citation

Published : 27 December 2019

Issue Date : January 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-019-0358-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

An Overview of Corporate Valuation

• First Online: 05 August 2023

Cite this chapter

• Benedicto Kulwizira Lukanima 2  

Part of the book series: Classroom Companion: Business ((CCB))

405 Accesses

Valuation is one of the important topics in the business field, and it plays a key role in many areas of finance such as corporate finance, mergers and acquisitions (M&A), and portfolio management. Although the term “valuation” seems to be common, many people may be unaware of its core components. There are different ways in which valuation can be performed—hence, it is not an absolute process. Therefore, different analysts recommend different values for the same company or equity, simply because of different valuation approaches depending on valuation purposes and the suitability of valuation approaches. From this point of view, the definition of value (or valuation) depends on the valuation approach—for example, we have intrinsic value, relative value, market value, and book value.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Bibliography

Brown, G.R. (1998), The idea that valuation is an art, not a science, is hardly mentioned these days, Journal of Property Valuation, and Investment , 16 (1). doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/jpvi.1998.11216aaa.001

DePamphilis, D. M (2019), Mergers and Acquisitions Cash Flow Valuation Basics, In: Mergers, Acquisitions, and Other Restructuring Activities: An Integrated Approach to Process, Tools, Cases, and Solutions 10th ed. , Elsevier Inc., 177 – 205, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/C2017-0-02823-9

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Fabozzi, F. J., Focardi, F. M., & Jonas, C. (2017), Equity Valuation: Science, Art, or Craft ? Issue 4, CFA Institute.

Google Scholar  

Fischoff, S. (2021), Business Valuation Is More Art Than Science, Available vis Financial Poise, https://www.financialpoise.com/art-of-business-valuation/ .Accessed on July 1, 2021.

Mackintosh, J. (2022). Value Investing Is Back. But for How Long? A bounce in bond yields is good news for dividend payers. Available via The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/value-investing-is-back-but-for-how-long-11643726540 . Accessed February 01, 2022.

Nelson, B. (2022). Investing’s First Principles: The Discounted Cash Flow Model. Available via CFA. https://blogs.cfainstitute.org/investor/2022/01/19/investings-first-principles-the-discounted-cash-flow-model/ . Accessed January 19, 2022.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Finance and Accounting, Universidad del Norte, Barranquilla, Colombia

Benedicto Kulwizira Lukanima

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Benedicto Kulwizira Lukanima .

1 Electronic Supplementary Material

Chapter slides—refer to the PowerPoint files for ► Chap. 1 . (PPTX 1548 kb)

Excel illustrations—refer to Excel workings for ► Chap. 1 . (XLSX 17 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Kulwizira Lukanima, B. (2023). An Overview of Corporate Valuation. In: Corporate Valuation. Classroom Companion: Business. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28267-6_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28267-6_1

Published : 05 August 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-28266-9

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-28267-6

eBook Packages : Economics and Finance Economics and Finance (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Int J Environ Res Public Health

Analysis of Academic Literature on Environmental Valuation

Francisco guijarro.

1 Research Institute for Pure and Applied Mathematics, Universitat Politècnica de València, 46022 Valencia, Spain

Prodromos Tsinaslanidis

2 Department of Economics, University of Western Macedonia, 52100 Kastoria, Greece

Environmental valuation refers to a variety of techniques to assign monetary values to environmental impacts, especially non-market impacts. It has experienced a steady growth in the number of publications on the subject in the last 30 years. We performed a search for papers containing the term “environmental valuation” in the title, abstract, or keywords. The search was conducted with an online literature search engine of the Web of Science (WoS) electronic databases. A search of this database revealed that the term “environmental valuation” appeared for the first time in 1987. Since then a large number of studies have been published, including significant breakthroughs in theory and applications. In the present work 661 publications were selected for a review of the literature on environmental valuation over the period 1987–2019. This paper analyzes the evolution of the leading methodologies and authors, highlights the preference for the choice experiment method over the contingent valuation method, and shows that relatively few papers have had a strong impact on the researchers in this area.

1. Introduction

Environmental valuation has traditionally been considered in the context of non-market valuation. Its aim is to obtain a monetary measure of the benefit or cost to the welfare of individuals and social groups of environmental improvement interventions or the consequences of environmental degradation [ 1 , 2 ]. However, the ultimate goal is not to value a (non-market) environmental good in monetary terms, but to provide decision-makers with the necessary tools to take the appropriate political initiatives to efficiently allocate resources, impose taxes and design compensation schemes [ 3 , 4 ], even after assuming the difficulties of developing theoretically grounded practical policy tools and avoiding political manipulation [ 5 ].

Environmental valuation methods have been used to determine the benefits and costs related to the use of environmental goods, improving their conditions or remedying environmental damage and must consider the complexity of the area. For example, the economic benefits of national parks extend beyond tourism; natural amenities and recreation facilities often serve to attract and retain people, entrepreneurs, businesses, and retirees [ 6 ]. On the other hand, some researchers have provided evidence of how worsening environmental conditions can affect the value of other goods. For example, noise and air pollution from road traffic have been reported to negatively impact real estate prices [ 7 , 8 ], and [ 9 ] reported that 55% of those surveyed in Brisbane (Australia) considered that noise adversely affected the value of their property.

Economists have traditionally developed tools to measure environmental values by estimating individuals’ willingness to pay to benefit from environmental goods. The costs associated with environmental deterioration are measured by the loss suffered by the individuals who benefited from the damaged good, and deciding the appropriate compensation for losing the benefit (willingness to accept) [ 10 , 11 ].

The general approach of Total Economic Value (TEV) combines all the different values, which are grouped according to the service provided by the environmental good ( Figure 1 ). The use values are those derived from the actual use of the resource, while the non-use values are not related to its present use. The former includes the direct use value—the value derived from the direct use and exploitation of the environmental good, the ecological value—defined by the benefits that environmental goods provide to support forms of life and biodiversity and the option value—related to future use opportunities of the good. Non-use values are composed of the existence value—the value that individuals give to environmental goods for their mere existence—and the bequest value—the value estimated by individuals when considering the use of goods in the future by their heirs.

The concept of Total Economic Value of environment, taken from [ 12 ].

The aim of environmental valuation methods is to measure the values included in TEV. Although some authors have classified valuation methods from a more general perspective [ 13 ], the methods specifically related to environmental valuation can be classified as follows:

• - Contingent valuation method. Values are estimated in a hypothetical market based on surveys in which respondents are asked how much they are willing to pay for the use and conservation of an environmental good. The purpose of contingent valuation is to estimate individual willingness to pay for changes in the quantity or quality of environmental goods or services [ 3 ].
• - Choice experiment method. This method provides the respondents with alternative choices in which different environmental goods are defined by their attributes. According to [ 14 ], “the most significant advance in environmental valuation may be to move away from a focus on value and focus instead on choice behaviour and data that generate information on choices.”.
• - Travel cost method. Values are estimated by accounting for the cost incurred by people who travel to visit an environmental good. The method assumes that the willingness to pay must be at least as large as the travel cost incurred.
• - Hedonic price method. Values are computed from the prices of traded goods. This approach is frequently used when the price of traded goods is influenced by environmental factors [ 8 ].

The field of environmental valuation has recently expanded both from a theoretical and practical point of view [ 15 ]. This paper aims to outline the advances made by researchers according to their impact on the research area and highlights the key aspects covered by leaders in this field.

