How the Australasian and Canadian Codes (VALMIN and CIMVal) approach mineral property valuation is described. Brief comment is also made on the International Valuation Standards Committee's interest in a global valuation standard for Mineral (Extractive) Industries and the South African SAMREC initiatives to adopt a VALMIN-like Code. The conventional tripartite classification of valuation approaches into those that are Market-based, Income-based and Cost-based is outlined. It is best practice to use as many of these approaches as possible (and as many methods as reasonable in the particular circumstances), given the quantity and quality of the data available on the Mineral Asset (which depends upon the state of development of the mineral property). The use of specific methods must satisfy the basic considerations of logic and reasonableness and the purpose of the valuation. The competence, judgement and repute of the valuer are critical factors, since all valuations are time and circumstance specific. What constitutes Market Value' in the different jurisdictions is discussed and definitions are given. Challenges facing the globalisation of a VALMIN-type Code for the international Minerals Industry are the influence of real estate valuers and the US jurisdictional idiosyncrasies. This is mainly due to a fixation on real property rights with a preference for using real estate-like comparative sales techniques (Market Approach) to the exclusion of Income-based approaches; a regulatory reluctance in the US to accept that Resources have considerable value; and the International Accounting Standards Board's preference for Historical, rather than Current Value, accounting.