Explore the vast range of titles available.

Purpose The real estate world finds itself at a tipping point of a transition: a dramatic and irreversible shift in (real estate) systems in society. This paper is a State of the art of Disruption, Blockchain and Real Estate in the Netherlands and international. Design/methodology/approach The following questions were asked to all those involved: What do you think is the essence of Blockchain for real estate? What is the most current situation with respect to Blockchain and real estate from your perspective? Which publications are important from your perspective? What do you expect with respect to the impact of Blockchain on real estate for (social) real estate? What are questions for the future for real estate and Blockchain? In addition, interviews, exploratory conversations and correspondence took place, and the content was peer reviewed. Findings Changes in value concepts affect the valuation of real estate and the thinking about it. The orientation of changing users and owners of real estate affects innovativeness, values and flexibility in managing that property. Orientation on disruption must be seen as proof that the real estate world is able to actually innovate the accumulated assets and consolidate this. The financial and real estate markets are markets that exaggerate through irrational behaviour. Fear of “eat or be eaten” determines people’s behaviour. Financial and thus real estate markets are always unstable and must always be regulated by people and organizations. Research limitations/implications The question that remains is whether it is important to look at disruptive innovations in existing markets or newcomers in the real estate market and Blockchain. The question is whether Blockchain is only a technological disruption, or a real game changer, and whether the entire value chain of the real estate market will embrace it. No two disruptions are the same. Trust in Blockchain is a prerequisite for guiding the predictable form of that disruption where start-up companies use new technology to offer cheaper and inferior alternatives to real estate in the market. You could also talk about anti-fragile value: “Some things benefit from shocks; they thrive and grow when exposed to volatility, randomness, disorder, and stressors and love adventure, risk, and uncertainty. Yet, in spite of the ubiquity of the phenomenon, there is no word for the exact opposite of fragile. Let us call it antifragile” (Taleb, 2012), in other words: attention to disruption and Blockchain creates a viable real estate economy. Practical implications The true meaning of the Blockchain technology for real estate still needs to be investigated. The author is still curious to understand and clarify the value of Blockchain for real estate processes. Doubt continues to exist and is therefore a feeding ground for further research, because we do not know what we have not seen. Social implications Looking at the impact of Blockchain on real estate, a number of conclusions can be drawn. First of all, the relationship between Blockchain and real estate has not yet been proven in practice. It is expected to develop further in the form of registering transaction processes and the DNA passport of a real estate object. Secondly, completeness and transparency are the basic ingredients for trust in the system. Third, real estate wants to remain viable. For this reason, taking the offense is necessary for real estate and management to connect with social demand. Behaviour also leads to new earnings models of the social and economic spin-off of disruptive real estate. If the Dutch real estate sector embraces Blockchain and is able to realize innovations, there are opportunities for real estate entrepreneurs to exploit the disruptive character to provide those new services. Originality/value The way in which disruption, Blockchain and real estate will develop in the coming years are not the only obvious characteristics of a particular era but also its social impact and user behaviour. This also applies to how this real estate transition can best be tracked, guided and utilized in society at the international, national and regional level. Disruptive organizations clearly respond to the viability of the (built) environment and therefore determine competitive strength. This affects the current and future valuation of real estate.