To determine the most important topics and assess the academic impact of environmental valuation, we performed a bibliometric analysis considering publications in the Web of Science from 1987 to 2019. We assessed their productivity through their historical evolution and the distribution of papers by journal. The units of analysis were ordered by the citation and co-citation structure and the results gave insights into the organization and future trends on research in environmental valuation.

We performed a search for papers containing the term “environmental valuation” in the title, abstract or keywords. The search was conducted on the online literature search engine of the Web of Science electronic databases. On 17 December 2019 we obtained 661 results from the search engine covering the period 1987–2019, including articles, book chapters, proceedings papers and reviews of 1442 authors. Table 1 shows the protocol followed to perform the data collection and some key figures.

Procedure for the data collection and key figures.

The dataset is analysed in the following section on R [ 16 ], a free software environment for statistical computing and graphics. The bibliometrix [ 17 ] package was used to compile most of the tables in this paper.

3.1. Environmental Evaluation Publication History

The number of publications per year is depicted in Figure 2 . The first known paper on environmental valuation, published in 1987, was followed by a steady increase in number of environmental valuation-related publications over time.

Distribution of Environmental valuation publications by year (1987–2019).

Although the research was published in a wide range of journals, the 4 most popular were: Ecological Economics, Environmental & Resource Economics, Environmental Values, and Journal of Environmental Management– with nearly 30% of the studies ( Table 2 ). Ecological Economics stands out as the most prolific source on this subject with 109 papers, which represents 16.5% of the total sample. Not surprisingly, the top Journals are particularly involved with environmental and ecological issues. The first 6 Journals are grouped into Environmental Sciences or Environmental Studies categories from the Journal Citation Reports of the Web of Science. When taking the impact factor into consideration, the top 6 Journals were ranked into the first quartile of their corresponding categories in 2018, while the rest of Journals are between the first and second quartile in most cases.

Most relevant journals that have published the greatest number of environmental valuation papers.

3.2. Leading Topics in Environmental Valuation Research

The most common keywords used by researchers include “environmental evaluation”, “willingness to pay”, and “ecosystem services” ( Table 3 ). The keyword “environmental valuation” was used in 38% of the publications analyzed. The following keywords give useful insights into the evolution of the research topic and the methods developed and applied to value environmental goods and damage. The second most often used keyword is “willingness to pay”, which is commonly found in publications related to stated preference methods. The two abovementioned approaches to this group of environmental valuation methods occupy positions 4 (choice experiment) and 5 (contingent valuation). The choice experiment method also appears in the 7th position as “choice experiments”. The total of both alternatives (78) comes just after the “environmental valuation” keyword.

The 10 most used keywords by number of publications related with environmental valuation.

As the search procedure is automatic, the system differentiates “Choice experiment” from “Choice experiments”. In order to consider all the possible synonyms, we conducted a new experiment by searching for individual terms in the keywords ( Table 3 ). For example, the word “choice” was used to collect all the papers with a keyword related to the choice experiment method. This provided similar expressions to those given in Table 3 : Choice modeling, Choice modelling, Choice model, Choice experiment method, etc. The analysis showed that keywords related to the choice experiment method appeared in 165 papers, while other methods had a lower frequency (contingent valuation method, 69; hedonic price method, 18; travel cost method, 11).

The relevance of choice experiments as a prominent keyword used by researchers has increased over time. We show the evolution of four keyword categories through 3 equally spaced subperiods: 1987–1997, 1998–2008 and 2009–2019 ( Figure 3 ). The first two subperiods were dominated by keywords associated with contingent valuation methods (with labels “contingent valuation” and “contingent valuation method”) and cost-benefit analysis. However, a sudden change was found in the trend during the subperiod 2009–2019. During this time the choice experiments (with labels “choice experiment”, “choice experiments” and “choice experiment model”) dominated the researchers’ interest, closely followed by the willingness to pay keyword.

Evolution of the main keywords used by researchers in environmental valuation.

The popularity of the choice experiment method –over the contingent valuation method—was predicted by Adamowicz [ 14 ]: “The most significant advance in environmental valuation may be to move away from a focus on value and focus instead on choice behaviour and data that generate information on choices.” We can suggest several reasons to support the observed trend. First, the design of both methodologies makes the choice experiment method to extract more information than the contingent valuation method does. Results from contingent valuation are elicited by asking respondents for their willingness to pay (or willingness to accept). In a bidding game, the respondent is asked if he is willing to pay a specific amount of money. If the answer is yes, a higher amount is asked and, if the answer is no, a lower amount is proposed. The questionnaire is repeated until an initial yes changes to a no or vice versa. However, the choice experiment method uses attributes to define alternatives and information of the willingness to pay is obtained by observing the choices made by respondents [ 18 ]. As stated by Hoyos [ 15 ], the choice experiment method allows estimating the mean willingness to pay and also the marginal willingness to pay for the different attributes. Handling with more alternatives and attributes makes the application of the choice experiment more complex. However, its implementation has been facilitated by the development of statistical software. Furthermore, web-based surveys are becoming popular and easy to implement and the number of connected people to the internet keeps increasing, which limits biased sampling, then allowing presenting the choice set in a friendly manner [ 19 ]. An additional benefit from using the choice experiment method is related with the sensitivity to scope. This is one of the main concerns about the contingent valuation method, where the use of labels in the choice experiment may mitigate the lack of sensitivity to the scope [ 19 ].

3.3. The Most Influential Authors in Environmental Valuation

The most prominent authors in an area of research can be identified by citation analysis. Of the top 10 most influential publications on environmental valuation according to the number of citations, Boxall and Adamowicz [ 20 ] leads with 527 citations ( Table 4 ). The authors use a latent class model to evaluate choice behaviour as a function of observable attributes of the choices and latent heterogeneity in the respondents’ characteristics. Although it has the highest number of citations, the paper by Lancsar and Louviere [ 21 ] received more cites on a yearly basis. The choice experiment model dominates the top ranked papers of Table 4 in which the authors introduce different environmental valuation examples to illustrate their proposals. Some of the top ranked papers are devoted either to the demonstration of case studies or to a review of the literature.

The 10 most frequently cited papers on environmental valuation.

We have analyzed the relevance of different authors in the topic according to the number of publications and the number of citations per year. Figure 4 gives one line to each author, where the extremes represent the year of the first (left circle) and last publication (right circle). Hanley was cited for the longest period, which was 25 years (1995–2019). The diameter of the circles varies in proportion to the number of papers published each year and the colour denotes the number of cites received. For example, the paper by Hanley et al. [ 22 ] has the highest number of citations per year (21.9) in the table. Although this is not the most cited paper according to the bibliographic analysis, it appears in the figure because Hanley is the most prolific researcher.

Relevance of authors according to their production and the number of citations.

The figure distinguishes two groups of authors. The first incorporates those who have been publishing on the topic for roughly 20 years: Hanley, Adamowicz, Boxall, Spash and Brouwer. The other group contains those who published between 2007 and 2019: Meyerhoff, Schaafsma, Hoyos, Mariel and Thorsen.

It should be noted that a few papers are responsible for a high percentage of the citations ( Figure 5 ). gives the number of citations in descending order. Only 7 papers received more than 300 citations for the whole period analyzed, while 55.7% received 10 or fewer. This shows that only a few papers influenced this research topic during this period.

Distribution of citations per paper.

