Appraisal practice in Central and Eastern Europe

LTStraipsnyje apžvelgiama šiuolaikinių turto vertinimo Centrinėje ir Rytų Europoje metodų raida. Ji skirstoma į tris etapus. Ypač daug dėmesio skiriama trečiajam etapui, ekonomikoje pradėjus veikti rinkos santykiams. Apžvelgiami naudojami metodai ir procedūros, nauji profesijos reikalavimai. Autoriaus nuomone, turto vertintojai Centrinės ir Rytų Europos šalyse (CREŠ) yra stebėtinai gerai išsilavinę. Taip pat puiki jų orientacija pagrindiniuose laisvos rinkos dėsniuose. Ir eiliniai piliečiai, ir profesionalai kur kas glaudžiau pažįstami su rinkos veikimu negu žmonės Vakaruose. Privati šeimos būsto nuosavybė daugumoje šalių, po II-jo pasaulinio karo tapusių SSRS dalimi, buvo gyvenimo norma. Rytų Europa yra puikiai pasirengusi adaptuotis prie rinkos ekonomikos sąlygų - suvokti joje vykstančius procesus ir laikytis joje priimtų procedūrų. Deja, perėjimo kaina labai skaudi. Ekonomika negali pernakt susitvarkyti su perėjimo sumaištimi. Kiekvienos šalies ekonomikoje turi būti numatyti būdai padėti kitoms šalims - toms, kurioms reikalinga pagalba ir kurioms istoriškai ne taip gerai sekėsi. Kiekvienos šalies ekonomika tai - visuomeninių ir privačių iniciatyvų bei funkcijų mišinys. Tai - viso, kas konkrečiu momentu yra geriausia, pusiausvyros taškas, kuriame kiekvienas individas atskirai ir visi bendrai gali gauti optimalios naudos. Vakariečiai gali pasiūlyti daug, tačiau jie negali Centrinei ir Rytų Europai primesti savos laisvo verslo sampratos kaip vienintelio geriausio būdo veikti. Kažkur tarp visko glūdi atsakymas, galintis geriausiai patenkinti šių šalių rinkos poreikius bei pasitarnauti visuomenei.

ENIt is remarkable how well educated valuers are in the CEECs; further how well experienced they are in the basic concepts of a free market. It is said they have had a closed economy for fifty years and thus do not, or should not, have an understanding of how a market economy functions. To the contrary, citizens and professional people alike, not only have an intimate and well-founded understanding of markets but are much more cognizant of how markets function than many of us in the West are led to believe. There has always been a secondary market in Central and Eastern Europe, even if it functioned basically on the barter system. Communism never closed the economy: at best it only controlled it. Each and every individual knew everything there is to know about the haggling process and the fundamentals that govern the price of what one has and what one wants. Private ownership of single family residential properties remained a fact of life in most of the countries that became a part of the USSR following World War II. Farmers markets for excess or surplus agricultural production continued unabated, driven not by political forces but rather by human desire and necessity. So, it is easy to understand how well prepared Eastern Europeans are to adjust to a market economy in terms of understanding the process and in implementing the procedures. Unfortunately, the cost of the transition is extremely painful. It is too much, too soon. Their economies cannot cope with the rigours of massive transition overnight.All economies need to have some process of assisting the needy and less fortunate. All economies represent a blend of public and private initiatives and functions. It is the balance of what is best at a particular moment in time that will bring the combined optimal benefits to the individual, both separately and collectively. We in the West have much to offer. We also have much to learn about our own systems. We cannot impose our concepts of free enterprise on Central and Eastern Europeans, as necessarily being the best way to do things. Somewhere in between lies the answer that will best serve their markets and provide the greatest benefit to the population at large, not only in the broad economic and political perspective, but as it applies to their professional activities.