Pioneering institutions in sector on real estate appraisal

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 5 Sayı: 3, 123 - 133, 01.07.2021

Fatih Taktak , Mahir Serhan Temiz

https://doi.org/10.31127/tuje.704692

Öz

The institutions that take the leading role in the evaluation of the real estate should be determined. Real estate valuation takes place in a multi-headed organizational structure and is benefited from institutions in both the public and private sectors. The method of determining the institutions will be examined through the social network analysis methodology of the network of relations between public institutions and the private sector. With the numerical and visual analyzes the following questions will be examined: "Which is the director and responsible institution to undertake the task of collecting the institutional structure under one roof?", Which is the institution that uses the real estate appraisal results most in their works?, Which institution is the most cooperating in acquiring data on real estate appraisal?, Which are the most known institutions that make real estate appraisal?, Which of the institutions that make real estate appraisal are most trusted?”. The study will be conducted in order to find answers given to the related questions. As a result, relations between institutions engaged in real estate appraisal business are assessed by social network analysis and interoperability issuing "awareness network" will be put forward.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Real Estate Appraisal, Network Analysis, Organizational Communication, Interoperability, Awareness

Destekleyen Kurum

Usak University

Proje Numarası

2016 / MF012

Teşekkür

This study was supported by Usak University, Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit with project number (2016 / MF012).

