FIG Commission 9 - Valuation and the Management of Real Estate |
|||||||||||||||||
Term 1999-2002
However, Commission 9 shares mutual interests with Commissions 1 – Professional Standards, Commission 2 – Professional Education, and Commission 7 – Cadastre and Land Management. The emergence of a series of joint working groups and collaborations amongst these commissions has been a new direction in recent years. The Mission Statement for Commission 9, developed in 1998, had a strong focus on identifying valuers and appraisers both within the FIG family of members and in the emerging infrastructures of developing free market economies. The secondary but by no means less important objective was to increase FIG member participation while liaisons with other appraisal and valuation organizations was viewed as a potential source of new memberships in FIG. Some success has been achieved during these past three years. Currently valuation organizations from the Czech Republic, USA, Lithuania, Armenia and Israel are members of the FIG family. On a more practical level, Commission 9 has had an increasing interest in and concern for the impacts on property rights and values created by adverse environmental conditions that exist in may industrialized and rural parts of the world. During the tenure of the current leadership in Commission 9, new opportunities have come forth for additional areas of interest. These include the enhanced focus on the Pacific Rim with greater emphasis on the emerging opportunities for a growing valuation profession in China. Commission 9 has also been fortunate in obtaining grants from professional businesses in Australia and elsewhere, creating a small fund for subsidizing papers and speakers from emerging countries that address the many special problems faced in the process of creating a professional valuation profession and market service where none has existed before. Progress being made In 1998, it is estimated that fewer than 10% of the member organizations in FIG included a valuer/appraiser membership component. This meant that of the then 64 member organizations in FIG, perhaps only six or seven organizations included valuers in their membership. Of course, some of these organizations provide more than one participant in the Commission’s activities. In 2002, it is estimated that 16% of the FIG member organizations have valuers in their ranks, a modest but appreciated increase in the role of Commission 9 in the workings of FIG. The hard core of FIG members who actively participate in Commission 9 are fewer than ten individuals, although a larger number of organizations “designate” a member for Commission 9 without any followup attendance or involvement in the Commissions’ affairs. Each successive year, the Commission 9 Annual Meeting has witnessed acceptable but cyclical attendance and participation from increasing numbers of member countries, affiliate members and academic members. The record is consistent: From the Congress year 1998 in Brighton, England with 24 attendees at the annual meeting; the following year in Singapore had 12 attendees. Attendance at the 2000 Prague meeting increased to eighteen, with another decline the following year in Seoul with fifteen. It is anticipated that for the Congress in Washington, D.C., attendance will again rise as it did in Brighton.
Terms of Reference
Mission Statement
Working Group 9.1 - Education and training of valuers in developing economiesPolicy Issues
Chair Bill Rodney (UK) Working Group 9.2 - Environmental influences on real estatePolicy issues
Chair Michael Yovino Young. Working Group 9.3 - Research fundingPolicy Issues
Chair Simon Adcock (Australia) Working Group 9.4 - Promoting valuation membership of FIGPolicy issues The under-representation of valuation organisations within FIG. Chair David Millard (USA) Joint Commission 2 and 9 Working Group - Education of valuation in FIG.Policy issues
Chair Prof. Kauko Viitanen (Finland) |