Det sker dagligen många fastighetsinvesteringar runt omkring i sverige, många av dessa investeringar saknar en grundlig marknadsundersökning inför investeringen. Detta skapar problem inom fastighetsbranschen. Å ena sidan är många av investeringarna riskfyllda och inte väl genomtänkta, å andra sidan finns det ofta många alternativa investeringar som kan generera en högre direktavkastning och därmed en ökad lönsamhet. Ibland kan dessa investeringar ligga på andra orter än vad företagen har sitt tillfälliga fastighetsbestånd. Geografisk diversifiering handlar om att företagen har fastighetsbestånd på flertal platser vilket i teori ökar lönsamheten,eftersom direktavkastningen är generellt högre i småstäder. Rapporten har som utgångspunkt att redogöra ifall marknaden framförallt är intresserade av investeringar i storstäder. Samt att komma underfund med skillnaden mellan vilka risker som tas högst hänsyn till i både småstad och storstad. Slutligen undersöks huruvida lönsamheten skiljer sig åt i respektive delmarknad. Inledningsvis utreds tidigare rapporter och årsredovisningar som behandlar de olika aspekternasom klaras ut i rapporten i form utav en litteraturgenomgång, som främst är tagna från KTHDIVA. Vidare är en teoridel som står till grund för resonemangen som presenteras i analysen och diskussionen, varpå en semistrukturerad intervju har hjälp för att skapa enenkätundersökning. Följt av ett resultat-, analys, diskussion och slutsatskapitel. Resultatet från studien är att intresset för att investera i storstäder är större än att investera i mindre städer, dock är lönsamheten större i småstäder. Slutligen är skillnaden på riskhantering i de olika delmarknader är relativt lika. Däremot finns det andra incitament som påverkar resultatet i denna undersökning, en av anledningarna är att rapporten är skriven under våren 2020, vilket är under den period som covid-19. Vilket resulterar i att framförallt mindre företag ej haft tid till att svara på enkätundersökningen som presenteras i rapporten. För att tala om ett generellt resultat behöver vidare undersökningen kring intresse, lönsamhet och riskhantering. / The report's starting point is to report if the market is primarily interested in investments in large cities. As well as coming to the bottom with the difference between which risks that are mostly taken into account in both small towns and big cities. Finally, it is examined whether profitability differs in each sub-market. Initially, a literature review is conducted, containing previous reports and annual reports that deal with various aspects of the study. These reports are mainly taken from KTH DIVA. Furthermore,a theory section is the basis for the arguments presented in the analysis and discussion,where upon a semi-structured interview helps to create a survey. Followed by a result, analysis, discussion and conclusion chapter. The result of the study is that the interest in investing in large cities is greater than investing insmaller cities, but profitability is greater in small towns. Finally, the difference in riskmanagement in the various sub-markets is relatively similar. However, there are other incentives that affect the results of this survey, one of the reasons being that the report was written in spring 2020, which is during the period covid-19. As a result,especially smaller companies have not had time to respond to the survey presented in there port. Further answers are needed to be able to talk about a general result from the survey.

This dissertation investigates the motivating factors as well as the perceived inhibitors to the Nigeria diaspora investing in Nigeria. Two studies address (1) the motivation for the Nigeria diaspora to invest in their country of origin (2) the perceived factors inhibiting them. Not much is known about what motivates diaspora to invest in their country of origin or why investment intensity varies among diaspora communities. To this end, the relationship between the causal factors and Nigerian born diaspora investment interest is examined using Nielsen & Riddle (2007) investment motivation framework. Using this interdisciplinary approach, an individual level conceptual model of diaspora homeland investment is generated. The study shows that members of the Nigeria diaspora community do not invest in their homeland for financial reward. They invest for perceived emotional returns and this is positively moderated by the degree of their social embeddedness in their country of origin as well as in their country of residence. They also invest for perceived social rewards. This is also moderated by their social embeddedness. The second study examined the perceived inhibitors to diasporic investment using the Galetto conceptual framework (Galetto, 2011). According to Galletto, investment is contingent on four main proximate factors; a minimum amount of money remitted or saved; minimum level of local development; the presence of suitable investment opportunities and the existence of specific household arrangement. The study shows that the perceived inhibitors to diasporic investment are: poor physical infrastructure; weak financial system and political instability and risk and that the dominant inhibitor is political instability and risk. Collectively, these two studies examine why the Nigeria diaspora would want to invest in their homeland and what prevents them from doing so. They seek to identify ways to turn diaspora investment and entrepreneurship interest into meaningful investment in the country-of-origin. Understanding why the nascent Nigeria diaspora investor or entrepreneur invest in their homeland and the obstacles they face is an important first step to identifying ways that governments can attract diasporic investment and entrepreneurship through marketing and other promotional efforts. Finally, this research lays a foundation for a stream of future research, building on the findings and data generated in the process of addressing the research questions. / Business Administration/Strategic Management