Kaynakça

• Barabási A L (2016). Network science. Cambridge university press.
• Borgatti S P & Molina J L (2003). Ethical and strategic issues in organizational social network analysis. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 39(3), 337-349. DOI: 10.1177/0021886303258111
• Borgatti S P, Mehra A, Brass D J & Labianca G (2009). Network analysis in the social sciences. Science, 323(5916), 892-895. DOI: 10.1126/science.1165821
• Borgatti S P & Ofem B (2010). Social network theory and analysis. Social network theory and educational change, 17-29.
• Borgatti S P, Everett M G & Johnson J C (2018). Analyzing social networks. Sage. ISBN: 978-1-5264-0409-1
• Burt R S & Minor M J (1983). Applied network analysis: A methodological introduction. Sage Publications, Inc.
• Carrington P J, Scott J & Wasserman S (2005). Models and methods in social network analysis. Cambridge university press, 28
• Charalabidis Y, Janssen M & Krcmar H (2015). Introduction to the big, open, and linked data (BOLD), analytics, and interoperability infrastructures in Government Minitrack. 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Kauai, HI, USA. DOI: 10.1109/HICSS.2015.248
• Diallo S Y, Gore R J, Barraco A, Padilla J J & Lynch C (2016). Quantitative performance metrics for evaluation and comparison of middleware interoperability products. The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation, 13(2), 161-169. DOI: 10.1177/1548512915570143
• Ertas M (2019). Education for real estate valuation in Turkey. International Journal of Engineering and Geosciences, 4(1), 8-15. DOI: 10.26833/ijeg.416336
• Çay T, Toklu, N & Esen Ö (2017). Evaluation of land reform policies in Turkey. International Journal of Engineering and Geosciences, 2(2), 63-67. DOI: 10.26833/ijeg.297223
• Freeman L C (2004). The development of social network analysis. A Study in the Sociology of Science, Empirical Press, Vancouver, BC Canada, 1. ISBN: 1-59457-714-5
• Freeman L C (1996). Some antecedents of social network analysis. Connections, 19(1), 39-42.
• Freeman L C, White D R & Romney A K (2017). Research methods in social network analysis. Routledge, New York, USA.
• Friedman J P, Harris J C & Lindeman J B (2017). Dictionary of real estate terms. Simon and Schuster.
• Iversen T, Anell A, Häkkinen U, Kronborg C & Ólafsdóttir T (2016). Coordination of health care in the Nordic countries. Nordic Journal of Health Economics, 4(1), 41-55. DOI: 10.5617/njhe.2846
• Güney C, Doğru A Ö, Başaraner M, Çelik R N, Uluğtekin N, Özlüdemir T & Keskin M (2015). “TUCBS Açmazı” ve Açık Bir Ulusal Mekansal Veri Altyapısına Yönelim. 15. Türkiye Harita Bilimsel ve Teknik Kurultayı. (in Turkish).
• Jablin F M & Putnam L L (2001). The new handbook of organizational communication: Advances in Theory, Research and Methods. Sage Pub.
• Jablin F M & Putnam L L (2004). The new handbook of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods. Sage Pub.
• Jones A T, Friedkin N E & Singh A K (2017). Modeling the Co-evolution of Committee Formation and Awareness Networks in Organizations. Complex Networks and their Applications. Springer, Cham, 881-894. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-72150-7_71
• Kauko T (2018). Pricing and sustainability of urban real estate. Routledge.
• Knoke D & Yang S (2019). Social network analysis. Sage, 154.
• Krause A L & Bitter C (2012). Spatial econometrics, land values and sustainability: Trends in real estate valuation research. Cities, 29, S19-S25. DOI: 10.1016/j.cities.2012.06.006
• Lucius D I (2001). Real options in real estate development. Journal of Property Investment & Finance, 19(1), 73-78.
• Lundsgaarde E, Fejerskov A M & Skovgaard J (2018). Analysing climate finance coordination. DIIS.
• MacGregor B D, Schulz R & Green R K (2018). Routledge Companion to Real Estate Investment. Routledge.
• Moreno J L & Jennings H H (1938). Statistics of social configurations. Sociometry, 342-374.
• Nanda A (2019). Residential Real Estate: Urban & Regional Economic Analysis. Routledge.
• Ozbek E D, Zlatanova S, Aydar S A & Yomralioglu T (2016). 3D Geo-Information requirements for disaster and emergency management. International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing & Spatial Information Sciences, 41.
• Polat Z A & Ustuner M & Alkan M (2015). On the way to vision of cadastre 2034: Cadastre 2014 performance of Turkey. FIG working week, Sofia, Bulgaria.
• Saralioğlu M Ö, Demir O, Coruhlu Y E & Saralioğlu E (2019). Data model design for qualified natural-protected area in Turkey. Survey Review, 51(365), 154-165. DOI: 10.1080/00396265.2017.1388960
• Scott J (1988). Social network analysis. Sociology, 22(1), 109-127. DOI: 10.1177/0038038588022001007
• Seevers M T, Johnson B R & Darnold T C (2015). Social Networks in the Classroom: Personality Factors as Antecedents of Student Social Capital. American Journal of Business Education, 8(3), 193-206.
• Smith A & Wen X (2017). Investing in institutions for cooperation. Journal of the Economic Science Association, 3(1), 75-87. DOI: 10.1007/s40881-017-0033-2
• Smith C (2016). U.S. Patent Application No. 14/673,810.
• Taktak F (2013). Social/organizational network analysis within the scope nsdi. PhD Thesis, Yıldız Technical University, Turkey (in Turkish).
• Taktak F & Demir H (2019). Relations that show the network potential for spatial data sharing. Technical Gazette, 26(2), 346-354. DOI: 10.17559/TV-20170920100230
• Thibaut A, Bruno M A, Chatelle C, Gosseries O et al. (2012). Metabolic activity in external and internal awareness networks in severely brain-damaged patients. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 44(6), 487-94. DOI: 10.2340/16501977-0940
• Tichy N M, Tushman M L & Fombrun C (1979). Social network analysis for organizations. Academy of management review, 4(4), 507-519. DOI: 10.5465/amr.1979.4498309
• Ujwary-Gil A (2019). Organizational Network Analysis: Auditing Intangible Resources. Routledge.
• Unel F B, Yalpir S & Gulnar B (2017). Preference changes depending on age groups of criteria affecting the real estate value. International Journal of Engineering and Geosciences, 2(2), 41-51. DOI: 10.26833/ijeg.297271
• Vaubel R (2016). 3 Institutions for European Cooperation. Breaking Up Is Hard To Do: Britain and Europe’s Dysfunctional Relationship: Britain and Europe’s Dysfunctional Relationship, 40.
• Yu S M (2016). Real Estate Education. Sıngapore's Real Estate: 50 Years of Transformation, 241-252.
• Zutshi A, Grilo A & Jardim-Goncalves R (2012). The business interoperability quotient measurement model. Computers in Industry, 63(5), 389-404. DOI: 10.1016/j.compind.2012.01.002
• Wang C, Dai S & Xu H (2018). Estimating the land opportunism of hotel investment in generating real estate appreciation and firms’ market value. Land use policy, 77, 752-759. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.06.015
• Wang S, Chen X & Szolnoki A (2019). Exploring optimal institutional incentives for public cooperation. Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation, 79, 104914. DOI: 10.1016/j.cnsns.2019.104914
• Wasserman S & Faust K (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications, Cambridge university press, 8.
• Whitney J, Woodworth B N, Sohaney M & Hacking L J (2009). U.S. Patent Application No. 12/403,324.