royal institution
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

831
(FIVE YEARS 30)

H-INDEX

14
(FIVE YEARS 2)

2022 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 640
Author(s):  
Rotimi Abidoye ◽  
Benson Teck Heng Lim ◽  
Yu-Cheng Lin ◽  
Junge Ma

Bridging the gaps between property graduates’ attributes and industry expectations has been touted to be the key driver of sustainable development for the next generation of the workforce. This study investigated property-related knowledge and skills from the perspective of property employers and graduates in Australia in the digital age by (1) identifying the most and least important knowledge and skillsets in the property sector; (2) examining the strategies used to develop the required knowledge and skillsets; and (3) ascertaining if there are differences in the knowledge and skillsets perceived to be necessary between employers and graduates. A questionnaire survey was undertaken across property employers affiliated with the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) and graduates of an Australian university. The results showed that problem solving and time management are the most important knowledge and skills for property employers and graduates, respectively. Notably, there were statistically significant differences in the perceived importance of course directors maintaining close communication with employers, real-life case study-based school assessment, the use of various course delivery methods, inviting guest speakers, and internship training while studying between employers and graduates. This finding implies that Australian property professionals are yet to fully embrace technology in the digital age.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramit Debnath ◽  
Ronita Bardhan ◽  
Darshil U. Shah ◽  
Antiopi Koronaki ◽  
Aurimas Bukauskas ◽  
...  

This working paper is an evidence submitted to the Royal Institution for British Architects that makes the case that the built environment must drastically reduce its carbon emissions to work towards net zero. Here we advocate for climate repair through the built environment by decarbonising UK’s building sector through both improved energy efficiency of buildings and the use of nature‐based solutions, such as engineered timber and natural insulating materials. The UK has the opportunity to lead by example at the upcoming United Nations COP‐26 conference and beyond, as we implement the solutions in the coming years.


Author(s):  
T.V. Shapoval

The article is focused on legal nature of International Valuation Standards Committee (renamed to International Valuation Standards Council in 2008) and implementation of its valuation standards by states and international organizations. The paper concentrates on legal gaps regarding the application aspects of property value calculations in international law. Treaties do not provide substantial determinacy, include no instruction or the appropriate methodology on numerous calculation issues and typically set forth only basic standard of valuation such as standard of fair market value of property for the calculation of compensation. It shows that lack of standards for determining awards of compensation creates a source of uncertainty for protection in international public law. The issue discusses a framework where international valuation standards of international non-governmental organizations are given legal weight and serve as guidelines for the calculation of awards. After establishing the legal basis for an award, tribunals use their impression of valuation best practices as well as discretion to conduct the analysis. The result depends on the assumptions and philosophy of the adjudicating tribunal. It is emphasized that international arbitration practice in measures of compensation should be based on principles of fairness and reasonableness. Part of the issue is based on Directive of European Union with provisions that valuation standards of states should take into account internationally recognised valuation standards, in particular those developed by the International Valuation Standards Committee, the European Group of Valuers’ Associations or the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors. Member states of  European Union admitted valuation standards of international non-governmental organizations as reliable standards for the credit purposes after the financial crisis, which has shown that irresponsible behaviour by market participants can undermine the foundations of the financial system leading to potentially severe social and economic consequences.


Author(s):  
Irina Komar

The present article deals with the specifics of valuation of retail property and individual trade related properties on the basis of the international experience and as recommended by International Valuation Standards and RICS (The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (Great Britain)) valuation standards (Red Book). The present article is justified as currently Russia lacks a standard, uniform for the valuers or legal experts, to be used for the purposes of valuation of similar subjects. At the same time, methodical literature is insufficient while there are numerous property disputes that call for pre-court valuations and expert evidence of valuation of such subjects, including numerous litigations arising out of bankruptcy or establishing cadaster value to the amount of market value. The author reviews the existing approaches to valuation of real estate in accordance with both the international and national standards and awards professional recommendations pertaining to the use of the income approach to value retail real properties and individual trade related properties. The definitions and metrics of the above real properties’ groups are described separately. Also, the author provides guidelines for inquiry of the documents and information necessary for the acquisition of the data to be used in the course of valuation and expert evidence. All pricing factors are described in detail in the present article against the examples of retail real properties and individual trade related properties (say, hotel) and explanation of their effect on the market value in case the income approach is applied is provided.