Lastly, there is another interesting point related to the authors’ affiliation country; Figure 6 separates the papers whose authors’ affiliations are all located at the same country (Single Country Publications, SCP) and those with authors’ affiliations from different countries (Multiple Country Publications, MCP). The UK and the USA dominate the research on environmental valuation according to the number of papers published during the analyzed period. There are only 5 European countries in the top 10, while China is the only Asian representative. China is also in the last position in the top 10. Regarding the collaboration between authors from different countries, researchers from the UK and Spain are the most likely to collaborate in multinational publications, while Brazilian and Chinese affiliations produced the fewest publications with contributions from foreign authors.

Most productive countries in environmental valuation.

3.4. Co-Citation Analysis

This subsection begins with some comments about what productivity is in the field of research publication. Of course this is a wide field of debate, but some preliminaries must be established before proceeding with the co-citation analysis. According to [ 29 ], there are several measures to account for productivity. The most basic bibliometric measure is the number of papers published, which provides the raw data for all citation analysis. Another measure is the number of citations, which determines the recognition and influence of a paper. Then we can distinguish between citations received from papers published in Journals indexed in WoS, or citations received for other Journals not considered in WoS. As stated by [ 29 ], a measure of association between highly cited papers is used to form clusters: “That measure is the number of times pairs of papers have been co-cited, that is, the number of later papers that have cited both of them”. Hence, co-citation implies that two papers are cited in a third paper and assumes that both papers are related. We have performed a co-citation analysis by differentiating 3 main clusters in different colours ( Figure 7 ). The references of cluster 1 are represented by the book by Mitchell and Carson [ 30 ], in which the authors describe the contingent valuation method and claim that “the contingent valuation (CV) method offers the most promising approach for determining public willingness to pay for many public goods”. However, the positivist perspective in Mitchell and Carson [ 30 ] is contested by other prominent works in the same group. The report in Arrow et al. [ 31 ] indicate several drawbacks to the contingent valuation method and gives some guidelines to be used if the proposal is to produce useful information for natural resource damage assessment. The research in Kahneman and Knetsch [ 32 ] reports the most serious shortcoming of the CV method. According to these authors: “the assessed value of a public good is demonstrably arbitrary, because willingness to pay for the same good can vary over a wide range depending on whether the good is assessed on its own or embedded as part of a more inclusive package”. There is a more recent relevant book in this group, Bateman et al. [ 33 ], which gives a general approach to stated preferences techniques with application to different non-market goods and services.

Co-citation network analysis.

The cluster 2 (in red) elicited from the co-citation analysis is led by the paper by Boxall et al. [ 26 ], “A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation”. This paper introduces an empirical comparison of the contingent valuation method and choice experiments. Most papers in this group follow the approach in Boxall et al. [ 26 ]. For example, Adamowicz et al. [ 34 ] examine the choice experiment as “an extension or variant of contingent valuation”. The paper in Adamowicz et al. [ 35 ] had earlier compared a stated preference model and a revealed preference model for recreational site choice. The earliest work in the group is the book by Ben-Akiva et al. [ 36 ], which analyzes the discrete choice method from a more general perspective.

And lastly, the cluster 3 covers different references related to choice modelling approaches but with a different approach to the publications in the second group. Again, a single book is the leader in number of cites: Louviere et al. [ 37 ]. Interestingly, this book is not the only reference which gives a survey of choice modelling. The paper by Hoyos [ 15 ] provides a review of the state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments; Hanley et al. [ 22 ] examine the choice modelling approach to environmental valuation. The authors state that this methodology “can be considered as an alternative to more familiar valuation techniques based on stated preferences such as the contingent valuation method”; Hanley et al. [ 23 ] also outline choice experiments and analyze its roots in Lancaster’s characteristics theory of value; while the paper by Lancaster [ 38 ] is another relevant work in this group.

4. Discussion

Environmental valuation is intrinsically difficult because realistic environmental valuation situations are rarely observed, and singularities in environmental assets impede a uniform treatment of those values outlined by the Total Economic Value. Notwithstanding the difficulties, a plethora of papers have been published during the last decades.

As a result of this research it can be concluded that revealed preferences methodologies are surpassed by works focused on stated preference methods for the analyzed period as a whole. The research discloses the relevance of stated preference methods over revealed preferences methods, with a clear dominance of choice experiment over any other environmental valuation method, as predicted by Adamowicz [ 14 ]. The complexity of the choice experiment method has resulted in new challenges and research lines for academics. Choosing and implementing experimental designs, interpreting standard and more advanced random utility models, and estimating measures of willingness-to-pay are some of the issues covered by researchers [ 39 ].

Differences on the environmental valuation have been also revealed by the co-citation analysis, which reports different clusters by considering the methods used in the environmental valuation process. Despite its past influence, none of the travel cost and hedonic price methods is in the 10 most popular methods of environmental valuation, according to the keywords in the dataset used. In addition, the leading Journals in the publication of environmental valuation papers are ranked in prominent positions by WoS in their corresponding categories. The paper also distinguish two groups of authors according to the time they have published on the topic. The first group initiates the growth of the area in the mid-1990s, while the second group concentrates its impact mainly from 2010.

The abovementioned differences in the use of the environmental valuation methods do not imply that one method is unequivocally better or worse than another since its appropriateness depends on a particular situation. In other words, no single method is suitable in all valuation scenarios. Rather, the choice of the valuation method is context-specific. Revealed preference methods can be prioritized when budget and time are constrained. Stated preference methods require a complex questionnaire development and data analysis, which translates into an additional need of resources (both money and time). Conversely, revealed preference methods can only capture use values, while stated preference methods can estimate both use and non-use values. In addition, using multiple methodologies can be appropriate in some situations. For example, the combination of revealed and stated preference methods can improve benefit estimation of a single component [ 35 ]. This approach can be useful when a revealed preference method is utilized as the main valuation instrument, but some environmental values are more accurately estimated by using another method and the result is aggregated. In this case, the researcher must be careful to avoid double counting if the components of value captured by the different methods overlap [ 40 ].

5. Conclusions

From the evolution of environmental valuation publications in the last 30 years, we can assert that the discipline has been consolidated. Papers related to choice experiments have dominated academic production in the last decade. In the current stage of environmental valuation researchers will have to cope with new challenges and emerging trends. As in other research areas, the increasing ability to collect enormous amounts of data facilitates the creation of the available massive databases, which can be used to take environmental valuation methodologies to the next stage in their evolution by incorporating machine learning techniques in the valuation process. However, this evolution should not be restricted to new applications of the well-known valuation methods only. Researchers must develop new approaches to deal with new elements in the valuation process. We expect that climate change, as one of the defining challenges of the 21st century, will attract most attention from researchers to propose new approaches in environmental valuation [ 41 , 42 ]. As knowledge and perception are subjective, the intangible aspects must be explicitly considered in the new valuation methods [ 13 ]. In this regard, we may conclude that the future path of environmental valuation is not necessarily related to new methodologies, but to the inheritance and assimilation of consolidated techniques commonly used in other scientific areas.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank three anonymous referees for their constructive comments and suggestions that substantially improved this article.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, F.G. and P.T.; methodology, F.G. and P.T.; software, F.G.; validation, P.T.; formal analysis, F.G.; investigation, F.G. and P.T.; resources, P.T.; data curation, F.G.; writing—original draft preparation, F.G.; writing–review and editing, P.T.; visualization, F.G. and P.T.; supervision, P.T. All authors have read and agree to the published version of the manuscript.

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

• Harvard Business School →
• Faculty & Research →
• Publications
• Global Research Centers
• Case Development
• Initiatives & Projects
• Research Services
• Seminars & Conferences
• Seminars & Conferences →

Values and Valuations

All social and economic exchange requires buyers and sellers to determine and agree upon a particular value. Yet value is often muddy and contested, and arriving at consensus in value seems particularly challenging when values differ. For example, how do art galleries and collectors arrive at an objective value for a work or art? How do people determine what has value and how do they quantify that value?

