Introduction
This issue closes the 43rd volume of the Journal of Property Investment & Finance (JPIF) and represents the start of my 44th year of being involved with the journal as, initially, the assistant editor and for nearly 35 years as the editor. In many ways, not much has changed in that time. The double-blind refereeing still applies, and the production is the same as it ever was (just more streamlined by technology) and, most importantly, the rigour of the reviews ensures that the calibre of the published papers remains high.
But there is one big overriding difference that reflects the massive change in real estate education over the same period, and that is the significant disengagement between academics and practitioners.
When the journal started, the editorial board was dominated by practitioners – erudite and knowledgeable individuals who know about the practicalities of real estate valuation and investment. They knew what they knew, and, in the context of wanting useful research, they knew what they didn’t know. As such, all the papers submitted and reviewed were considered in the context of how the findings of the research were useful to valuers and investors in practice, and did they add to the expanding body of literature on the subject of property or, as it later became referenced, real estate? Most papers were written by academics (sometimes in tandem with a practitioner), but they were written to be applied at the coalface.
The link between industry and academia was strong and symbiotic. And this was mirrored in the societies and conferences that developed at the same time. In the UK, the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors saw the importance of encouraging and nurturing these relationships. It funded research projects and conferences. It had a research officer to co-ordinate and grow these synergies, and for 20 or so years the relationships and the conferences thrived.
Academics knew that their research needed to be applied, and it was. Nearly all papers submitted were useful to practitioners. They still needed to be refereed to ensure a high standard, but, with minor or major amendments, the papers were useful and publishable.
Today, the opposite is true. I receive so many papers that either have no practical application at all or the authors don’t recognise or understand the importance of their work to industry. Once upon a time a conclusion concluded and commented on the importance of the work and the findings and why it was useful to the real estate investors and owners. Today, such expansive and insightful conclusions are rare, and the majority of submissions today are rejected before review, as I know that my editorial board will send them back asking for the author(s) to show how their findings can be applied in practice.
But let’s not be over-negative. This is, as I mentioned in a previous editorial, a wonderful opportunity to increase your chances of being published not only in JPIF but also in other good real estate journals. Research the topics that are important to industry. Work with colleagues in industry so you can merge academic thought with practical understanding. Real estate is a physical and tangible investment. Think about the impact of your results upon the physical environment, upon occupational and investment markets and, most importantly, upon the buildings themselves. Even if you are concentrating on databases of REITs or similar, remember that the value of those investments is underpinned by value and the returns of individual physical assets. And to understand investment, you need to understand the occupational and consumer markets.
If you can do that and place your work in an economic context, then your work will always have merit and will always be sought out by practitioners, and that increases the likelihood of being published.
Nick French
Real Estate Valuation Theurgy, Chichester, UK
August 2025
