Journal of Economic Perspectives · 2025 · Elmendorf, Christopher S.、Nall, Clayton、Oklobdzija, Stan
中文摘要
为何美国城市和郊区的住房供给受到如此严格的限制?城市经济学家提出了两种主要假说:房主自身利益与政治碎片化。房主在人数上多于租户,且相对租户具有组织优势,据称他们会游说反对开发以保护其房产价值。碎片化假说强调,开发的负外部性由本地承担,而大部分收益则在区域或全国层面实现,从而导致地方政府阻挠住房建设。本文提出另一种解释:普通人根本不相信向区域住房存量中增加更多住房会降低房价。基于对城市和郊区居民的三项原创调查,只有少数受访者表示,一次大规模、正向的区域住房供给冲击会降低价格或租金。这些信念并不坚定且不稳定(表明人们很少思考该问题),但受访者对于高房价应归咎于谁持有稳定看法:开发商和房东。大规模、两党超级多数支持价格管制、需求补贴以及对所谓不良行为者的限制,他们认为这些政策比供给自由化更能有效实现广泛的可负担性。我们讨论了这些发现对扩大住房供给努力的含义。
Abstract
Why is housing supply so severely restricted in US cities and suburbs? Urban economists offer two primary hypotheses: homeowner self-interest and political fragmentation. Homeowners, who outnumber and have organizational advantages over renters, are said to lobby against development to protect their property values. The fragmentation hypothesis emphasizes that development's negative externalities are borne locally while most of the benefits accrue regionally or nationally, leading localities to block housing. This paper offers another explanation: ordinary people simply do not believe that adding more housing to the regional stock would reduce housing prices. Across three original surveys of urban and suburban residents, only a minority of respondents say that a large, positive, regional housing supply shock would reduce prices or rents. These beliefs are weakly held and unstable (suggesting people have given the issue little thought), but respondents do have stable views about who is to blame for high housing prices: developers and landlords. Large, bipartisan supermajorities support price controls, demand subsidies, and restrictions on putative bad actors, policies which they believe would be more effective than supply liberalization for widespread affordability. We discuss the implications of these findings for efforts to expand the supply of housing.