Investment-uncertainty Relationship Research Articles

Investment, firm-specific uncertainty, and financial flexibility

We study how financial flexibility impacts on firm's investment decisions under uncertainty. We use a comprehensive dataset covering US firms for the period 1983–2019. We develop a baseline model of investment under uncertainty and characterize the bindingness of financial constraints. We then use this model to explore firms’ investment responses under uncertainty in the presence of financial constraints under different assumptions regarding the value they assign to financial flexibility. Our results point to a negative uncertainty-investment relationship for constrained firms, withstanding the impact of the value of financial flexibility on this relationship. This negative relationship, however, is less pronounced when the value of financial flexibility is higher (especially for younger financially constrained firms).

Leaving well-worn paths: Reversal of the investment-uncertainty relationship and flexible biogas plant operation

We propose a dynamic investment model to study investment behavior for power grid-stabilizing, flexibility-providing energy projects. Our model adds to the literature in several novel ways. First, we use time series-based optimization approaches (i.e., a single-unit commitment model) to determine, validate and parametrize exponential Ornstein–Uhlenbeck (OU) revenues as a state variable for the real options model in a biogas plant flexibilization case study. Second, from a theoretical perspective, our findings suggest that for specific revenue processes (i.e., exponential OU processes) the well-known option-driven incentive to wait acts alongside a new uncertainty-driven intrinsic investment incentive. Hence, higher uncertainty may lead to earlier investment. Third, we show how the results influence managerial decision making in practice and can be used to shape the design of an optimal renewable support scheme.

The uncertainty–investment relationship: scrutinizing the role of firm size

PurposeThe objective of this paper is threefold. First, it aims to empirically study whether firm-specific/idiosyncratic uncertainty, macroeconomic/aggregate uncertainty and political uncertainty have an adverse influence on firms' investment decisions in Pakistan. After establishing this, it scrutinizes whether the uncertainty effects on investment are different for firms of different sizes. Finally, it investigates whether any heterogeneity exists in the uncertainty impacts across different industries.Design/methodology/approachThe empirical analysis is based on an unbalanced panel data of 468 nonfinancial firms listed at the Pakistan Stock Exchange (PSX) during the period 2000–2018. Departing from the literature, the paper builds a time-varying composite volatility/uncertainty index based on the principal component analysis (PCA) by utilizing the constructed volatility series for sales, cash flows and return on assets to gauge firm-specific uncertainty for each firm included in the analysis. Likewise, the paper develops a PCA-based composite index for macroeconomic uncertainty by using the conditional variance series of consumer price index (CPI), industrial production index (IPI), the interest rate and the exchange rate obtained by estimating the (generalized) autoregressive conditional heteroscedastic, (G)ARCH, models. Finally, political uncertainty is measured by political risk components maintained by the Political Risk Services Group. The empirical framework of the paper augments the standard investment equation by incorporating all three types of uncertainty. Firms are grouped into small, medium and large categories based on firms' total assets and the size indicators are generated. Next, the indicators are multiplied by each uncertainty measure to quantify the differential effects of uncertainty across firm size. Firms are also differentiated by sectors to explore the sector-based asymmetries in the uncertainty effects. The “robust two-step system generalized method of moments (2SYS GMM) (dynamic panel data) estimator” is applied to estimate the empirical models.FindingsThe results provide robust and strong evidence of the detrimental influence of all three types of uncertainty on investment. Yet, it is observed that the strength of the influence considerably varies across uncertainty types. In particular, compared to firm-specific uncertainty, both macroeconomic and political uncertainties have more unfavorable effects. The analysis also reveals that the effects of all three types of uncertainty are quite different at small, medium and large firms. Specifically, it is observed that although the investment of all firms is influenced adversely by magnified uncertainty, the adverse effects of all three kinds of uncertainty are quite stronger at small firms than medium and large firms. These findings support the phenomenon of size-based asymmetries in the effects of uncertainty on investment. The results also provide evidence that either type of uncertainty quite differently affects the investment policy of firms in different sectors.Practical implicationsThe findings help different stakeholders to know how different types of uncertainty differently affect corporate firms' investments. Further, they suggest that firm size has a vital role in ascertaining the adverse effects of uncertainty on investment. The paper identifies to which type of uncertainty investors and policymakers should care more about and to which types of firms and industries they should concern more during volatile times. Firms should have more fixed assets and expand their size to mitigate the detrimental effects on investment of internal and external uncertainties. The government should enhance the political stability to induce firms for a higher level of investment, which, in turn, will result in higher growth of the economy.Originality/valueThe originality of the paper is credited to four aspects. First, unlike most previous studies that have utilized a single volatility measure, this paper constructs composite uncertainty indices based on the weights determined by the PCA. Second, it examines the effect of political uncertainty over and above the effects of idiosyncratic and aggregate (macroeconomic uncertainty) for an emerging economy. Third, and most important, it provides first-hand empirical evidence on the role of firm size in establishing the asymmetric effects of uncertainty on investment. Finally, it provides evidence on the industry-based heterogeneity in the uncertainty effects.