Scholars of economics, sociology, and management have long sought to understand how value is determined. Existing research ranges from formal models of financial markets to ethnographic studies of cultural markets, but is often conducted in disciplinary silos and does not readily appear to share any common theories or frameworks.

The inaugural Values and Valuations Conference aims to bring together a diverse group of academics and practitioners to explore innovative questions surrounding the study of valuation processes. We hope to identify commonalities that can serve to unify the study of valuation processes as well as highlight hidden assumptions that demand further inquiry. A special sub-theme of this conference will focus on the challenges of valuation in emerging technologies such as the Metaverse, cryptocurrencies, and NFTs, where value is hotly contested. In addition to the potential for profound social impact, these technologies highlight the need for an interdisciplinary approach and the potential for fruitful collaborations between academia and industry.

We will begin with breakfast keynote talks where leading scholars representing the fields of economics and sociology will provide an overview of key problems in the study of valuation processes. Three panel sessions will follow, during which academics will share recent research and practitioners will share emerging challenges and insights from industry. Finally, our keynote speakers will provide concluding remarks and chart directions for future research.

For more information, please contact [email protected]

Contact Information

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Valuation Topics

Find the databases and market data, books and guides, training events, news and more that are important to your particular valuation topic.

Case Law & Expert Testimony

Compensation

Cost of Capital

Discounts & Premiums

Economic Damages & Lost Profits

Estate & Gift

Fair Value for Financial Reporting

Global Business Valuation

Industry Analysis

Intellectual Property

Market Comparables

Standards of Value

Related Expertise: Value Creation Strategy , Corporate Finance and Strategy

Ten Lessons from 20 Years of Value Creation Insights

November 27, 2018  By  Gerry Hansell ,  Jeff Kotzen ,  Eric Olsen ,  Alexander Roos ,  Eric Wick ,  Ed Newman , and  Hady Farag

In 1602, commerce evolved into capitalism when the Dutch East India Company formally syndicated its ownership. The first dispute between managers and shareholders came shortly thereafter, in 1622, when a “complaining participant” sued for control rights, citing disagreements on transparency, governance, and capital allocation. Throughout the next four centuries, company owners and managers have wrestled with how best to handle the inherent tensions between long-term shareholder value creation and myriad other management objectives.

BCG has been advising companies on value creation since our founder, Bruce Henderson, opened its doors more than five decades ago. Indeed, many of the firm’s innovations—such as the growth share matrix, experience curves, and cash trap—stem from our early work on the ways that competitive advantage and capital allocation interact to create value for a company’s owners.

In 1998, the firm published the first BCG Value Creators Report, which ranked the top corporations on the basis of the value they’d created over the previous five years and also attempted to draw out lessons from the winners. Since then, we have expanded our databases, refined our methodologies, and—continually developing our thinking—shared our perspectives annually. For our 20th report, we have now diligently reassessed our cumulative experience and distilled our perspectives down to ten lessons—including the source of some of the most common managerial mistakes—that we think really matter. (See “Value Creation Insights Through the Years”)

Value Creation Insights Through the Years

• The 2017 Value Creators Report: Disruption and Reinvention in Value Creation
• The 2016 Value Creators Report: Creating Value Through Active Portfolio Management
• The 2015 Value Creators Report: Value Creation for the Rest of Us
• The 2014 Value Creators Report: Turnaround
• The 2013 Value Creators Report: Unlocking New Sources of Value Creation
• The 2012 Value Creators Report: Strategies for Superior Value Creation
• The 2011 Value Creators Report: Risky Business
• The 2010 Value Creators Report: Threading the Needle
• The 2009 Value Creators Report: Lessons from Consistent Value Creators in the Consumer Industry
• The 2008 Value Creators Report: Missing Link
• The 2007 Value Creators Report: Avoiding the Cash Trap
• The 2006 Value Creators Report: Spotlight on Growth
• The 2005 Value Creators Report: Balancing Act
• The 2004 Value Creators Report: The Next Frontier
• The 2003 Value Creators Report: Back to Fundamentals
• The 2002 Value Creators Report: Succeed in Uncertain Times
• The 2001 Value Creators Report: Dealing with Investors’ Expectations
• The 2000 Value Creators Report: New Perspectives on Value Creation
• The Value Creators Report: A Study of the World’s Top Performers

1. Value creation is not the only goal, but it is essential. The concept of shareholder value incites lots of debate. For some, it is the singular company objective. For others, it is a misguided target. There are plenty of points of view in between.

This debate sucks up a lot of air purposelessly, for two reasons. First, companies have shareholders, shareholders have rights, and shareholders are increasingly sophisticated, exercising their rights through activism and other channels. More often than not, a management team that loses the support of its investors also loses control of the company’s agenda, including the ability to pursue other, nonfinancial objectives.

Second, the conflicts among the differing points of view are not as intense as many believe them to be. There is a growing body of evidence that purpose-driven, sustainable strategies are also beneficial to shareholders. Our research on the impact of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) metrics shows that companies that perform well in terms of nonfinancial ESG measures also deliver better financial performance and command measurably higher valuation. (See Total Societal Impact: A New Lens for Strategy , BCG report, October 2017.)

Put another way, building a great company is not at all inconsistent with being a great stock.

2. Metrics alone are not enough to achieve this goal. Here are two points that they don’t teach in business school.

First, the theory that value creation comes solely from the act of making positive net present-value investments is of limited use in most modern public companies. Fundamentally, investors price a company’s shares on the basis of their views of the underlying business and the attractiveness of the available reinvestment opportunities. Because such expectations are priced into the stock today, the real value creation task confronting leaders of public companies is the need to make more and better investments than the ones already anticipated by investors or to increase—beyond expectations—the profits being earned on existing investments. Beating expectations as expectations evolve is what matters. It’s no small task, and it’s nearly impossible to achieve using metrics alone.

Second, strong and sustainable value creation is delivered in the trenches. Hardwiring value management principles into an organization’s systems and processes—including target setting, planning, capital allocation and risk assessment performance reviews, and incentive compensation—is just as important as getting the metrics right. (See Exhibit 1.) A comprehensive value creation agenda encompasses both the hard (performance) and soft (culture) sides of the challenge. (See “ VF Corporation’s TSR-Led Transformation ,” BCG article, September 2013.)

3. Medium-term TSR must be the capstone metric. Two truths are critical to understanding many of the common mistakes made in the name of value creation: TSR is the only metric that represents the shareholder’s bottom line, and the only metric that correlates 100% with TSR is TSR. (See “ Value Creation and Corporate Reinvention ,” BCG article, December 2017.) Medium-term TSR, measured over a three- to five-year time frame, gives strategies the chance to be implemented and investments the opportunity to mature.

Substituting any proxy metric for TSR inevitably leads companies off course. When earnings per share (EPS) is the principle governing metric, for example, managers can end up “buying” increased EPS by cutting important investments such as R&D or making excessive capital expenditures, ill-advised M&A moves, or poorly timed buybacks. In contrast, TSR is balanced, and it takes into account all the critical factors that drive fundamental value: revenue growth (from reinvestment in the business), margin expansion (from cost control and pricing), and cash flows (which can be reinvested in more growth or used for debt reduction, dividends, and buybacks). TSR also takes into account how managerial actions that determine the valuation multiple, such as investing in the future, optimally deploying capital, or reducing risk exposures, affect investor expectations.

