The development of regional differentiation of office construction in the Czech Republic: 1990–2010

Open access

Abstract

The factors that were crucial for the construction of administrative buildings in the regional capitals of the Czech Republic are subject to examination in this article. One primary question is whether the development of office construction reflects the qualitative importance of the cities, or whether there are some other regularities in the spatial distribution of construction. To identify the key factors, controlled interviews with experts professionally involved in the construction of administrative buildings were carried out, and these data were then extended as part of a large-scale questionnaire survey with other experts on the issue. The results have confirmed the dominant position of the capital city of Prague in terms of its qualitative importance, as the remaining regional capitals have less than one-tenth of the volume of modern office building areas. The greatest differences in the construction of administrative buildings have been noted in Brno and Ostrava, despite the fact that they exhibit similar characteristics when considered in the light of respondent-determined factors.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 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.

  • ADAIR A. BERRY J. MCGREAL S. SÝKORA L. GHANBARI P. A. REDDING B. (1999): Globalisation of real estate markets in Central Europe. European Planning Studies 7(3): 295–305.

  • ARTN (2002): Trend Report 2002 [online]. Prague: Association for Property Markets Development [cit. 14.10.2011]. Available at: http://artn.cz/cz/aktivity/trend-report/obecne-informace

  • ARTN (2004): Trend Report 2004 [online]. Prague: Association for Property Markets Development [cit. 14.10.2011]. Available at: http://artn.cz/cz/aktivity/trend-report/obecne-informace

  • ARTN (2006): Trend Report 2006 [online]. Prague: Association for Property Markets Development [cit. 14.10.2011]. Available at: http://artn.cz/cz/aktivity/trend-report/obecne-informace

  • ARTN (2008): Trend Report 2008 [online]. Prague: Association for Property Markets Development [cit. 14.10.2011]. Available at: http://artn.cz/cz/aktivity/trend-report/obecne-informace

  • ARTN (2010): Trend Report 2010 [online]. Prague: Association for Property Markets Development [cit. 14.10.2011]. Available at: http://artn.cz/cz/aktivity/trend-report/obecne-informace

  • BERTZ S. (2002): The peripheralisation of office development in the Dublin metropolitan area – the interrelationship between planning and development interests. Irish Geography 35(2): 197–212.

  • BIČÍK I. JANČÁK V. (2006): Czech agriculture in the integrating Europe. Acta Geographica Universitatis Comenianae 48(2): 155–165.

  • BIRELL J. GAO S. (1997): The property development process of phases and their degrees of importance. Cutting edge 1997 RICS.

  • BLAŽEK J. (1996): Nové institucionální rámce ekonomiky a regionální rozvoj. In: Hampl M et al.: Geografická organizace společnosti a transformační procesy v České republice (pp. 303–314). Univerzita Karlova v Praze Přírodovědecká fakulta katedra sociální geografie a regionálního rozvoje Prague.

  • BLAŽEK J. (2001): Velké firmy a subjekty progresivního terciéru jako aktéři regionálního rozvoje v České republice. In: Hampl M. et al.: Regionální vývoj: specifika české transformace evropská integrace a obecná teorie (pp. 227–249). Univerzita Karlova v Praze Přírodovědecká fakulta katedra sociální geografie a regionálního rozvoje Prague.

  • BLAŽEK J. CSANK P. (2007): Nová fáze regionálního rozvoje v ČR? Sociologický časopis/Czech Sociological Review 43(5): 945–965.

  • CARN N. RABIANSKI J. RACSTER R. SELDIN M. (1988): Real estate market analysis – Techniques and applications. Prentice Hall Boston.

  • CLARK G. L. HEBB T. WÓJCIK D. (2007) Institutional investors and the language of finance: the global metrics of market performance. In: Godfrey J. Chalmers K. [eds.]: Globalisation of Accounting Standards (pp. 15–33). Edward Elgar Cheltenham.

  • CUSHMAN & WAKEFIELD (2011): Internal database of office stock in the Czech Republic. Unpublished material.

  • CZSO (2011): Regional statistics Czech Republic in Figures: Czech statistical office 2011 [cit. 10.11.2011]. Available at: http://www.czso.cz/csu/2013edicniplan.nsf/engp/1410-13

  • D’ARCY É. KEOGH G. (1997): Towards a property market paradigm of urban change. Environment and Planning 29(4): 685–706.

  • DES ROSIERS F. THÉRIAULT M. (2014): Retail Real Estate. In: Baker H.K Chinloy P. [eds.]: Private Real Estate Markets and Investments: An Overview (pp. 87– 106). Oxford University Press New York.

  • DRBOHLAV D. ČERMÁK Z. (1998): International Migrants in Central European Cities. In: Enyedi G. [ed.]: Social Change and Urban Restructuring in Central Europe (pp. 87–107). Akadémiai Kiadó Budapest.

  • ENGELEN E. FAULCONBRIDGE J. (2009): Introduction: financial geographies-the credit crisis as an opportunity to catch economic geography’s next boat? Journal of economic geography 9(5): 587–595.

  • FISHER P. (2005): The property development process: Case studies from Grainger Town. Property Management 23(3): 158–175.