On the definition of the investment-uncertainty relationship

This short paper provides a rigorous definition for the assertion “an increase of uncertainty harms investment” within the real-options framework. In most cases, the effect of uncertainty on investment depends on the time-horizon considered. For typical parameter configurations, more uncertainty favors investment in the short-run.

Re-evaluating natural resource investments under uncertainty: An alternative to limited traditional approaches

The need to evaluate natural resource investments under uncertainty has given rise to the development of real options valuation; however, the analysis of such investments has been restricted by the capabilities of existing valuation approaches. We re-visit the well-known example of a copper mine project under a one-factor and two multi-factor models using the influence diagram simulation-and-regression (IDSR) approach. The one-factor setting was originally proposed by Brennan and Schwartz (J Bus 58(2):135–157, 1985), who used partial differential equations (PDEs) and finite differences to approximately solve the valuation problem; extensions to two and three factors were later analysed by Tsekrekos et al. (Eur Financ Manag 18(4):543–575, 2012) using the least-squares Monte Carlo method. We apply the IDSR approach to perform a detailed portfolio analysis of the one-factor benchmark investment and find issues in both the definitions and values of the fixed-output-rate mine and closure option at the portfolio decomposition stage in Brennan and Schwartz (1985). We then apply the IDSR approach to re-evaluate two multi-factor extensions of Tsekrekos et al. (2012) and detect issues in their sensitivity analyses that impact on the reliability of some of their findings. To confirm this and validate the values we obtained, we integrate PDE-based analytical expressions that describe the volatilities implied by the multi-factor models into our IDSR-based analysis. Using the investment-uncertainty relationship, we are able to correctly analyse the impact of the complex multi-factor model parameters on investment value. We conclude that the limitations of PDE-based finite difference approaches may invalidate their use in portfolio situations, but analytical expressions obtained from PDE-based modelling may be profitably integrated into a simulation-based, numerical analysis to validate results and gain new insights.

The uncertainty-investment relationship with endogenous capacity

This paper revisits the uncertainty-investment relationship with a real-option model. Unlike existing models, the firm chooses both timing and size of investment, hence we use a new composite measure of investment that takes into account both timing and size. With this modification, we show that investment is not necessarily a monotonically decreasing function of uncertainty (or volatility) as predicted by the existing literature. For most parameter value configurations, investment is initially an increasing function and subsequently a decreasing function of uncertainty. This result also holds with the newer Knightian measure of uncertainty. Comparative static analysis indicates that uncertainty is more likely to have a positive effect on investment when demand growth rate and demand volatility are low, and interest rate and operating cost are high. The effect also depends on the production technology; with decreasing-returns-to-scale technology it is more likely to be positive. Finally, it is shown that investment is more sensitive to uncertainty for decreasing-returns-to-scale technology, high cost of production capacity, low operating cost and less market power. While there is some empirical evidence in support of a non-monotonic uncertainty-investment relationship and the role of market power, the other implications of the model have not been empirically tested yet.

The investment-uncertainty relationship in the oil and gas industry

Recent studies of the oil market demonstrate endogeneity of the oil price by modelling it as a function of consumption and precautionary demands and producers’ supply. However, studies analysing the effect of oil price uncertainty on investment do not disentangle uncertainties raised by underlying components which play a role in the oil market. Accordingly, this study uses a new approach to investigate the relationship between investment and uncertainty for a panel of U.S. firms operating in the oil and gas industry. We decompose oil price volatility to be driven by structural shocks that are recognized in the oil market literature, over and above other determinants, in order to study whether the investment uncertainty relationship depends on the drivers of uncertainty. Our findings suggest that oil market uncertainty lowers investment only when it is caused by global (consumption) oil demand shock. Stock market uncertainty is found to have a negative effect on investment with a year of delay. The results suggest no positive relationship between irreversible investment and uncertainty, but interestingly, a positive relation exists for reversible investment. This finding is in line with the option theory of investment and implies that the irreversibility effect of increased uncertainty dominates the traditional convexity effect.