The only metric that correlates 100% with TSR is TSR.

Copy Shareable Link

Medium-term TSR is the only performance metric that appropriately scores the game. This is why it is the only multiperiod metric mandated by the US Securities and Exchange Commission and why it’s the principle performance metric evaluated by Institutional Shareholder Services. These two bodies exert outsize influence on corporate reporting and governance around the world.

4. Every company can find a path to value creation.  Managers often feel trapped, or at least typecast, by industry expectations and macroeconomic factors. They overlook the inevitability that in every industry and for every cycle, there are winners—companies that outperform the pack.

Starting points matter, but for almost every starting point, there is a value-creating road forward. As always, in 2018, the leading companies in our sample of top value creators substantially outpaced their own industry as well as the total market. The median TSR of the top ten companies in each industry was higher than the industry’s median by 9 percentage points (in insurance) and 32 percentage points (in media and publishing as well as metals). (See Exhibit 2.)

The lesson is this: being in a sector whose market performance is below average is no excuse. TSR is a relative—as well as an absolute—metric, so whether an industry is under pressure or accelerating, every company has the opportunity to outperform its peers. No matter how bad an industry’s average performance is relative to other sectors and to the market as a whole, it is still possible for companies in that industry to deliver superior shareholder returns. (See “ How Top Value Creators Outpace the Market—for Decades ,” BCG article, July 2017.)

5. Growth is the most common path to TSR outperformance, but not the only path. Profitable revenue growth is often the primary driver of TSR outperformance over extended time horizons. For top performers during five- to ten-year periods, revenue growth accounts for an average of 50% to 70% of value creation. For this reason, it’s easy to forgive managers for concluding that growth is all that matters.

Still, this view is misguided for two reasons. First, it overlooks that myopic pursuit of growth is one of the most common paths to value destruction. (See Threading the Needle: Value Creation in a Low-Growth Economy , the 2010 BCG Value Creators Report, September 2010.) Aggressive growth can be a high-risk, high-reward proposition, and “bad” growth is a common cause of long-term TSR underperformance. There are many examples of companies that were able to sustain 10% or more top-line growth only to generate below-average or even negative TSR. In many cases, such disconnect is driven by M&A moves gone bad, prioritizing growth at the expense of margins, betting on a cycle that collapses, or investing in adjacencies in which the competitive advantages of the core business do not apply.

The second reason is that there are many examples of top-quartile value creators generating TSR from some combination of other factors, including margin improvement, cash return, and multiple expansion. Our 2017 list of the top consistent value creators over 20 years contained two tobacco companies, which, despite shrinking markets, adverse regulation, and ample brand disparagement, generated annual TSRs of 17% and 22% from 1997 through 2016.

There are many paths to top-quartile TSR.

6. Cash flow is underappreciated and often misunderstood. While growth is the most common route to top- and bottom-quartile performance, it is cash that accounts for most of the shareholder return that a company generates over time. Indeed, since 1926, about 40% of the TSR of the S&P 500 has come from cash returned through dividends—even more when buybacks are factored in. Furthermore, cash generation is the main driver for growth businesses, as it defines the magnitude of a company’s organic or M&A long-term reinvestment rate.

Beyond the simple truth that cash flow is king lies a less obvious point: investors do not value equally all dollars returned to shareholders. In fact, the method of return—share buybacks, dividends, or debt repayment—can have a powerful secondary effect on valuation. For 15 years, we have been arguing in our publications that dividends are especially important: material increases in payout often lead to a significant expansion of a company’s valuation multiple and therefore, in the right circumstances, can drive far greater TSR than buybacks. (See “Thinking Differently about Dividends,” BCG Perspectives, May 2003.)

7. M&A is a powerful tool—for those that commit to it. M&A has a bad rap, thanks to the commonly cited assertion that most deals destroy value. It is true that more than 50% of deals simply transfer wealth from buyer to seller. But there is an untold other side to that story: many long-term, top-quartile value creators engage in significant numbers of M&A deals. (See The 2015 M&A Report , BCG report, October 2015.) This should not be surprising: M&A is one way (and there are not that many others) to reinvest large amounts of capital. Furthermore, well-sourced and well-executed deals can serve up substantial returns. (See “ The Real Deal on M&A, Synergies, and Value ,” BCG article, November 2016.)

The factors that make successful acquirers successful are straightforward. These acquirers commit to M&A and approach it as they would any other industrial process: they climb an experience curve, become proficient over time, and scale up their capability. They also invest disproportionately in three key areas. (See “ Lessons from Successful Serial Acquirers ,” BCG Perspectives, October 2014.) First, they craft a proprietary view of the ways that they create value. This guides their M&A strategy. Second, senior leadership is deeply engaged in the M&A process, and managers at all levels of the organization are expected to source and cultivate relationships with potential targets. Finally, the most successful acquirers articulate a core set of operating principles that define the way that the M&A process will be managed with no additional bureaucracy.

8. Valuation multiples are no longer a black box.  In many cases, managers think that a company’s valuation multiple is a random and uncontrollable outcome and that fickle investors don’t truly understand the businesses in which they invest. We respectfully disagree. While multiples move somewhat randomly over short time periods as they incorporate a wide range of information about future profits and risk, they are not random and certainly not uncontrollable. We have invested more than 20 years in building an analytical tool set that helps companies understand how their shares trade in public markets and which financial KPIs investors take as signals of a healthy (or unhealthy) business outlook. Our tools reveal the key drivers of valuation, which, in turn, can reveal strategic information about a business. (See Exhibit 3.)

Our tools reveal the key drivers of valuation, which, in turn, can reveal strategic information about a business.

One can point to countless examples. In many industries, investors look at gross margin as a proxy for a business’s resistance to commoditization (in, for example, technology) or its brand power (apparel). Investors in financial services put a premium on return on tangible equity. Biotech investors value forward-growth expectations—almost without regard to current profitability. In other sectors, investors put a premium on dividends, which they view as signals of a company’s confidence in future earnings and its managers’ willingness to put their money where their mouth is.

The drivers of valuation provide a rich and refined tool for common managerial tradeoffs, such as driving growth at the expense of margins or reinvesting free cash flow instead of paying down debt. Indeed, the success of companies such as Church & Dwight and VF has been achieved, in part, on a strong understanding of the way that business fundamentals and valuation multiples interact to inform strategic decisions. (See Improving the Odds: Strategies for Superior Value Creation , the 2012 BCG Value Creators Report, September 2012.)

9. The shape and asymmetry of investment opportunities are far more important than the precision of the calculations behind them. Too often, senior management wastes time and energy trying to get the data inputs for their models precisely right. The leading example of this phenomenon is the fruitless fretting over a company’s weighted average cost of capital. (Charlie Munger, the vice chairman of Berkshire Hathaway, once said, “I’ve never heard an intelligent discussion about the cost of capital.” He’s right.) What managers should be evaluating is how a proposed investment compares with the next-best use of capital. If the difference in the cost of capital assumptions (within reasonable bounds) reduces the attractiveness of an investment, it has likely already failed the test.

Even more important, excessive focus on technical precision takes time and effort away from the more meaningful determinants of investment decisions, such as the reliability and asymmetry of the forecast and whether there are any accounting principles at play that decouple reported earnings from cash flow. Management time and attention are much better spent on pressure-testing key assumptions, contrasting different approaches for evaluation (such as cash versus accounting metrics), and considering the different competitive scenarios in which the investment could unfold. (See Risky Business: Value Creation in a Volatile Economy , the 2011 BCG Value Creators Report, September 2011.)

