At the moment of writing of this article, mid-2018, the topic ‘blockchain’ was introduced in the real estate industry in the Netherlands about two years ago. Blockchain will have a large impact in the way we share information and make transactions. Its promise is big, interest in the topic and the number of experiments doubles each year, and not only in the Netherlands, but globally too. So you might expect the number of actual ‘blockchain products’ for the real estate market to follow the same exponential pattern.In reality, however, this is hardly the case at all. Does that mean there are barely any problems to which blockchain is the solution? Perhaps the problems do exist, but the market is not ready yet? And why not? The two most frequently asked questions in the real estate industry are the following: 1. How will blockchain change my business model?2. Where can I buy it so that I can employ it tomorrow?
MULTIFILE
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
Om haar doelstellingen te behalen en op professionele wijze om te gaan met haar vastgoed wil het Vastgoedbedrijf van de gemeente Groningen op een innovatieve manier gaan sturen op de maatschappelijke vastgoedportefeuille. Het gebruik van data en informatietechnologieën, oftewel datagedreven werken en sturen geeft inzicht in de effectiviteit en efficiëntie van de portefeuille. Deze roadmap omvat, naast een theoretisch kader, een stappenplan waarmee het proces naar data-gedreven vastgoedsturing wordt beschreven. Uitgangspunt hierbij is stapsgewijs uitvinden aangezien datagedreven vastgoedsturing vraagt om een andere manier van denken en doen. Er worden actionable insights gecreëerd zodat strategisch sturen mogelijk wordt. Het te ontwikkelen datamodel vormt de basis voor het aangaan van de dialoog, het nemen van beslissingen en het opstellen van lange termijndoelen. De uitkomst is een datamodel voor een proactieve, wendbare, toekomstbestendige organisatie die in staat is in te spelen op een veranderende omgeving en stuurt op een zo hoog mogelijk maatschappelijk rendement.De opkomst van Big Data en vooral Smart Data stelt ons in staat om op een andere manier inzicht te verkrijgen in wat er in de toekomst gaat gebeuren en hierin te sturen. Smart Cities, slimme apparaten en andere voorbeelden van Internet of Things - niet alleen mensen zijn online, maar ook dingen - genereren waardevolle data en maken dat dit eenvoudig gedeeld kan worden. En de introductie van Blockchain in het vastgoed zorgt bijvoorbeeld voor een andere manier van waardeoverdracht (Veuger, 2017). Het zijn voorbeelden van de inzet van data en technologische mogelijkheden die zorgen voor grote veranderingen en invloed hebben op en potentiële waarde - transparanter, professioneler, objectiever - hebben voor de vastgoedwereld. Maar hoe kan de gemeente Groningen nieuwe data en informatietechnologieën gebruiken om strategisch te sturen op de maatschappelijke vastgoedportefeuille?
MULTIFILE
This module for Involving Anthropology presents an account of one of the plenary debates held at the International Union of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences (IUAES) World Congress held at Manchester University, 5-10 August 2013. The module begins with a brief introduction to provide the context for the debate, which included two speakers for (Amita Baviskar and Don Nonini) and two speakers against (Helen Kopnina and Veronica Strang) the motion: ‘Justice for people must come before justice for the environment’. The introduction is followed by an edited transcript of John Gledhill’s welcome and introduction, the texts of the arguments made by each speaker for and against the motion (with the exception of Veronica Strang, whose presentation is being published elsewhere a summary of the comments and questions subsequently invited from the floor of the hall, and then a transcript of the responses of the presenters. https://doi.org/10.1080/00664677.2015.1102229 https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
MULTIFILE
OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the perspectives of professionals from the Dutch audiological centres on the definition and care pathways of children with suspected auditory processing disorders (susAPD).DESIGN: focus group interviews.STUDY SAMPLE: In total, 45 professionals from 6 disciplines, representing 22 different audiological centres and one ambulatory service, participated in five parallel focus group interviews. Participants had a variety of experience in diagnosing and advising children with suspected APD.RESULTS: Qualitative analysis (open and thematic) identified four themes ("Definition", "Causes", "Diagnostic Procedures" and "Clinical Reasoning") expressing a variety of perspectives. Differences in perspectives were mainly affected by two debates: (1) whether or not APD exists as a pure (auditory) disorder and (2) whether or not current AP-tests are suitable in diagnosing children with listening difficulties. They also expressed a need for more guidance from the literature in their clinical decision making process.CONCLUSIONS: Professionals from the Dutch audiological centres share a broad perspective on children with APD. The ICF framework supports this perspective, thereby diminishing the need for a clear definition. The use of AP-tests should be limited to children where broader developmental disorders are first ruled out; a possible "pure" APD could then be diagnosed in a limited number of children.
DOCUMENT
Biographical information of Jan Floris de Jongh
DOCUMENT
Calls for greater diversity, especially in relation to the appointment of arbitrators, have been prevalent for some time in the international arbitration community, followed by several initiatives being set up to address the issue. While the primary focus of the diversity debate has been on gender, there have also been calls to expand and diversify the profile of the arbitrator pool to include more non-Western and non-White arbitrators. For several years, scholars and practitioners have argued for countless benefits of increased racial diversity, such as an increased acceptability and legitimacy of the arbitration process. There is a consensus that in a deliberative process like ADR, practitioners should reflect their claimants’ demographics. The existence of diverse panels helps further the aims of meticulous and accurate fact-finding approaches. Similarly, they argue that the lack of racial diversity may directly and negatively affect the quality of arbitration awards. This blog post will focus on the lack of diversity of African arbitrators appointed to resolve international arbitration proceedings, as well as initiatives that are being set up to address such issues. The focus on African ethnicity is given for two reasons: 1) African countries are no strangers to arbitration. Nearly 100 arbitral institutions exist across Africa. 2) There has been an increase of arbitration proceedings emanating from African regions, while there has been a minimal growth in the ethnic diversity of arbitrators appointed to resolve these disputes. This article was originally published on https://commercialarbitrationineurope.wordpress.com/2021/06/29/diversity-in-arbitration-the-lack-of-racial-diversity-in-international-arbitral-tribunals/
MULTIFILE
