European valuation practices: how to compare valuations across borders? Initial findings

Abstract

PurposeReal estate investors invest more and more cross‐border, but the valuation practices in the different countries are not similar. For investors it is good to know the difference in valuations between the countries, therefore this paper aims to investigate the valuation practices in eight different countries (France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Portugal, Russia, Spain and the UK).Design/methodology/approachTo gather the information a questionnaire was sent out. The questionnaire included questions not only about facts, but also about the respondents' opinion about the reliability of the information.FindingsIt was found that in the different countries market value is not always the basis and that a wide variation of surface measurements is currently applied. Regular lease periods and the responsibility for operating cost vary from country to country. Also the sources for market evidence and their reliability differ per country. So it can be seen that, although market values can be compared across countries, valuation methodologies are country‐specific.Research limitations/implicationsThe authors are still in the process of retrieving information and quality control, and the intention is to expand the research to all European Union countries, and finally all European countries. Therefore this paper only shows initial findings.Originality/valueThe existing research about international valuation practices is not very recent, and, because the authors not only assembled facts and processes, but also collected the respondents' opinions about the reliability of the information, the research is very valuable.

Effects of valuation variance and inaccuracy on Nigerian commercial property market

“…As with asset prices in the equity and bond markets, property asset valuations are central to the interrelated processes of performance measurement, acquisition and disposal decisions (Adegoke, 2006). Hordijk et al (2011) compare standards across the countries, indicating that valuation standards as usually applied are country specific. Another study on valuation practices has to do with the issue of legal framework.…”

Valuation standards and methods: are Sweden’s (still) different?

“…Several studies have investigated whether and how property valuers in different countries differ in their practices (Eriksson et al , 2005; Hordijk et al , 2011; Lim et al , 2006; McParland et al , 2002). Hordijk et al (2011) showed that sources and reliability of information used in valuation practices differed in different countries in Europe (France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Portugal, Russia, Spain and the UK), and concluded that methodologies remain country-specific. The study by Lim et al (2006) found differences in property valuers’ use of various valuation methods and practices in Hong Kong and mainland China.…”

Valuing unregistered urban land in Indonesia

“…They can be classified into three. The first body of research is on how best to value 1 3 Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review (2018) 15:315-340 in advanced capitalist societies (see, for example, Canonne and Macdonald 2003;Schulz 2003;Hordijk et al 2011;Schnaidt and Sebastian 2012). A second body of research brings out inadequacies of valuation in the Global South (Sheehan 2011(Sheehan , 2012Boydell 2010;Boydell and Baya 2011;Anderson 2006bAnderson , 2015.…”