Explore the vast range of titles available.

In this essay, we review the basic economics of housing supply and the functioning of US housing markets to better understand the distribution of home prices, household wealth, and the spatial distribution of people across markets. We employ a cost-based approach to gauge whether a housing market is delivering appropriately priced units. Specifically, we investigate whether market prices (roughly) equal the costs of producing the housing unit. If so, the market is well-functioning in the sense that it efficiently delivers housing units at their production cost. The gap between price and production cost can be understood as a regulatory tax. The available evidence suggests, but does not definitively prove, that the implicit tax on development created by housing regulations is higher in many areas than any reasonable negative externalities associated with new construction. We discuss two main effects of developments in housing prices: on patterns of household wealth and on the incentives for relocation to high-wage, high-productivity areas. Finally, we turn to policy implications.

Chinese housing prices rose by over 10 percent per year in real terms between 2003 and 2014 and are now between two and ten times higher than the construction cost of apartments. At the same time, Chinese developers built 100 billion square feet of residential real estate. This boom has been accompanied by a large increase in the number of vacant homes, held by both developers and households. This boom may turn out to be a housing bubble followed by a crash, yet that future is far from certain. The demand for real estate in China is so strong that current prices might be sustainable, especially given the sparse alternative investments for Chinese households, so long as the level of new supply is radically curtailed. Whether that happens depends on the policies of the Chinese government, which must weigh the benefits of price stability against the costs of restricting urban growth.

Rising home values also raise the cost of living, offsetting their impact on consumption. However, additional home equity collateral can loosen borrowing constraints, increasing spending for households that value their current endowment of housing highly. I use geographically linked microdata to exploit regional heterogeneity in housing markets and identify the causal effect of house price fluctuations on consumer spending. A $1 increase in home values leads to a $0.047 increase in spending for homeowners, but a negligible response for renters. Results reflect large responses among credit constrained households, suggesting looser borrowing constraints are a primary driver of the MPC out of housing wealth.

Borrowing against the increase in home equity by existing homeowners was responsible for a significant fraction of the rise in US household leverage from 2002 to 2006 and the increase in defaults from 2006 to 2008. Instrumental variables estimation shows that homeowners extracted 25 cents for every dollar increase in home equity. Home equity–based borrowing was stronger for younger households and households with low credit scores. The evidence suggests that borrowed funds were used for real outlays. Home equity–based borrowing added $1.25 trillion in household debt from 2002 to 2008, and accounts for at least 39 percent of new defaults from 2006 to 2008. JEL: D14, R31

I process satellite-generated data on terrain elevation and presence of water bodies to precisely estimate the amount of developable land in U.S. metropolitan areas. The data show that residential development is effectively curtailed by the presence of steep-sloped terrain. I also find that most areas in which housing supply is regarded as inelastic are severely land-constrained by their geography. Econometrically, supply elasticities can be well characterized as functions of both physical and regulatory constraints, which in turn are endogenous to prices and demographic growth. Geography is a key factor in the contemporaneous urban development of the United States.

Empirical research on cities starts with a spatial equilibrium condition: workers and firms are assumed to be indifferent across space. This condition implies that research on cities is different from research on countries, and that work on places within countries needs to consider population, income, and housing prices simultaneously. Housing supply elasticity will determine whether urban success reveals itself in the form of more people or higher incomes. Urban economists generally accept the existence of agglomeration economies, which exist when productivity rises with density, but estimating the magnitude of those economies is difficult. Some manufacturing firms cluster to reduce the costs of moving goods, but this force no longer appears to be important in driving urban success. Instead, modern cities are far more dependent on the role that density can play in speeding the flow of ideas. Finally, urban economics has some insights to offer related topics such as growth theory, national income accounts, public economics, and housing prices.

The aim of this article is to identify the calculative practices that turn urban development planning into the supply-side of land financialisation. My focus is on the statutory planning of housing supply and the accounting procedures, or market devices, that normalise the practices of land speculation in the earliest stage of the urban development process. I provide an analysis of the accountancy regime used by planning authorities in England to evidence a 5-year supply of housing land. Drawing on the work of Michel Callon on market framing, I assess the activities of economic agents in performing or ‘formatting’ this supply, its boundaries, externalities and rules of operation. I evidence the effect of this formatting in normalising the treatment of land as a financial asset and in orienting the statutory regulation of land supply to the provision of opportunities for the capture of increased ground rent at a cost to the delivery of new homes. 本文的目的是揭示将城市发展规划转化为土地金融化的供给侧的精明做法。我的重点是住房供应的法定规划和会计程序或市场机制，正是这些因素在城市发展过程的最早期阶段使土地投机行为正常化。我对英国规划当局使用的会计制度进行了分析，这一会计制度用以证明5年的住房土地供应。借鉴米歇尔·卡隆 (Michel Callon) 在市场框架方面的研究，我评估了经济主体在执行或“格式化”这种供给方面的活动、其边界、外部性和运行规则。我证明了这种格式化在以下两方面的影响：一是使土地作为一种金融资产的处理正常化，二是使土地供应的法定监管以提供获取增加的地租的机会为导向（而这必然增加提供新住房的成本）。

What is the optimal rate of new housing supply? We answer this question with a simple model of new housing supply where the choice variable is the rate of new housing lot sales. This model is informed by the cost-side assumptions of the static equilibrium model but allows for demand for home-buying to vary over time. It differs from static models of housing production equilibrium by assuming that landowners hold land assets that are sold in asset markets to create new supply. Landowners maximise the present value of their balance sheet by choosing a rate of new housing lot sales, accounting for the effect on asset price growth from their sales in a housing market of finite depth. The resulting absorption rate equation has radically different parameter effects compared to the popular static housing density model. Constraints on density, for example, increase the optimal rate of supply by reducing the return to delaying development. Interest rates, land value tax rates, and demand growth, positively relate to the optimal rate of supply. The policy lessons are (1) the relationship between demand growth and the optimal supply rate limits the ability for market supply to reduce prices, and (2) increasing the cost to delaying housing development is the primary way to increase the market rate of housing supply.

We set up and solve a spatial, dynamic equilibrium model of the housing market based on two main assumptions: households with heterogenous abilities flow in and out metropolitan areas in response to local wage shocks, and the housing supply cannot adjust instantly because of regulatory constraints. In our equilibrium, house prices compensate for cross-sectional productivity differences. We increase productivity dispersion in the calibrated model in order to match the 30-year increase in cross-sectional wage dispersion that we document based on metropolitan-level data. We show that the model quantitatively matches the observed 30-year increase in dispersion of house prices across US metropolitan areas. It is consistent with several other features of the cross-sectional distribution of house prices and wages.

This paper presents a model of a housing market with a fixed supply of land available for future development. Building density and the rate of land development are both endogenous. Competition amongst atomistic landowners leads to welfare-maximizing development policies. However, a monopolist landowner develops land faster, with lower building density, than a welfare-maximizing social planner. Unless demand is very high, the first effect dominates, because a monopolist landowner increases the size of the housing stock faster than a social planner. Rapid, low-density development is a commitment device. It boosts the monopolist’s development proceeds by making it more difficult to flood the market with new housing in the future.