10. Treating your investors like customers pays dividends over time. Relatively few companies put anywhere near the level of time, effort, and intensity into learning why investors own their stock that they put into figuring out why customers buy their products. This is a mistake.

Some customers are more valuable than others, so it makes no sense to try to serve every customer equally. Similarly, there are investors that a company wants and those that it would just as soon not have. Each investor has its own investment process, capital allocation preferences, KPIs, and buy-sell triggers. Investors differ in their willingness to support a company’s mid-to-long-term strategy—especially when results are likely to take time to materialize. The smart play for management teams is to identify the “right” investors and go after them, just as they would pursue high-value customers.

Doing so takes more than the typical approach to investor relations. Value-oriented leadership teams seek to engage in a genuine dialogue with sophisticated investors about the ways value will be created. They use such opportunities to benefit from the experience of portfolio managers and analysts, whose insights can help challenge conventional wisdom within the company.

Company executives also need to appreciate that the support of patient and long-term-oriented investors comes at a price—in the form sometimes of inconvenient transparency. During both good and not-so-good times, investors want a candid assessment of key market forces, the company’s strategies to win, and the upsides for sticking around, as well as the roadmap for getting to the payoff and how they can track progress. And when mistakes are made, investors want to know what lessons have been learned. They increasingly also want reassurance that a solid governance system—one that includes a proven board of directors and executive compensation that emphasizes the right metrics—is in place. (See Winning Moves in the Age of Shareholder Activism , BCG Focus, August 2015.)

All this takes time and sophistication on the part of management, but the effort is worthwhile. Over and over, we see that well-aligned investors are critical to ensuring the success of well-designed strategies.

The shape of the playing field has changed many times since the early 17th century and, indeed, over the 20 years of our Value Creators series, which have seen the dot-com bubble expand and burst, the surges in the middle years of the first and second decades of this century, and the great financial crisis. One of the biggest changes has been to the nature of business itself.

Value management grew up in an economy that was dominated by capital-intensive companies, for which value creation was largely about squeezing out incremental returns on physical capital (accounted for on balance sheets). Recent decades have seen the rapid rise of “discovery” businesses—including IT, pharma, professional services, and medical technology—for which value creation is much more about driving top-line growth and generating returns from investments that flow through the income statement. (See “ Value Patterns: The Concept ,” BCG Perspectives, May 2012.)

This proliferation of new business models is, in many cases, interpreted as making value management less relevant when, of course, the opposite is true. The 2019 Value Creators report will examine some of the new challenges we expect managers to face as advancing technology causes the economy—and the managerial principles that govern value creation within it—to evolve. But the use of TSR as a North Star that guides value-creating agendas and the application of the hard-won, timeless principles of value creation are more important than ever. The game may be changing once again, but the rules—and the ways of winning—remain the same.

Managing Director & Senior Partner

Senior Advisor

Managing Director & Senior Partner; Global Leader, Center for CFO Excellence

Managing Director & Partner

Partner & Director, Shareholder Value Strategy

ABOUT BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP

Boston Consulting Group partners with leaders in business and society to tackle their most important challenges and capture their greatest opportunities. BCG was the pioneer in business strategy when it was founded in 1963. Today, we work closely with clients to embrace a transformational approach aimed at benefiting all stakeholders—empowering organizations to grow, build sustainable competitive advantage, and drive positive societal impact.

Our diverse, global teams bring deep industry and functional expertise and a range of perspectives that question the status quo and spark change. BCG delivers solutions through leading-edge management consulting, technology and design, and corporate and digital ventures. We work in a uniquely collaborative model across the firm and throughout all levels of the client organization, fueled by the goal of helping our clients thrive and enabling them to make the world a better place.

© Boston Consulting Group 2024. All rights reserved.

For information or permission to reprint, please contact BCG at [email protected] . To find the latest BCG content and register to receive e-alerts on this topic or others, please visit bcg.com . Follow Boston Consulting Group on Facebook and X (formerly Twitter) .

Perspectives on Strategy and Value: Insights on creating sustainable value in an uncertain world.

• Browse All Articles
• Newsletter Sign-Up

• 22 Mar 2024
• Research & Ideas

Open Source Software: The $9 Trillion Resource Companies Take for Granted

Many companies build their businesses on open source software, code that would cost firms $8.8 trillion to create from scratch if it weren't freely available. Research by Frank Nagle and colleagues puts a value on an economic necessity that will require investment to meet demand.

• 12 Mar 2024
• Cold Call Podcast

How to Bring Good Ideas to Life: The Paul English Story

Paul English is one of the most imaginative and successful innovators of his generation. He cofounded several companies, including Kayak, before starting Boston Venture Studio, where he is currently a partner. This multimedia case, “Bringing Ideas to Life: The Story of Paul English,” explores his process of creative idea generation, examining how he was able to bring so many ideas to market. In this episode, Harvard Business School professor Frances Frei and English discuss how to tell the difference between a good idea and a bad one, the importance of iteration, and taking a systematic (but fast) approach to developing new ideas. They also explore how his process dovetails with Frei’s “move fast and fix things,” strategy from her recent book.

• 14 Nov 2023

The Network Effect: Why Companies Should Care About Employees’ LinkedIn Connections

What do Honeywell, IBM, and Pfizer have in common? Employees with strong professional networks. A study of 2 billion employee relationships on LinkedIn probes the power of such connections—and potential benefits for companies. Research by Frank Nagle.

• 06 Dec 2021

The Popular Stock Metric That Can Lead Investors Astray

Investors may rely too heavily on a financial measure that no longer reflects the economic fundamentals of modern business. What should investors do? Research by Charles C.Y. Wang and colleagues. Open for comment; 0 Comments.

• 02 Oct 2019
• Working Paper Summaries

The Value Potential of New Business Models

A business model determines the opportunity’s value creation potential and suggests how the resulting value might be distributed among participants pursuing that model. Strategists need to understand the interaction of elements of the job to be done and asset configuration in order to create differing strategic prescriptions.

• What Do You Think?

What Grade Would You Give Walmart CEO Doug McMillon?

SUMMING UP: James Heskett's readers gave Walmart high marks for its response to gun violence but suggested the company could have been even more proactive. Open for comment; 0 Comments.

• 10 Jan 2019

Can Miguel McKelvey Build the ‘Culture Operating System’ at WeWork?

How deeply does the culture of a startup matter? Can it be shaped? Professor Jeffrey Rayport discusses WeWork cofounder Miguel McKelvey’s innovative role in building a company culture to support rapid growth. Open for comment; 0 Comments.

• 03 Dec 2018

How Companies Can Increase Market Rewards for Sustainability Efforts

There is a connection between public sentiment about a company and how the market rewards its corporate social performance, according to George Serafeim. Is your company undervalued? Open for comment; 0 Comments.

• 31 Mar 2018

Expected Stock Returns Worldwide: A Log-Linear Present-Value Approach

Over the last 20 years, shortcomings of classical asset-pricing models have motivated research in developing alternative methods for measuring ex ante expected stock returns. This study evaluates the main paradigms for deriving firm-level expected return proxies (ERPs) and proposes a new framework for estimating them.

• 02 May 2017

The Cross Section of Bank Value

How do commercial banks create value? This paper represents the first attempt to empirically identify the primary determinants of cross-sectional variation in bank value. Among the findings: A bank's ability to produce deposits is by far the most important determinant in explaining cross-sectional variation in bank value.

