Today's subject and method of study on the management of lands and buildings

To begin with, the intention, conception and method of this study will be outlined.

1) It is needless to say that, in the construction and management of a city, lands and buildings constructing the city should be effectively utilized and managed.

Conventionally, studies on the management of lands and buildings have been made exclusively from the private economy view-point ----- from the stand-point of enterprises in the private sector which individually utilize lands. For instance, when a building investment is made on a land, this investment can be proper only if the individual buildings are commercially profitable; the form of land management should permit pursuit of the most effective utilization of that land as viewed solely from the landowner; the location for factories or other facilities should be selected to make the internal economy of individual facilities maximum. The current theories for land and building management, or view-points of location are based on this kind of conception.

However, even the management of lands and buildings from the private economy view-point will simultaneously give significant effects unavoidably to the management of public space of region, city or country, that is, to the public economy. Various contradictions arising in the current cities are closely related to the fact that the management of lands, buildings and facilities are made exclusively from the private economy view-point.

In those capitalist societies where most facilities as the city constituents are managed by individual enterprises, studies on the management of individual lands and buildings are necessary as a matter of course. But, studies with the view of investigating how this private management is related to the public economy have gained great importance today. And, in the national research institutes, it will be justified specifically that the management studies on the private economy should be made from the public economy view-point, rather than from the private economy one, with an aim of clarifying the influences of the land and building management on the private economy basis on the management of public space of city and country, together with those studies on the management of the very public space.

Thus, this paper is intended to study the structure of:

(1)	Contradictions inherent to the management of lands and buildings on the pricate economy basis, as viewed from the public economy, and
(2)	Contradictions inherent to the management of the very public space of city and country and to present the fundamental policies and measures for dissolving these contradictions.

2) It may be said that the management study belongs categorically to the field of economics or the science of management. Indeed, it will be never prohibited, or rather be necessary, for an architect to study the problem of building management as such. But, if his study is confined to the category of the science of management itself, it may have almost no impetus to breaking of new ground of study, or the results of study may be of only small value and contribute little to the development of architectonics itself, after he has engaged as architect in the handling of this problem.

Primarily, architectonics is aiming ultimately at developing the material construction of living space and production space where human beings are to live and produce things, the author thinks. Building construction can not exist without management, and therefore, it is obvious that the study of building management forms one field of architectonics. However, for the management study as one field of architectonics, it is of special importance to unite with constructing of building spaces, or the space of city and country as an collective expression of them, which forms the ultimate aim of architectonics. Realy, the management of lands, buildings and cities can not but have much to do with many concepts such as house rent, price, depreciation, life time, demand-supply, taxation system, central or local government finance, investment allotment, national income, etc., but insofar as the study remains in these fields only, it merely bears a part of economics, the science of management or finance, and can hardly fulfill the essential subject of architectonics, that is, creation and development of building spaces.

This field may be inter-disciplinary between architectionics and management economics and is called (by the author) "space management economics". But, its conception does not originate from economics, but from architectonics. Ultimately, it is in the position to make contribution to creation and development of building and city spaces or living and production spaces. Thus, the second point in pushing forward this study is to grasp the management of lands and buildings in the relation to material spaces.

3) Since this study is intended and concepted as schematically shown above, it will be developed in this paper in the following terms.

a.	Investigation of the actual condition of contradictions ----- construction pollution, city problem, etc. ----- arising between the private management of lands and buildings ----- high-storied buildings, housings, reclamation, dwelling area development, redevelopment, etc. ----- and the management of public space, and investigation of fundamental conditions of the management,
b.	Investigation of the public economy regarding the optimum allotment of social capital and public properties in the city or country management.
c.	Investigation of the land utilization economy as viewed from the city or country management.

This study is a trial development of the conception outlined above. It describes the management basis for medium- and high-storied housing supply enterprises in the private sector (private economy management), and its relation to the problem of the right of sunshine (destruction of regional space and environment) occurring in the process of construction.