Purpose: This research is about the added value of occupancy sensing and the factors that influence the added value. The objective of this research is to gain insight into the added value of occupancy sensing from a facility management perspective and the factors that influence the perceived added value. Design/methodology/approach: The paper provides insight into the added value of occupancy sensing from a facility management perspective, obtained through qualitative research. By conducting interviews with suppliers, users and an organisation that consciously chooses not to use occupancy sensing, the added value becomes apparent. The interviewed experts were approached as a result of selected articles or through the Saxion UAS network. The people who responded were interviewed. A limited number of 10 interviews was chosen because that was the minimum number of interviews required for this study. Findings: Several factors influence the added value of occupancy sensing. From the literature, these are data maturity, human behaviour and the quality of sensors. For the study, goal/motivation, preconditions and data or Information Technology (IT) were added. The interviews showed that organisations choose occupancy sensing mainly because smart buildings are on the rise, it is popular and they can make decisions based on the data and evidence. The most important precondition is that it must be known in advance what needs to be measured and that the facility managers are included in the process. The most significant influence on the success of added value is human behaviour. If the end users are not included in the new way of working, there is a good chance that they are not satisfied and that there is no added value. The functioning of IT and the use of the data also influence the added value. This research shows that added value is only achieved if the preconditions are met and factors such as human behaviour are taken into account. When this works well, facility management as a department will also be able to deliver substantial value to the entire organisation. Research limitations/implications: The limitations of this research were that there was only one interview with a non-user. Their opinion would be more valuable where the respondents are asked more about the data maturity of the organisation and their alignment with the organisation’s strategy. The limitations mainly have to do with the limited time frame of the research. In further research, it is also indicated that for a more complete study, this time frame should be extended. Practical implications: The results can be used by everybody who needs to get insight into the use of occupancy sensing from a facility management perspective and the added value for facility management. Originality/value: While there is a significant amount of literature on occupancy sensing and the use of sensors in office environments, there is only limited research on the added value of occupancy sensing from a facility management perspective. Paper type: Research paper. The literature review shows that the added value of facility management is difficult to make tangible. Many organisations see facility management as a cost item, and therefore, the costs must always be taken into account. There is a shift from cost to added value for the organisation, but this only works if the strategy of facility management (FM)/corporate real estate management (CREM) is aligned with the strategy of the organisation. In many cases, this does not yet appear to be the case. For future research, the advice is to look more into other smart features and their added value. Data maturity is a limitation of this research, and the relationship between data maturity and facility management should be studied more. The future is digital and data-driven, and there are not sufficient studies on that.

Purpose A first exploration of the impact of blockchain on real estate in the Netherlands took place in 2017. In the follow-up, several blockchain and real estate studies have appeared with research on real estate and blockchain worldwide. In view of the previous research, the question remained as to what is now happening worldwide in the field of blockchain and real estate. This has resulted in the start-up of the Foundation for International Blockchain and Real Estate Expertise (FIBREE) network. This network has led to the launch of two investigations: Industry Report Blockchain Real Estate 2019 on exploration of international products and a database exploring blockchain and real estate on exploring (inter)national research. This paper aims to provides an overview and analysis of all relevant scientific publications – targeted on the Netherlands – and does so within a context of a first small international exploration of international research, experts and products – in particular land registration. Design/methodology/approach I have asked everybody at the Regionals Chairs of FIBREE to collect data with info about which blockchain and real estate product-suppliers or initiatives do you see, which research-output on blockchain and real estate is there and who are the experts with which specific expertise? This paper provides an overview and analysis of all relevant scientific publications – targeted on the Netherlands – and does so within a context of a first small international exploration of international research, experts and products – in particular land registration. Findings This paper provides an overview and analysis of all relevant scientific publications – targeted on the Netherlands – and does so within a context of a first small international exploration of international research, experts and products – in particular land registration. Research limitations/implications A question that remains is to continue to look at existing markets or too disruptive innovation newcomers in the blockchain market. The question is whether blockchain is only a technological disruption or a real game changer and whether the entire value chain of the market is going to embrace this. Confidence in blockchain is therefore a precondition for guiding that disruption where (new) companies use new technology to offer cheaper and superior alternatives in the market. But the big question is how quickly blockchain will develop as well as all its applications. Practical/social implications A question that remains is to continue to look at existing markets or too disruptive innovation newcomers in the blockchain market. The question is whether blockchain is only a technological disruption or a real game changer and whether the entire value chain of the market is going to embrace this. Confidence in blockchain is therefore a precondition for guiding that disruption where (new) companies use new technologies to offer cheaper and superior alternatives in the market. But the big question is how quickly blockchain will develop as well as all its applications. Originality/value A first exploration of the influence of blockchain on real estate in the Netherlands took place in 2017. In the follow-up, several blockchain and real estate studies appear with research about real estate and blockchain worldwide.

Purpose The 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/approach Every 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. Findings Municipalities 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/value Qualitative and quantitative research are combined to compare theory with practice on CREM and MREM. The results contribute to the professionalisation of Dutch municipalities.