• 15 Feb 2016

Replicating Private Equity with Value Investing, Homemade Leverage, and Hold-to-Maturity Accounting

This paper studies the asset selection of private equity investors and the risk and return properties of passive portfolios with similarly selected investments in publicly traded securities. Results indicate that sophisticated institutional investors appear to significantly overpay for the portfolio management services associated with private equity investments.

• 10 Sep 2014

Become a Value Creator

Managers who adopt a mindset to create value hold the key to becoming truly successful leaders, says Brian Hall. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.

• 10 Sep 2012

HBS Cases: Branding Yoga

As yoga's popularity has grown into a $6 billion business, a cast of successful entrepreneurs has emerged with their own styles of the ancient practice. Yet yoga's rise underscores a larger question for Professor Rohit Deshpandé: Is everything brandable? Closed for comment; 0 Comments.

• 13 Apr 2011

The ‘IKEA Effect’: When Labor Leads to Love

Companies increasingly involve customers in the design and assembly of products, from Converse allowing customers to design their own shoes to IKEA asking customers to assemble their own furniture. In this paper researchers Michael I. Norton (Harvard Business School), Daniel Mochon (University of California at San Diego), and Dan Ariely (Duke) use the "IKEA Effect" to explain the increase in valuation we place on products we build ourselves. The researchers discuss the implications of the IKEA Effect for marketing managers and organizations more generally. Key concepts include: Successful assembly of products—no matter how amateurish—leads consumers to value them over and above the value that arises from merely purchasing a product. Labor increases valuation of completed products not just for consumers who profess an interest in "do-it-yourself" projects, but even for those who express a preference for buying preassembled products. Successful completion is an essential component for the link between labor and liking to emerge; participants who were not permitted to finish their creations did not show an increase in willingness-to-pay. The marketing challenge lies in convincing consumers to engage in the kinds of labor that will lead them to value products more highly, especially given their general aversion to such pursuits. The overvaluation that occurs as a result of the IKEA Effect has implications for organizations as a contributor to two key organizational pitfalls: sunk cost effects and the "not invented here" syndrome. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.

• 24 Nov 2009

From Strategy to Business Models and to Tactics

Drivers such as globalization, deregulation, or technological change, just to mention a few, are profoundly changing the competitive game. Scholars and practitioners agree that the fastest-growing firms in this new environment appear to have taken advantage of these structural changes to compete "differently" and innovate in their business models. However, there is not yet agreement on what are the distinctive features of superior business models. This dispute may have arisen, in part, because of a lack of a clear distinction between the notions of strategy, business model, and tactics. HBS professor Ramon Casadesus-Masanell and Joan Enric Ricart present an integrative framework to distinguish and relate the concepts of business model, strategy, and tactics. Key concepts include: An integrative framework that cleanly separates the realm of business model, strategy, and tactics will help guide the search for novel, interesting, and profitable new ways to compete. "Business model" refers to the logic of the firm, the way it operates, and how it creates value for its stakeholders. "Strategy" refers to the choice of business model through which the firm will compete in the marketplace. "Tactics" refers to the residual choices open to a firm by virtue of the business model that it employs. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.

• 17 Aug 2009

Quantifying the Economic Impact of the Internet

Businesses around the advertising-supported Internet have incredible multiplier effects throughout the economy and society. Professor John Quelch starts to put some numbers on the impact. Open for comment; 0 Comments.

• 16 Jan 2006

What Customers Want from Your Products

Marketers should think less about market segments and more about the jobs customers want to do. A Harvard Business Review excerpt by HBS professor Clayton M. Christensen, Intuit’s Scott Cook, and Advertising Research Foundation’s Taddy Hall. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.

• 03 Mar 2003

Top Ten Legal Mistakes Made by Entrepreneurs

The life of a startup can be precarious, a wrong turn disastrous. Harvard Business School professor Constance Bagley discusses the most frequent legal flops made by entrepreneurs, everything from hiring the wrong lawyer to puffing up the business plan. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.

• Bibliography
• More Referencing guides Blog Automated transliteration Relevant bibliographies by topics
• Automated transliteration
• Relevant bibliographies by topics
• Referencing guides

Dissertations / Theses on the topic 'Property valuation'

Create a spot-on reference in apa, mla, chicago, harvard, and other styles.

Consult the top 50 dissertations / theses for your research on the topic 'Property valuation.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Browse dissertations / theses on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.

Yang, Zan. "Five essays in property valuation." Doctoral thesis, Stockholm : Dept. of Real Estate and Construction Management, Royal Institute of Technology [Avd. bygg- och fastighetsekonomi, Tekniska högsk.], 2000. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-3026.

Rowley, Steven. "A National Valuation Evidence Database : the future of valuation data provision and collection." Thesis, Northumbria University, 1998. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.245441.

Netzell, Olof. "Essays on lease and property valuation." Doctoral thesis, KTH, Bygg- och fastighetsekonomi, 2010. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-26801.

Nordlund, Bo. "Essays in property valuation and accounting." Licentiate thesis, Stockholm, 2004. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-339.

Cote, Katherine Nicole Arnold. "Regional real property valuation forecast accuracy." To access this resource online via ProQuest Dissertations and Theses @ UTEP, 2008. http://0-proquest.umi.com.lib.utep.edu/login?COPT=REJTPTU0YmImSU5UPTAmVkVSPTI=&clientId=2515.

McParland, Clare. "European investment valuation practices and implications for the harmonisation of valuation standards." Thesis, University of Ulster, 2001. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.342318.

Hayles, Kelly, and kellyhayles@iinet net au. "A Property Valuation Model for Rural Victoria." RMIT University. Mathematical and Geospatial Sciences, 2006. http://adt.lib.rmit.edu.au/adt/public/adt-VIT20070221.150256.

Amidu, Abdul-Rasheed. "Expertise development in commercial property valuation practice." Thesis, Birmingham City University, 2016. https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.719996.

Wang, Pengfei. "How to effectively integrate sustainability into property valuation?" Thesis, KTH, Bygg- och fastighetsekonomi, 2011. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-48601.

Christopoulou, K. "A geographic knowledge discovery approach to property valuation." Thesis, University College London (University of London), 2009. http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/14871/.

Armitage, Lynne Audrey. "The role of property market analysis in the valuation of investment grade property." Thesis, Queensland University of Technology, 1999. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/36086/13/Lynne_Armitage_Thesis.pdf.

Wyatt, Peter. "Property valuation using a geographical information system (GIS) : investigation of the potential impact that a GIS-property information system will have on property valuation with particular reference ..... spatial element of property value." Thesis, University of Brighton, 1994. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.260947.

Barker, John Holly. "The valuation of income-producing property in international law." Thesis, University of Cambridge, 1998. https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/251665.

Nordlund, Bo. "Valuation and Performance Reporting in Property Companies Accouding to IFRS." Doctoral thesis, KTH, Bygg- och fastighetsekonomi, 2008. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-9243.

O'Roarty, Brenna Ann. "A critical assessment of the rental valuation of retail property." Thesis, University of Ulster, 1996. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.243624.

Louey, Wing-hong, and 雷永康. "Analysis of the asset valuation methods of real estate properties in the People's Republic of China and Hong Kong." Thesis, The University of Hong Kong (Pokfulam, Hong Kong), 1996. http://hub.hku.hk/bib/B31251389.

Fibbens, M. J. W. "The application of personal computers to direct comparison valuation : a residential mass appraisal investigation /." View thesis View thesis, 1993. http://library.uws.edu.au/adt-NUWS/public/adt-NUWS20030610.165133/index.html.