Author(s):  
Boris Bulyubash

This article reviews the history of a debate over priority in the discovery of the mechanical equivalent of heat that was centered around J. P. Joule and J. R. von Mayer. The following two stages may be distinguished in this debate. During the first stage, those involved in it were Joule and Mayer themselves. While Mayer presented a numerical value for the mechanical equivalent of heat, which was based on the data from Gay-Lussac’s experiment, Joule determined the value of this coefficient in his own experiment although he did it later than Mayer (actually, Joule was unaware of Gay-Lussac’s experiment). This article shows that, in the end, Joule and William Thomson, who also participated in the debate, recognized (even though formally and with reservations) Mayer’s priority. During the second stage of the debate, its participants were British scientists who supported Mayer or Joule. Thus, Mayer’s priority was supported by Professor J. Tyndall of the Royal Institution in London and it was he who initiated the resumption of the discussion. Joule’s priority was advocated by Professor W. Thomson of the University of Glasgow and Professor P. Tait of the University of Edinburgh. It is noted that a personal animosity between Tyndall and Tait, as well as Tyndall’s competitive attitude towards Thomson, had a significant impact on the tone of the debate, and the examples of Tait’s provocative remarks and Tyndall’s reactions are provided. Joule’s involvement during the second stage of the debate that was mostly limited to private correspondence between himself, Tait, Thomson, and Tyndall, is discussed. Over the time elapsed after the first stage of the debate, the level of rejection of Mayer’s arguments by the scientific community had decreased significantly. The awarding of the Royal Society’s Copley Medal to Joule (1870) and Mayer (1871), both of them nominated by Tyndall, came as a symbolic conclusion of the debate.


2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Thorne

PurposeThe recent coronavirus pandemic created uncertainty across most markets. This has resulted in many valuations being reported with caveats warning that they are uncertain. However, many valuers and their clients remain unclear as to what these warnings are supposed to convey and why they are required by many valuation standards, including the International Valuation Standards. The purpose of this paper is to explain how recognition of the need for uncertainty disclosures has developed over the past 25 years and how such disclosures can enhance overall trust in valuation.Design/methodology/approachThe author has been involved in the development of the guidance issued by both the International Valuation Standards Council and Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, which included extensive consultation with financial regulators and valuation users alike. He has also examined the wider economic theories of risk and uncertainty and how these need to be clearly distinguished in valuations.FindingsThis paper identifies the situations under which valuation uncertainty can occur, and steps that a valuer can follow to determine whether it is sufficiently material to require an appropriate caveat to be issued alongside the valuation. It also examines the merits of different ways in which material uncertainty can be disclosed.Practical implicationsThe paper should provide valuers with a better understanding of the reason why uncertainty disclosures are required and the circumstances in which they are required. It also provides principles to help them formulate disclosures that are appropriate in different circumstances.Originality/valueThis is an abridged version of a Valuers' Briefing “Valuation Uncertainty – Reporting the unknowable” by the author and published as either an eBook or paperback available from Amazon.


Author(s):  
Brian Cantor

The diffraction of X-rays is used as the main method for determining the atomic and molecular structures of inorganic and biological materials. The basic law of diffraction was discovered by Lawrence Bragg when he was a student at Cambridge University and he was just 22 years old. Bragg’s law explains how the angle of a diffracted X-ray beam varies with the wavelength of the X-rays and the spacing of the atoms and molecules in the material. This chapter examines the way X-rays are generated and scattered by electrons, atoms and crystals; the use of structure factors and Fourier transforms to calculate the intensity of the scattered X-rays; and the effect of using electrons or neutrons instead of X-rays. Bragg was born and brought up in Adelaide in Australia. He discovered Bragg’s law with the help of his father, William, after they had moved to England. Lawrence was a Professor at Manchester University, Cambridge University, and the Royal Institution; contributed to the development of range-finding, asdic, and sonar during the First and Second World Wars; and supervised Crick and Watson when they discovered the structure of DNA.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document