BazEkon - Biblioteka Główna Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie

BazEkon home page

Meny główne

Autor
Zięba Małgorzata (Cracow University of Economics, Poland)
Tytuł
Sustainable Urban Development and Office Location
Źródło
Zarządzanie Publiczne / Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Krakowie, 2021, nr 2 (56), s. 67-82, rys., bibliogr. 53 poz.
Public Governance
Słowa kluczowe
Rozwój zrównoważony, Nieruchomości komercyjne, Deweloper
Sustainable development, Commercial property, Developer
Uwagi
Klasyfikacja JEL: R3; O18; Q01; Q56.
summ.
Badanie zostało ufundowane ze środków Badań Statutowych na rok 2018 dla Katedry Ekonomiki Nieruchomości i Procesu Inwestycyjnego Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie
Abstrakt
Objective: The paper explores the criteria of selecting a location for new office projects by developers, as well as analyses them in relation to the principles of sustainable urban development. Real estate market's participants should be part of the sustainable urban development process due to the impact of the built environment on cities' functioning. The overall research question has been about whether there is an intersection between the need for sustainable urban development and locational preferences of office developers.Research Design & Methods: The paper discusses results of qualitative research (semi-structured interviews) among office developers in Cracow. The focus of the research has been narrowed down to selected aspects of the complex relations between the real estate market and urban development, namely the location of office buildings.
Findings: The developers emphasised access to well-developed public transportation networks as well as access to urban amenities and services as crucial features of good location, attractive for end-users. Thus, the attractive location of an office building is, to large extent, consistent with the principles of sustainable urban development.
Implications/Recommendations: The research findings emphasise the significance of the market participants' awareness of the concept of urban sustainability, as this leads them to exert pressure on developers to create more sustainable buildings and choose more adequate locations. Furthermore, local sustainable urban development strategies and policies create a framework for developers to make more sustainable choices of location.
Contribution/Value Added: This is an original contribution to knowledge on the dynamically-growing office market in Cracow, which I am hoping to have achieved by means of revealing developers' office location preferences as well confronting these preferences with the urban sustainability requirements. The article broadens the analysis of office location preferences by adding the context of urban sustainability. Due to the significance of these findings for urban development, the research opens opportunities for further analysis on a more comprehensive sample. (original abstract)
Dostępne w
Biblioteka SGH im. Profesora Andrzeja Grodka
Pełny tekst
Pokaż
Bibliografia
Pokaż
  1. Aarhus, K. (2000). Office location decisions, modal split and the environment: The ineffectiveness of Norwegian land use policy. Journal of Transport Geography, 8(4), 287-294. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0966-6923(00)00009-0
  2. Adnan, Y. M., Daud, M. N., & Mohamed Razali, M. N. (2015). A multi-criteria framework for office tenants' preferences at office buildings. International Journal of Strategic Property Management, 19(3), 271-282. https://doi.org/10.3846/1648715X.2015.1052586
  3. Adnan, Y. M., Daud, M. N., & Razali, M. N. (2012). Property specific criteria for office occupation by tenants of purpose built office buildings in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Property Management, 30(2), 114-128. https://doi.org/10.1108/02637471211213389
  4. Adnan, Y. M., & Daud, N. (2010). Factors Influencing Office Building Occupation Decision By Tenants in Kuala Lumpur City Centre - A DELPHI Study. Journal of Design and Built Environment, 6(June), 63-82.
