• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The Annals of regional science >New housing supply elasticity in Australia:a comparison of dwelling types
【24h】

New housing supply elasticity in Australia:a comparison of dwelling types

机译：澳大利亚的新住房供应弹性：住房类型的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This paper extends the work of McLaughlin (Australas J Reg Stud l(17):60-80, 2011) by estimating housing supply elasticities of the six Australian capital cities over a longer panel, from 1983-2010. In addition, we extend McLaugh-lin's analysis by comparing housing supply elasticities by dwelling type and also test for the presence of longer supply lags than previously examined in the supply literature. Based on widespread implementation of land-use regulations by Australian federal and state governments over the past 30 years, we hypothesize difference in elasticity between housing types is ambiguous, with supply lags greater for multifam-ily units. We employ the urban growth model of new housing supply developed by Mayer and Somerville (J Urb Econ 48(l):85-109, 2000a) and Mayer and Somerville (Reg Sci Urb Econ 30(6):639-662,2000b) and employed in Zabel and Paterson (J Reg Sci 46(l):67-95,2006) and McLaughlin (Australas J Reg Stud l(17):60-80,2011), to estimate the elasticity of new housing supply in Australia's six capital cities-Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth, Adelaide, and Hobart-using an unbalanced quarterly panel from 1983-2010. Our findings suggest that the elasticity of new supply is greater for multifamily units than single-family units, while supply response lags for multi-family homes are on the order of 4-8 quarters longer than that of single-family homes. These findings suggest that although Australian land-use policies may be achieving their goal of increasing the supply of smaller, more affordable units, future policies should seek to reduce the extensive supply lags of housing types to help ease short-run price increases.
机译：本文通过估计更长的时间范围（1983-2010年）的六个澳大利亚首都城市的住房供应弹性，扩展了McLaughlin的工作（Australas J Reg Stud l（17）：60-80，2011）。此外，我们通过按住所类型比较住房供应弹性来扩展McLaugh-lin的分析，并测试是否存在比先前在供应文献中讨论的更长的供应滞后。基于过去30年来澳大利亚联邦政府和州政府广泛实施的土地使用法规，我们假设住房类型之间的弹性差异不明确，多户家庭的供应滞后更大。我们采用Mayer和Somerville（J Urb Econ 48（l）：85-109，2000a）和Mayer and Somerville（Reg Sci Urb Econ 30（6）：639-662,2000b）开发的新住房供应的城市增长模型。并受雇于Zabel和Paterson（J Reg Sci 46（l）：67-95,2006）和McLaughlin（Australas J Reg Stud l（17）：60-80,2011）中，以估算澳大利亚新住房供应的弹性六个首都-悉尼，墨尔本，布里斯班，珀斯，阿德莱德和霍巴特-使用1983-2010年的季度面板不平衡。我们的发现表明，多户住宅的新供应弹性要大于单户住宅，而多户住宅的供应响应滞后时间要比单户住宅长4-8个季度。这些发现表明，尽管澳大利亚的土地使用政策可能实现了增加更小，更可负担的住房供应的目标，但未来的政策应寻求减少住房类型的广泛供应滞后，以缓解短期价格上涨的风险。

著录项

  • 来源
    《The Annals of regional science》 |2012年第2期|p.595-618|共24页
  • 作者

    Ralph B. McLaughlin;

  • 作者单位

    School of Natural and Built Environments, University of South Australia,Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号