Teang, Kanha, and Yiran Lu. "Property Valuation by Machine Learning and Hedonic Pricing Models : A Case study on Swedish Residential Property." Thesis, KTH, Fastigheter och byggande, 2021. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-298307.

Sri, Navarathne Sakalashilpathilaka Laksrilal Heli Prasad Neelawala. "Asymmetric information between buyers and sellers in the residential property market: A hedonic property valuation approach." Thesis, Queensland University of Technology, 2014. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/76412/5/S.N.S.L.H.P%20Neelawala%20Thesis.pdf.

Wong, Chiu-keung. "An Exploratory study of behavioral characteristics in Hong Kong property valuation practice." Click to view the E-thesis via HKU Scholars Hub, 2006. http://lookup.lib.hku.hk/lookup/bib/B37943509.

Paterson, Robert W. "Nonmarket Valuation and Land Use: Two Essays." Fogler Library, University of Maine, 2001. http://www.library.umaine.edu/theses/pdf/PatersonRW2001.pdf.

Kutsch, Nina. "The valuation of interests in UK unlisted closed-ended property funds." Thesis, University of Reading, 2010. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.511734.

Chan, Hok Kee Nelson. "Contaminated land valuation and the problem of stigma." Phd thesis, Australia : Macquarie University, 2001. http://hdl.handle.net/1959.14/48464.

Louey, Wing-hong. "Analysis of the asset valuation methods of real estate properties in the People's Republic of China and Hong Kong /." Hong Kong : University of Hong Kong, 1996. http://sunzi.lib.hku.hk/hkuto/record.jsp?B2594762x.

Dahmash, Firas Naim. "An examination of the value relevance and bias in the accounting treatment of intangible assets in Australia and the US over the period 1994-2003 using the Feltham and Ohlson (1995) framework." University of Western Australia. Financial Studies Discipline Group, 2007. http://theses.library.uwa.edu.au/adt-WU2007.0145.

Adair, Alastair S. "The determination of significant variables in the valuation of residential properties." Thesis, University of Reading, 1991. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.306216.

Stegfeldt, Gustav. "Property valuation when comparable sales are made in form of corporate transactions." Thesis, KTH, Fastigheter och byggande, 2014. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-146886.

Scott, Ian Park. "A knowledge-based approach to the computer-assisted mortgage valuation of residential property." Thesis, University of South Wales, 1998. https://pure.southwales.ac.uk/en/studentthesis/a-knowledgebased-approach-to-the-computerassisted-mortgage-valuation-of-residential-property(85b5791b-47d5-4a6d-83e0-7c8c94b2978f).html.

Macko, Filip. "Způsoby ocenění v Austrálii." Master's thesis, Vysoké učení technické v Brně. Ústav soudního inženýrství, 2019. http://www.nusl.cz/ntk/nusl-402600.

Treg, Christopher. "A Multilevel Property Hedonic Approach to Valuing Parks and Open Space." ScholarWorks @ UVM, 2010. http://scholarworks.uvm.edu/graddis/230.

AL-KHABBAZ, AHMAD ABDALLA. "MODELING AVIATION FACILITIES IMPACT ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY VALUES." Diss., The University of Arizona, 1987. http://hdl.handle.net/10150/184124.

Wells, David Michael. "Impact of brand equity on the purchasing of consumer durables." CSUSB ScholarWorks, 2007. https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd-project/3139.

Poddaný, Martin. "Oceňování nemovitostí - tržní hodnota vs. administrativní cena." Master's thesis, Vysoká škola ekonomická v Praze, 2009. http://www.nusl.cz/ntk/nusl-15485.

Dimke, Kelley C. "Valuation of Tree Canopy on Property Values of Six Communities in Cincinnati, Ohio." The Ohio State University, 2008. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1211933613.

Havard, Timothy M. "Valuer behaviour and the causes of excessive variance in commercial investment property valuation." Thesis, University of Manchester, 1999. https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.665990.

Blake, Andrea Gaye. "Carbon sequestration: Evaluating the impact on rural land and valuation approach." Thesis, Queensland University of Technology, 2016. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/93574/1/Andrea_Blake_Thesis.pdf.

Shampton, John F. "Locational Determinants of Real Estate Valuation: an Analysis of Spatial Autocorrelation in the Hedonic Pricing of Real Estate." Thesis, University of North Texas, 1992. https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc278245/.

Martin, Jon E. (Jon Egan). "Determining the Impact of Selected Variables on the Sale Price of Real Estate." Thesis, University of North Texas, 1989. https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc501198/.

Van, der Byl Calven. "A statistical model for valuation of residential property in the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan area." Thesis, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, 2012. http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1020045.

Borst, Richard A. "Discovering and applying location influence patterns in the mass valuation of domestic real property." Thesis, Ulster University, 2007. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.438804.

Lorenz, David Philipp. "The application of sustainable development principles to the theory and practice of property valuation." Karlsruhe : Univ.-Verl. Karlsruhe, 2006. http://www.uvka.de/univerlag/volltexte/2006/182/.

Suen, Fun-sing, and 孫奮生. "Decision support systems for real estate evaluation." Thesis, The University of Hong Kong (Pokfulam, Hong Kong), 1994. http://hub.hku.hk/bib/B31257021.

Lake, Iain Richard. "Using a Geographical Information System (GIS) to implement the Hedonic pricing." Thesis, University of East Anglia, 1998. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.266754.

Boman, Anna, and Jonas Larsson. "Patent Valuation in Theory and Practice." Thesis, Linköping University, Department of Management and Economics, 2003. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-1578.

Background: Today, an increased need to value patents is expressed in several different situations. For example, banks more frequently accept patents as collateral for loans and patents are being exchanged more often between companies. It is argued that a hindrance for the recognition of the value of patents, and other assets lacking physical form, is that the current methods of valuation are not developed for this type of assets.

Purpose: Our objective is to investigate the practical relevance of four theoretical valuation approaches in the context of patent valuation and to point out crucial factors affecting the choice of valuation approach.

Procedure: Interviews were conducted with professionals working in the field of corporate finance and with an expert in the field of patents and intellectual property rights.

Results: The respondents are not of the same opinion whether relevant approaches for patent valuation exist at all. Among the respondents who find it possible to value patents, the income approach is the dominating approach. The theoretical correctness of this approach, derived from the definition of value, is stressed as the primary argument for the use of it. Methods such as Decision Tree Analysis, within the income approach, and Relief from Royalty, a hybrid of the market- and income approach, are used as complements.

Rajapaksa, Dewage Darshana Peiris. "Floods and property values: A hedonic property and efficiency analysis." Thesis, Queensland University of Technology, 2015. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/86975/1/Darshana%20Peiris_Rajapaksa_Thesis.pdf.

Uba, Okwuchukwu Gerald. "Determining the Property Value Impact of Landfills." PDXScholar, 1994. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds/4751.

Dunbar, Charles David. "Methods and techniques for valuation of patents." CSUSB ScholarWorks, 2003. https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd-project/2306.

Godwin, Wayne. "A critical review of the approaches and attitudes of South African property valuers towards the valuation of hotels under a contemporary management agreement." Master's thesis, University of Cape Town, 2017. http://hdl.handle.net/11427/27058.

Pienaar, Petrus Terblanche. "The use of the Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) method as a method of valuation within the South African property industry: A critical review." Master's thesis, University of Cape Town, 2015. http://hdl.handle.net/11427/14125.

Daud, Muhammad Nasir. "Public sector information management and analysis using GIS in support of property valuation in Malaysia." Thesis, University of Newcastle Upon Tyne, 2000. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.313266.