  5. An, S., Cui, N., Bai, Y., Xie, W., Chen, M., & Ouyang, Y. (2015). Reliable emergency service facility location under facility disruption, en-route congestion and in-facility queuing. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 82, 199-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2015.07.006
  6. Appel-Meulenbroek, R. (2008). Managing "keep" factors of office tenants to raise satisfaction and loyalty. Property Management, 26(1), 43-55. https://doi.org/10.1108/02637470810848886
  7. Archer, W. R., & Smith, M. T. (2003). Explaining Location Patterns of Suburban Offices. Real Estate Economics, 31(2), 139-164. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6229.00061
  8. Braun, T., Cajias, M., & Hohenstatt, R. (2017). Societal Influence on Diffusion of Green Buildings: A Count Regression Approach. Journal of Real Estate Research, 39(1), 1-37. https://doi.org/10.5555/0896-5803.39.1.1
  9. Cho, G.-H., & Rodriguez, D. (2015). Location or design? Associations between neighbourhood location, built environment and walking. Urban Studies, 52(8), 1434-1453. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098014537691
  10. Dettwiler, P. (2008). Modelling the relationship between business cycles and office location: The growth firms. Facilities, 26(3/4), 157-172. https://doi.org/10.1108/02632770810849490
  11. European Commission. (2010). Europe 2020. A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-014-0173-7.2
  12. Fagg, J. . J. (1980). A Re-examination of the Incubator Hypothesis: A Case Study of Greater Leicester. Urban Studies, 17(1), 35-44. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420988020080041
  13. Fischetti, M., Ljubic, I., & Sinnl, M. (2017). Redesigning Benders Decomposition for Large-Scale Facility Location. Management Science, 63(7), 2146-2162. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2461
  14. Fu, Y., & Zhang, X. (2017). Trajectory of urban sustainability concepts: A 35-year bibliometric analysis. Cities, 60, 113-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2016.08.003
  15. Gluszak, M., & Zięba, M. (2016). Using the Means-Ends Approach to Understand the Value of Sustainability on the Property Market. In A. Leon-Garcia (Ed.), Smart City 360 (Vol. 166, pp. 738-749). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33681-7
  16. Greenhalgh, P. (2008). An Examination of Business Occupier Relocation Decision Making: Distinguishing Small and Large Firm Behaviour. Journal of Property Research, 25(2), 107-126. https://doi.org/10.1080/09599910802605368
  17. Hammad, A. W. A., Akbarnezhad, A., & Rey, D. (2017). Sustainable urban facility location: Minimising noise pollution and network congestion. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 107, 38-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2017.09.005
  18. Harris, R. (2016). New organisations and new workplaces: Implications for workplace design and management. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 18(1), 4-16. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MRR-09-2015-0216
  19. Hassan, A. M., & Lee, H. (2014). The paradox of the sustainable city: definitions and examples. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 17(6), 1267-1285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-014-9604-z
  20. Haughton, G. (1999). Environmental Justice and the Sustainable City. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 18, 233-243. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X9901800305
  21. He, Z., & Romanos, M. (2015). Spatial agglomeration and location determinants : Evidence from the US communications equipment manufacturing industry. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098015586698
  22. Izadikhah, M., & Saen, R. F. (2016). A new preference voting method for sustainable location planning using geographic information system and data envelopment analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 137, 1347-1367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.08.021
  23. James, P., Magee, L., Scerri, A., & Steger, M. (2015). Urban Sustainability in Theory and Practice. Circles of sustainability. London and New York: Routledge.
  24. Jennen, M. G. J., & Brounen, D. (2009). The effect of clustering on office rents: Evidence from the Amsterdam market. Real Estate Economics, 37(2), 165-209. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6229.2009.00239.x