Risk aversion heterogeneity and the investment–uncertainty relationship

We develop a dynamic macroeconomic model encompassing heterogeneity in households’ attitudes towards risk, and we allow agents to share aggregate volatility by trading safe assets. In equilibrium, when volatility increases, low-risk-averse households, who hold a long position in risky assets, perceive a higher certainty-equivalent future return on capital. The perceived yield may also increase for high-risk-averse agents, who hold riskless assets. In response to a rise in certainty-equivalent expected returns, savings decrease due to a limited willingness to substitute consumption over time. This generates a negative response of aggregate investment to an increase in systematic volatility, showing that the aggregate behavior of an heterogeneous agents economy can be different from the behavior originating from an ‘average’ representative agent. The appearance of degenerate wealth distributions is avoided by allowing the risk aversion of each household to change stochastically over time.

Piyasa Yapısının Belirsizlik-Yatırım İlişkisi Üzerindeki Etkileri: Türk İmalatSanayiinden Bulgular

The broad aim of this study is to examine the impact of uncertainty on investment in Turkey. Our particular aim is to test Caballero’s (1991) theoretical claim that the negative relationship between investment and uncertainty is more pronounced in imperfectly competitive industries. With that aim in mind a panel of Turkish manufacturing industries for the years 1992-2001 is used to examine the effect of market structure on the investment-uncertainty relationship. Our estimation results show that uncertainty has a reductive effect on investment and that that effect becomes significantly stronger under imperfect competition conditions.

Investment-Uncertainty Relationship in the Oil and Gas Industry

Recent studies on oil market demonstrate endogeneity of oil price by modeling it as a function of consumption and precautionary demands and producers' supply. However, studies analysing the effect of oil price uncertainty on investment, do not disentangle uncertainties raised by underlying components playing a role in oil market. Accordingly, this study investigates the relationship between investment and uncertainty for a panel of U.S. firms operating in oil and gas industry with a new approach. We decompose oil price volatility to be driven by structural shocks that are recognized in oil market literature, over and above other determinants, to study whether investment uncertainty relationship depends on the drivers of uncertainty. Our findings suggest that oil market uncertainty lowers investment only when it is caused by global consumption demand shocks. Stock market uncertainty is found to have a negative effect on investment with a year of delay. The results suggest no positive relation between irreversible investment and uncertainty, but interestingly, positive relation exists for reversible investment. This finding is in line with the option theory of investment and implies that irreversibility effect of increased uncertainty dominates the traditional convexity effect.

Investment-Uncertainty Relationship in the Oil and Gas Industry

Recent studies on oil market demonstrate endogeneity of oil price by modeling it as a function of consumption and precautionary demands and producers’ supply. However, studies analysing the effect of oil price uncertainty on investment, do not disentangle uncertainties raised by underlying components playing a role in oil market. Accordingly, this study investigates the relationship between investment and uncertainty for a panel of U.S. firms operating in oil and gas industry with a new approach. We decompose oil price volatility to be driven by structural shocks that are recognized in oil market literature, over and above other determinants, to study whether investment uncertainty relationship depends on the drivers of uncertainty. Our findings suggest that oil market uncertainty lowers investment only when it is caused by global consumption demand shocks. Stock market uncertainty is found to have a negative effect on investment with a year of delay. The results suggest no positive relation between irreversible investment and uncertainty, but interestingly, positive relation exists for reversible investment. This finding is in line with the option theory of investment and implies that irreversibility effect of increased uncertainty dominates the traditional convexity effect.

The Impact of Uncertainty on Investment: A Meta-Analysis

In this paper we perform a meta-analysis on empirical estimates of the impact between investment and uncertainty. Since the outcomes of primary studies are largely incomparable with respect to the magnitude of the effect, our analysis focuses on the direction and statistical significance of the relationship. The standard approach in this situation is to estimate an ordered probit model on a categorical estimate, defined in terms of the direction of the effect. The estimates are transformed into marginal effects, in order to represent the changes in the probability of finding a negative significant, insignificant, and positive significant estimate. Although a meta-analysis generally does not allow for inferences on the correctness of model specifications in primary studies, our results give clear directions for model building in empirical investment research. For example, not including factor prices in investment models may seriously affect the model outcomes. Furthermore, we find that Q-models produce more negative significant estimates than other models do, ceteris paribus. The outcome of a study is also affected by the type of data used in a primary study. Although it is clear that meta-analysis cannot always give decisive insights into the explanations for the variation in empirical outcomes, our meta-analysis shows that we can explain to a large extent why empirical estimates of the investment-uncertainty relationship differ.

Negative uncertainty sensitivity of investment and market structure

This paper examines how industry competition changes the sensitivity of investment to uncertainty using Japanese firm data. A switching regression model is employed to test the predictions of the real options theory regarding the uncertainty–investment relationship under different industry competition attributes. We find that the negative uncertainty sensitivity of investment is increased by industry concentration, but decreased by market share. The latter finding supports the view of strategic investment behavior of rival firms under uncertainty, rather than the erosion of option values by competition.

