Explainer: Bad housing supply assumptions

Cameron Murray ()

No 4jmb8, OSF Preprints from Center for Open Science

Abstract: Glaeser and Gyourko (2003) (G&G) famously argued that if the marginal cost of a square metre of housing lot land is less than the average cost, this is evidence of a price effect from “artificial” supply constraints. They call this price gap a “regulatory tax”, but it is also known as a “zoning effect” or “zoning tax”. Their logic has been relied upon by hundreds of other studies and in numerous replications of their approach, including by economists from the Reserve Bank of Australia, whose results were widely publicised (Kendall and Tulip, 2018). However, the economic assumptions behind G&G’s approach are implausible. Although popular, their method should not be relied upon to infer anything about the nature of housing supply. This note explains why.

Date: 2021-05-21
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-ure
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://osf.io/download/60a74c090b6c6900399c16a7/

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:osf:osfxxx:4jmb8

DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/4jmb8

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in OSF Preprints from Center for Open Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by OSF ().