  25. Kibert, C. J. (2013). Sustainable Construction. Green Building Design and Delivery (Third). John Wiley & Sons.
  26. Knight Frank. (2017). Kraków. Office market Q4 2016.
  27. Kołodziejczyk, B. (2016). Office market in a growth phase. Retrieved from http://www.cushmanwakefield.pl/en-gb/research-and-insight/2016/increased-office-development-activity-in-poland
  28. Krätke, S. (1992). Urban Land Rent and Real Estate Markets in the Process of Social Restructuring: The Case of Germany. Environment & Planning D: Society & Space, 10(3), 245-264. https://doi.org/10.1068/d100245
  29. Leishman, C., Dunse, N. a., Warren, F. J., & Watkins, C. (2003). Office space requirements: comparing occupiers' preferences with agents' perceptions. Journal of Property Investment & Finance, 21(1), 45-60. https://doi.org/10.1108/14635780310468301
  30. Leishman, Chris, Orr, A., & Pellegrini-Masini, G. (2012). The Impact of Carbon Emission Reducing Design Features on Office Occupiers' Choice of Premises. Urban Studies, 49(11), 2419-2437. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098011427189
  31. Leone, R., & Struyk, R. (1976). The Incubator Hypothesis: Evidence from Five SMSAs. Urban Studies, 13(3), 325-331. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420987620080611
  32. Levy, D., & Peterson, G. (2013). The effect of sustainability on commercial occupiers' building choice. Journal of Property Investment & Finance, 31(3), 267-284. https://doi.org/10.1108/14635781311322238
  33. Lim, H. K., & Kain, J.-H. (2016). Compact Cities Are Complex, Intense and Diverse but: Can We Design Such Emergent Urban Properties? Urban Planning, 1(1), 95. https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v1i1.535
  34. Manzato, G. G., Arentze, T. a., Timmermans, H. J. P., & Ettema, D. (2011). Matching office firms types and location characteristics: An exploratory analysis using Bayesian classifier networks. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(8), 9665-9673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.01.155
  35. Mun, S., & Hutchinson, B. G. (1995). Empirical Analysis of Office Rent and Agglomeration Economies: a Case Study of Toronto. Journal of Regional Science, 35(3), 437-456. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9787.1995.tb01413.x
  36. Rao, C., Goh, M., Zhao, Y., & Zheng, J. (2015). Location selection of city logistics centers under sustainability. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 36, 29-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2015.02.008
  37. Rebelo, E. M. (2011). Urban planning in office markets: A methodological approach. Land Use Policy, 28, 83-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2010.05.003
  38. Remøy, H., & van der Voodt, T. J. . (2014). Priorities in accommodating office user preferences: impact on office users decision to stay or go. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 16(2), 140-154. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCRE-09-2013-0029
  39. Rymarzak, M., & Siemińska, E. (2012). Factors affecting the location of real estate. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 14(4), 214-225. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCRE-11-2012-0027
  40. Safian, E. E. M., & Nawawi, A. H. (2013). Occupier's Perceptions on Building and Locational Characteristics of Purpose-built Office. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 101, 575-584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.07.230
  41. Selltiz, C., Jahoda, M., Deutsch, M., & Cook, S. W. (1967). Research Methods in Social Relations (Revised On). Holt, RInehart and Winston.
  42. Shiers, D. E. (2000). "Green" developments: Environmentally responsible buildings in the UK commercial property sector. Property Management, 18(5), 352-365.
  43. Smith, R., & Bereitschaft, B. (2016). Sustainable Urban Development? Exploring the Locational Attributes of LEED-ND Projects in the United States through a GIS Analysis of Light Intensity and Land Use. Sustainability, 8(6), 547. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8060547
  44. Telega, A., & Zieba, M. (2016). URBAN PLANNING IN CRACOW AND LOCATION OF SUSTAINABLE (pp. 1245-1259). Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/2117/90607
  45. Tischler, S., & Mailer, M. (2016). NaWo - A Tool for More Sustainable Residential Location Choice. Transportation Research Procedia, 19(June), 109-118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2016.12.072
  46. Turcu, C. (2013). Re-thinking Sustainability Indicators: local perspectives of urban sustainability. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 56(5), 695-719. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2012.698984
  47. United Nations. (2016). Draft outcome document of the United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development (Habitat III). A/Conf.226/4*, (September), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.27.4.187
  48. USGBC. (2016). LEED v 4 for NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT, 161. Retrieved from http://www.usgbc.org/sites/default/files/LEED v4 BDC_04.05.16_current.pdf
  49. WCED. (1987). Our Common Future. In UN World Commission on Environment and Development.
  50. Wheeler, S. (1996). Sustainable Urban Development: A Literature Review and Analysis (Monograph No. 51).
  51. Willigers, J., & Van Wee, B. (2011). High-speed rail and office location choices. A stated choice experiment for the Netherlands. Journal of Transport Geography, 19(4), 745-754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2010.09.002
  52. Zuo, J., & Zhao, Z. Y. (2014). Green building research-current status and future agenda: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 30, 271-281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.10.021
  53. Zuo, J., & Zhao, Z. Y. (2014). Green building research-current status and future agenda: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 30, 271-281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.10.021
Cytowane przez
Pokaż
ISSN
1898-3529
Język
eng
URI / DOI
http://dx.doi.org/10.15678/ZP.2021.56.2.05
Udostępnij na Facebooku Udostępnij na Twitterze Udostępnij na Google+ Udostępnij na Pinterest Udostępnij na LinkedIn Wyślij znajomemu