How Asset Irreversibility Influences the Investment-Uncertainty Relationship

This paper examines how industry-specific uncertainty affects firms’ investments for varying degrees of asset irreversibility (i.e. the wedge between purchase price and liquidation value of an asset). To identify more or less irreversible capital goods, we exploit unique survey data on German manufacturing firms over the sample period 2004 to 2012 in which managers provide information on investments’ purpose (capacity expansion, replacement, restructuring, rationalization, and other). We find that uncertainty only depresses capacity expansion investments, while non-capacity expansion investments such as replacement, restructuring and rationalization investments are not affected. Our results indicate that only investments into the most irreversible capital goods will decrease if uncertainty raises. We provide several tests confirming the robust impact of asset irreversibility on the investment-uncertainty relationship as we analyze several competing channels explaining the negative investment-uncertainty relation, such as the financial friction or the market power channel.

Investment–uncertainty relationship: differences between intangible and physical capital

ABSTRACTThis paper disentangles the effects of uncertainty in explaining the heterogeneity of firms’ investments. In particular, following Bloom [2007. “Uncertainty and the Dynamics of R&D.” American Economic Review 97 (2): 250–255], we test the role of uncertainty and liquidity constraints extending the model to include R&D, non-R&D intangibles, as well as physical capital. The analysis is performed on a large data set of Italian firms, covering both manufacturing and services sectors, as well as large and small firms. We show that non-convex adjustment costs affect different capital inputs in different ways, depending on their degree of firm-specificity. The results confirm the Bloom model: flow adjustment costs explain investment in R&D and, to a lesser extent, in non-R&D intangibles. However, it struggles to explain tangible investment plans because of the ambiguous effect of the stock adjustment costs.

Capital Investment, Commodity Price Volatility, and Skewness: Evidence from the Oil and Gas Industry

We examine the simultaneous effects of uncertainty on firm-level capital investment and risk management, using forward-looking and exogenous measures of output price uncertainty. The effect of uncertainty on capital investment varies with firms' hedging strategy, and firm size plays a pivotal role in these effects. When faced with high price uncertainty, large firms increase their hedging intensity but do not lower capital investment or net debt issuance, whereas small firms do not adjust their hedging intensity but significantly lower capital expenditure and net debt issuance. Our analysis highlights the importance of considering risk management while examining the uncertainty-investment relationship.

On the investment–uncertainty relationship: A game theoretic real option approach

This paper examines the effect of uncertainty on investment timing in a game theoretic real option model. We extend the settings of the related recent literature on investment timing under uncertainty by a more general assumption, i.e. the investment is also influenced by the actions of a second player. The results show that a U-shaped investment–uncertainty relationship generally sustains even for infinite-lived investment projects and proper defined cash flows. However, timing of an investment occurs inefficiently late. Moreover, we show that the influence of uncertainty on the associated first-mover advantage becomes ambiguous, too.

On the investment–uncertainty relationship in a real option model with stochastic volatility

We consider the classical investment timing problem in a framework where the instantaneous volatility of the project value is itself given by a stochastic process, hence lifting the old question about the investment–uncertainty relationship to a new level. Motivated by the classical cases of Geometric Brownian Motion (GBM) and Geometric Mean Reversion (GMR), we consider processes of similar functional form, but with Heston stochastic volatility replacing the constant volatility in the classical models. We refer to these processes as Heston-GBM and Heston-GMR. For these cases we derive asymptotic solutions for the investment timing problem using the methodology introduced by Fouque et al. (2000). In particular we show that compared to the classical cases with constant volatility, the question of whether additional stochastic volatility increases or decreases the investment threshold depends on the instantaneous correlation between the project value and the stochastic volatility. For the case of Heston-GBM we provide a closed form expression that measures this effect quantitatively; for the case of Heston-GMR we derive the sign of the effect analytically, using a type of maximum principle for ODEs. Various numerical examples are discussed and a comparative analysis is provided.

The R&D Investment–Uncertainty Relationship: Do Strategic Rivalry and Firm Size Matter?

This paper uses a real options perspective to augment a standard research and development (R&D) investment model and implement a firm‐level empirical analysis to assess the practical significance of market uncertainty and its interactions with strategic rivalry and firm size. We use a measure of firm‐relevant market uncertainty along with panel data and find that firms invest less in current R&D as uncertainty about market returns increases. The effect of firm‐specific uncertainty on R&D investment is smaller in markets where strategic rivalry is likely to be more intense. Furthermore, holding access to financing constant, the effect of uncertainty on R&D investment is attenuated for large firms. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Investment under uncertainty: The nature of demand shocks and the expected profitability of capital

This paper analyses the disparity regarding the sign of the investment–uncertainty relationship in models of investment under symmetric adjustment costs. That sign is determined by the shape of the profit function, which is related to the nature of demand shocks.