Housing associations make too little a contribution to Society, the government has to step in too frequently because of maladministration, and the associations' executives are often unaware of the farreaching impact of their decisions. These are the conclusions of the new academic research conducted by Jan Veuger of Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University (RSM). In his dissertation, he asserts that in numerous cases there is no correlation between social and financial objectives. The Dutch House of Representatives debated the results of the report \"Ver van huis\" from the Parliamentary Committee of Inquiry on Housing Associations in early December 2014. After extensive exploration of the literature and PhD studies on the period from 2005-2009, the research design was inspired by the grounded theory, which has a certain bias as a result of the extensive literature study. In the line of thinking of the grounded theory, interviews with directors contacted were more or less uninhibited according to a narrative method. Afterwards, these interviews, independent of the researcher, thematic and labelled by a single Delphi method were submitted to an expert group which created a storyline.

Housing associations make too little a contribution to Society, the government has to step in too frequently because of maladministration, and the associations’ executives are often unaware of the farreaching impact of their decisions. These are the conclusions of the new academic research conducted by Jan Veuger of Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University (RSM). In his dissertation, he asserts that in numerous cases there is no correlation between social and financial objectives. The Dutch House of Representatives debated the results of the report “Ver van huis” from the Parliamentary Committee of Inquiry on Housing Associations in early December 2014. After extensive exploration of the literature and PhD studies on the period from 2005-2009, the research design was inspired by the grounded theory, which has a certain bias as a result of the extensive literature study. In the line of thinking of the grounded theory, interviews with directors contacted were more or less uninhibited according to a narrative method. Afterwards, these interviews, independent of the researcher, thematic and labelled by a single Delphi method were submitted to an expert group which created a storyline.

Blockchain might be the future of digitalizing assets into small pieces called tokens, of which the process is called tokenization. Transaction costs and speed are reduced, and entering into so called Real Estate Investment Trusts for investing in real estate are no longer an issue. Through tokenization, anyone from this planet can invest in real estate.Context: According to Savills (2017), the total value of world real estate reached $217 trillion in 2015. It only includes developed real estate and could have been much larger when we had counted the vast amount of non-developed land on the planet. One major boundary is the accessibility and the tradability of money. In the current situation, real estate is traded via Real Estate Investment Trusts (short: REITs). The problem with these REITs is the accessibility. Only the few people who can investment above the threshold can invest in real estate. Thereby, currency is another problem, because potential investors in Hong Kong cannot invest in Dutch real estate. This leads to a lack of liquidity on the financial real estate market. Blockchain might be the solution to this lack of global liquidity in real estate. In this way, real estate is purchased via smart contracts, traded via blockchain, and invested in by tokens: all very quickly. In this way, the world has no longer the financial borders from today. In theory, anyone can invest in real estate and make profit.The main question of this research paper is: In what way can tokenizing real estate by blockchain substitute the conventional way of investing in non-listed real estate?The sub questions of this theoretical framework in order to answer the main question are:What is the conventional way of trading non-listed real estate? How does this work? What are its boundaries? What is blockchain? How can it be adopted in real estate? What are smart contracts? What are its (dis)advantages? What is tokenization? How does it work? What are its (dis)advantages? What form of

In 2007, the Ministry of Housing and Spatial Planning took the initiative to issue the building blocks for social: 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 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 from 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 a marketed municipal real estate for carrying out practice-oriented research. This research in 2011-2012 led to the completely externally funded research group Social Real Estate in 2012. After that, the Social Real Estate professorship profiled itself in different areas. Especially 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 have given extra publicity in the media alongside the many publications of the lectorate. The debate in 2016 with civil society with the Prime Minister Mark Rutte with the handing over of 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

This paper discusses sustainable real estate and the role of ethics within real estate. Both terms 'sustainability' and 'ethics' needs an explanation. With this discussion the tripartite system of 'morals - principles - laws' is described in order to have more grip on sustainable real estate and ethics.

The Dutch Real Estate Assessment Act (DREA) regulates that nearly all real estate in the Netherlands will be appraised by the local government (municipality) each year. The assessed DREA value is used for taxes and other official purposes. The Netherlands Council for Real Estate Assessment is an independent administrative body that audits the activities of all municipalities in the Netherlands related to the Act for Real Estate Assessment. The council also advises the Minister of Finance on matters of property tax legislation as well as appraisal and assessment of real estate. The Minister of Finance is responsible for the activities of the Council. Community real estate is a sizable, and thus important, segment of the real estate market in the Netherlands. Because community real estate is situated amidst society, and as a result has an impact on the livability of our environment, it is -- and increasingly is becoming -- a subject of discussion in our society.