PurposeThe purpose of this study is to see how a more developed discipline – corporate real estate management (CREM) – can add value to a less developed discipline – municipal real estate management (MREM) – to contribute to their professionalisation. Design/methodology/approachEvery year since 2008 (except for 2013), municipalities have been asked to complete a questionnaire on how they manage their real estate. With these results, it is possible to perform quantitative analyses on both trends and the current situation. In addition, municipalities’ descriptions of their real estate management have been analysed in a qualitative way. FindingsMunicipalities are concentrating their real estate tasks in the municipal organisation to link their real estate, their policies and the citizens/tenants. Remarkable is the diversity of the functions and the broad definition of “the real estate employee” (organisational structure). Municipalities make strategic and organisational changes that aim to improve both the real estate portfolio and the municipal organisation (operations). The next years, municipalities will focus in particular on vacancy rates, organisation design, collaboration, ownership and the sustainability of the portfolio (direction). Originality/valueQualitative and quantitative research are combined to compare theory with practice on CREM and MREM. The results contribute to the professionalisation of Dutch municipalities.
DOCUMENT
The value of the public real estate portfolio is estimated to exceed the biggest Dutchprivate investor ten times. In spite of its importance, it seems that this municipal real estate is not always managed in a professional way. This paper is about how a more developed and researched discipline – corporate real estate management (CREM) – can add value to a less developed and researched discipline – municipal real estate management (MREM) – to contribute to their professionalisation.
DOCUMENT
Background and aim – The aim of this paper is to look at the professionalization of municipal real estate management (MREM) from an organizational design perspective.Methods / Methodology – Analysis of current and recent MREMliterature in a Dutch context on organizational design. Results – It appears that organizational design is implicitly or explicitly concluded as being interesting and relevant, but no research was performed on this topic. In general, it seems MREM could be significantly better organized creating higher value of its real estate for society. Practical or social implications – The finding that organizational design is an interesting yet underexposed parameter contributes to an awareness at real estate professionals. A better organization of MREM will not only increase professionalism, but also create higher value for local authorities and society. Moreover, possibilities for future research have been identified. Ultimately, new research and more best case practices can advance the management of real estate at local governments.
DOCUMENT
In The Netherlands, the Real Estate Assessment Act regulates the yearly appraisal of all Dutch real estate. Municipal real estate is a sizable, and thus important, segment of this real estate market. This results in assessed values that are used for official purposes and taxes. The Dutch municipalities also use these assessed values for their budgeting plans and in their considerations concerning their real estate portfolio (e.g. disposal). The act provides quality requirements these assessed values have to meet. One of these requirements is that the appraised value corresponds with the market value of the real estate objects.
DOCUMENT
The purpose of this study is to show how local authorities (municipalities) deal with their community real estate. The study is an annually recurring research: every year since 2008 (except for 2013), Dutch municipalities have been asked to complete a questionnaire about how they manage their real estate. With these results it is possible to perform quantitative analyses on both trends and the current situation.The questionnaire responses have led to the following conclusions: (1) Half of themunicipalities has a policy but takes few risk measures, (2) Withdrawing local government, (3) Management and operations most outsourced tasks, (4) Obstacles remain unchanged, (5) Cost reduction most relevant policy theme since 2009, (6) Relevance of some policy themes depends on municipality size, (7) More real estate is offered, smaller percentage is sold, 8) More FTEs for real estate management, especially executive tasks and (9) Conscious focuson quality. Dutch municipalities tune their new developments of the municipal real estate policy to the results of the Barometer for Municipal Community Real Estate. This leads to a further development of professionalism of the municipal real estate portfolios.The contribution to science is showing patterns of community real estate management at Dutch municipalities. A longitudinal study of this size on this subject is unique in The Netherlands.
DOCUMENT
The purpose of this study is to show how local authorities (municipalities) deal with their community real estate. The study is an annually recurring research: every year since 2008 (except for 2013), Dutch municipalities have been asked to complete a questionnaire about how they manage their real estate. With these results it is possible to perform quantitative analyses on both trends and the current situation. The questionnaire responses have led to the following conclusions: (1) Half of the municipalities has a policy but takes few risk measures, (2) Withdrawing local government, (3) Management and operations most outsourced tasks, (4) Obstacles remain unchanged, (5) Cost reduction most relevant policy theme since 2009, (6) Relevance of some policy themes depends on municipality size, (7) More real estate is offered, smaller percentage is sold, 8) More FTEs for real estate management, especially executive tasks and (9) Conscious focus on quality. Dutch municipalities tune their new developments of the municipal real estate policy to the results of the Barometer for Municipal Community Real Estate. This leads to a further development of professionalism of the municipal real estate portfolios. The contribution to science is showing patterns of community real estate management at Dutch municipalities. A longitudinal study of this size on this subject is unique in The Netherlands.
