000			01517cam a2200277 4500
001			ABS63247
008			000000n2000 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u109669
100			_aRouse, J
245			_aWhy surveyors haven't got a clue
260			_c2000
490			_aBuilding _v265(8163) 24 November 2000, 36-39(4)
520			_aLooks at the growth of UK corporate architecture, and argues that traditional valuation methods are unable to accurately measure design value. Defines design value as ranging from financial benefits, such as extra capacity or running-cost savings, to qualitative factors such as better working conditions and potential higher sales. BA, Lloyd's Register and Capital One have tried to attach numerical value to these types of benefits, but have found the traditional market valuation method limiting when applied to owner-occupied buildings. Outlines three alternative valuation methods - contingent valuation, analytic hierarchy process, fuzzy logic - and concludes that surveyors need to work with the business community to develop effective ways of measuring design values.
590			_aABS
650			_aARCHITECTURAL VALUE
650			_aOFFICE BUILDINGS
650			_aCORPORATE REAL ESTATE
650			_aDESIGN VALUE
650			_aVALUATION METHODS
650			_aMARKET VALUE
650			_aFUZZY LOGIC
650			_aCONTINGENT VALUATION
650			_aANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS
690			_aPROPERTY-PROPERTY APPRAISAL AND VALUATION
942			_n0
999			_c65469 _d65469