{"title":"什么是房地产?本学科的五个本体论问题","authors":"O. A. K’Akumu","doi":"10.1108/jerer-08-2022-0022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe study seeks to identify and document definitional challenges that hamper the delineation of the scope of real estate as a discipline and as an industry. Through literature review the article distils the perception of body of knowledge (BOK) of real estate within the academia. Two main issues are flagged up: the problem of undefined BOK and the collegiate dilemma. Later the study looks at the standard economic classification documents to capture the occupational domains of real estate professionals or real estate activities. These steps are necessary to help define an alternative academic, practical and social meaning of real estate that is sufficient and precise.Design/methodology/approachThe study uses literature review and, as primary method, qualitative document analysis (QDA). The study has made a special appeal for the application of qualitative strategy in real estate research other than following the methodological orthodoxy of quantitative causal research designs. Further, it has argued for the recognition of QDA as a legitimate research method in the context of real estate studies. Consequently, the study performed QDA procedures on international economic classification standards.FindingsFrom literature review and QDA, the study identified five definitional problems in the meanings or understandings of real estate: undefined body of knowledge, collegiate dilemma, inadequate classification of real estate occupations, inadequate industry classification and inadequate economic sector positioning. These are aspects that lead to misconceptions of the true boundary of knowledge in society and in the academia. The paper offers clarity and insights for the redrawing of these boundaries to give real estate its rightful place in the academia and in the real world.Originality/valueThe article follows up on the academic and social misconceptions on the BOK of real estate as a discipline and an economic activity domain to identify the contribution of real estate to the welfare of mankind. Ontology or the organization of academic or social knowledge is used to map out or catalogue real estate against competing domains and to show that the role of real estate is grossly understated and misunderstood. From the findings, the study makes recommendations to university curriculum developers, and international organizations like ILO, and UN-DESA to revise their conceptions of real estate to give the discipline its rightful position in society.","PeriodicalId":44570,"journal":{"name":"Journal of European Real Estate Research","volume":"70 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What is real estate? Five ontological questions for the discipline\",\"authors\":\"O. A. K’Akumu\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jerer-08-2022-0022\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposeThe study seeks to identify and document definitional challenges that hamper the delineation of the scope of real estate as a discipline and as an industry. Through literature review the article distils the perception of body of knowledge (BOK) of real estate within the academia. Two main issues are flagged up: the problem of undefined BOK and the collegiate dilemma. Later the study looks at the standard economic classification documents to capture the occupational domains of real estate professionals or real estate activities. These steps are necessary to help define an alternative academic, practical and social meaning of real estate that is sufficient and precise.Design/methodology/approachThe study uses literature review and, as primary method, qualitative document analysis (QDA). The study has made a special appeal for the application of qualitative strategy in real estate research other than following the methodological orthodoxy of quantitative causal research designs. Further, it has argued for the recognition of QDA as a legitimate research method in the context of real estate studies. Consequently, the study performed QDA procedures on international economic classification standards.FindingsFrom literature review and QDA, the study identified five definitional problems in the meanings or understandings of real estate: undefined body of knowledge, collegiate dilemma, inadequate classification of real estate occupations, inadequate industry classification and inadequate economic sector positioning. These are aspects that lead to misconceptions of the true boundary of knowledge in society and in the academia. The paper offers clarity and insights for the redrawing of these boundaries to give real estate its rightful place in the academia and in the real world.Originality/valueThe article follows up on the academic and social misconceptions on the BOK of real estate as a discipline and an economic activity domain to identify the contribution of real estate to the welfare of mankind. Ontology or the organization of academic or social knowledge is used to map out or catalogue real estate against competing domains and to show that the role of real estate is grossly understated and misunderstood. From the findings, the study makes recommendations to university curriculum developers, and international organizations like ILO, and UN-DESA to revise their conceptions of real estate to give the discipline its rightful position in society.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44570,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of European Real Estate Research\",\"volume\":\"70 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of European Real Estate Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jerer-08-2022-0022\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of European Real Estate Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jerer-08-2022-0022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
What is real estate? Five ontological questions for the discipline
PurposeThe study seeks to identify and document definitional challenges that hamper the delineation of the scope of real estate as a discipline and as an industry. Through literature review the article distils the perception of body of knowledge (BOK) of real estate within the academia. Two main issues are flagged up: the problem of undefined BOK and the collegiate dilemma. Later the study looks at the standard economic classification documents to capture the occupational domains of real estate professionals or real estate activities. These steps are necessary to help define an alternative academic, practical and social meaning of real estate that is sufficient and precise.Design/methodology/approachThe study uses literature review and, as primary method, qualitative document analysis (QDA). The study has made a special appeal for the application of qualitative strategy in real estate research other than following the methodological orthodoxy of quantitative causal research designs. Further, it has argued for the recognition of QDA as a legitimate research method in the context of real estate studies. Consequently, the study performed QDA procedures on international economic classification standards.FindingsFrom literature review and QDA, the study identified five definitional problems in the meanings or understandings of real estate: undefined body of knowledge, collegiate dilemma, inadequate classification of real estate occupations, inadequate industry classification and inadequate economic sector positioning. These are aspects that lead to misconceptions of the true boundary of knowledge in society and in the academia. The paper offers clarity and insights for the redrawing of these boundaries to give real estate its rightful place in the academia and in the real world.Originality/valueThe article follows up on the academic and social misconceptions on the BOK of real estate as a discipline and an economic activity domain to identify the contribution of real estate to the welfare of mankind. Ontology or the organization of academic or social knowledge is used to map out or catalogue real estate against competing domains and to show that the role of real estate is grossly understated and misunderstood. From the findings, the study makes recommendations to university curriculum developers, and international organizations like ILO, and UN-DESA to revise their conceptions of real estate to give the discipline its rightful position in society.