  • FISHER P. COLLINS T. (1999): The commercial property development process. Property Management 17(3): 219–230.

  • GARB Y. JACKSON J. (2010): Brownfields in the Czech Republic 1989–2009: The Long Path to Integrated Land Management. Journal of Urban Regeneration and Renewal 3(3): 263–276.

  • GOTHAM K. F. (2006): The secondary circuit of capital reconsidered: globalization and the US real estate sector. American Journal of Sociology 112(1): 231–275.

  • HAMPL M. (2010): Regionální diferenciace společnosti: obecné typy vývojových procesů. Geografie 115(1): 1–20.

  • HAMPL M. (2005): Geografická organizace společnosti v České republice: transformační procesy a jejich obecný kontext. Praha Univerzita Karlova v Praze Přírodovědecká fakulta Katedra sociální geografie a regionálního rozvoje.

  • HAMPL M. et al. (2001): Regionální vývoj: specifika české transformace evropská integrace a obecná teorie. Praha Univerzita Karlova v Praze Přírodovědecká fakulta.

  • HAVLÍČEK T. CHROMÝ P. JANČÁK V. MARADA M. (2005): Vybrané teoreticko-metodologické aspekty a trendy geografického výzkumu periferních oblastí. In: Novotná M. [ed.]: Problémy periferních oblastí (pp. 6–24). PrahaUniverzita Karlova v Praze Přírodovědecká fakulta katedra sociální geografie a regionálního rozvoje.

  • ILÍK J. OUŘEDNÍČEK M. (2007): Karlín a jeho proměny v souvislostech postsocialistické transformace Prahy. Geografie-Sborník ČGS 112(3): 292–314.

  • LUX M. SUNEGA P. (2011): Labour Mobility and Housing: The Impact of Housing Tenure and Housing Affordability on Labour Migration in the Czech Republic. Urban Studies 49(3): 489–504.

  • MARADA M. (2006): Dopravní vztahy v Pražském městském regionu. In: Ouřednícek M. [ed.]: Sociální geografie Pražského městského region (pp. 64–78). Praha Univerzita Karlova v Praze Přírodovedecká fakulta katedra sociální geografie a regionálního rozvoje.

  • MASSEY D. (1995): Spatial Divisions of Labour: Social Structures and the Geography of Production. (2. ed.) London Macmillan.

  • McGOUGH A. J. TSOLACOS S. (1997): The stylised facts of the UK commercial building cycles. Environment and Planning 29(3): 485–500.

  • NEDOMOVÁ E. [ed.] (1999): Trh bydlení jeho regionální diferenciace a sociální souvislosti. Praha Sociologický ústav AV ČR.

  • PARSA A McGREAL S KEIVANI R. (2000): Globalisation of Real Estate Markets and Urban Development in Central Europe. RICS Cutting Edge Conference.

  • PORTEOUS D. J. (1995): The geography of finance: spatial dimensions of intermediary behavior. Avebury Aldershot.

  • PRAGUE RESEARCH FORUM (2014): Office Market Figures for Q2 2014 [cit. 15.8.2014]. Available at: http://www.czech-office.cz/novinky/prague-research-forum-announces-the-office-market-figures-for-q2-2014/

  • PRUPIM (2011): Information about real estate investments [cit. 10.11.2011]. Available at: http://www.prupim.com

  • REBELO E. (2010): Urban planning in office markets: A methodological approach. Land Use Policy 28(1): 83–95.

  • SASSEN S. (1995) On concentration and centrality in the global city. In: Knox P. L. Taylor P. J. [eds.]: World Cities In a World-system (pp. 63–78). Cambridge University Press.

  • STANILOV K. (2007): The restructuring of non-residential uses in the post-socialist metropolis. In: Stanilov K. [ed.]: The Post-Socialist City: Urban Form and Space Transformations in Central and Eastern Europe after Socialism (pp. 73–99). Dordrecht Springer.

  • SÝKORA L. (2007): Office development and post-communist city formation. In: Stanilov K.: The Post-Socialist City: Urban Form and Space Transformations in Central and Eastern Europe after Socialism (pp. 117–145). Dordrecht Springer.

  • SÝKORA L. KAMENICKÝ J. HAUPTMANN P. (2000): Changes in the spatial structure of Prague and Brno in the 1990s. Acta Universitatis Carolinae Geographica 35(1): 61–76.

  • SÝKORA L. (1999): Changes in the internal spatial structure of post-communist Prague. GeoJournal 49(1): 79–89.

  • TEMELOVÁ J. (2007): Flagship developments and the physical upgrading of post-socialist inner city: The Golden Angel project in Prague. Geografiska Annaler 89B(2): 169–181.

  • VITURKA M. (2010) Regionální disparity a jejich hodnocení v kontextu regionální politiky Geografie 115(2): 131–143.

  • WILKINSON S. REED R. (2008): Property development. (5. ed.) Abingdon Routledge.

  • WOOD A. (2004): The Scalar Transformation of the U.S. Commercial Property-Development Industry: A Cautionary Note on the Limits of Globalization Author(s). Economic Geography 80(2): 119–140.

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor

IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 1.870
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 1.858

CiteScore 2018: 2.07

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.445
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.877

Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 156 76 2
PDF Downloads 93 56 0