MULTIFILE
This contribution concerns the province of Drenthe in the Netherlands, focusing on four municipalities in the southeast of Drenthe where real estate vacancy is a top priority of ministers and interested parties. This study introduces questions, ideas and solutions. The municipalities are developing and are responsible for the developments in the field of economic developments, community real estate, vacancy and reallocation. But what is the uniting force? The skill in managing community real estate lies in asking questions and having patience with answers. Answers may develop by asking questions and entering into the dialogue with the community. Municipalities are continually attempting to establish a balance between the opportunities of interested parties and those of themselves. A balance between public values, legitimacy and organization (capacity). Einstein discovered surprising answers because of the many questions he asked. Always asking questions stimulates personal knowledge, expertise and skills. Just like sailors running a tight ship who are always on the lookout for wind and currents. The study in economic developments, community real estate, vacancy and reallocation was carried out by the readership for Community Real Estate with 77 professionals in four municipalities with a total population of 195,000 and a surface area of approximately 1,200 square kilometers, comparable to the province of Utrecht
DOCUMENT
2007, the Ministry of Housing and Spatial Planning took the initiative to issue the social building blocks: real estate for facilities. This has been the first attempt to deal with social real estate professionally as an asset. In 2008 the professorship of public real estate started with its first Barometer for Social Real Estate. In 2009, I advocated in Real Estate Magazine that research into social real estate is necessary from the perspective of Corporate Real Estate Management (CREM) through new development models and more (PhD) research.In anticipation of the municipal elections of 2010, research by the research group Municipal Real Estate showed that social real estate was not a matter for the election programs of the political parties. This was a prelude to the funded RAAK subsidy application towards marketed municipal real estate for carrying out practice-oriented research. In 2012, this research led to the externally funded research group Social Real Estate. After that, the Social Real Estate professorship profiled itself in different areas. Extra media publicity has been generated primarily thanks to the attention of minister Stef Blok in 2014, when he received the first copy of the book Barometer Maatschappelijk Vastgoed (Social Real Estate): Corporate Social Responsibility at our annual congress, the round table meeting with State Secretary for Health, Welfare and Sport Martin van Rijn in 2015 and the informal conversation with the Minister of Education, Culture and Science Jet Bussemaker in 2015, as well as the many publications of the lectorate. In the 2016 debate with civil society with the Prime Minister Mark Rutte when handing over the book Barometer Maatschappelijk Vastgoed (Social Real Estate) 2016, a round table meeting in 2017 with Minister of Home Affairs and Kingdom Relations Stef Blok, aldermen and directors Real Estate of Municipalities in The Netherlands, have contributed to social and economic knowledge utilization for future and existing real estate professionals. At the PROVADA 2017 we co-organized ‘Shrink: Emptiness and Space for Innovation and Change’ session, where the Minister of the Home Affairs and Kingdom Relations Ronald Plasterk presented his vision on this subject.
MULTIFILE
Energy efficiency has gained a lot of prominence in recent debates on urban sustainability and housing policy due to its potential consequences for climate change. At the local, national and also international level, there are numerous initiatives to promote energy savings and the use of renewable energy to reduce the environmental burden. There is a lot of literature on energy saving and other forms of energy efficiency in housing. However, how to bring this forward in the management of individual housing organisations is not often internationally explored. An international research project has been carried out to find the answers on management questions of housing organisations regarding energy efficiency. Eleven countries have been included in this study: Germany, the United Kingdom (more specifically: England), France, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Slovenia, the Czech Republic, Austria and Canada. The state of the art of energy efficiency in the housing management of non-profit housing organisations and the embedding of energy efficiency to improve the quality and performance of housing in management practices have been investigated, with a focus on how policy ambitions about energy efficiency are brought forward in investment decisions at the estate level. This paper presents the conclusions of the research
DOCUMENT
