Housing allowance and the recipient's homeownership: Evidence from a panel data study in Sweden

Housing Studies

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 605-625

  Chen, Jie ^a   Enström Öst, Cecilia ^a  

^a UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

2SCML; Dynamic panel data; Endogeneity; Homeownership; Housing allowance

Indexed keywords

HOMEOWNERSHIP; INVESTMENT;

EASTERN HEMISPHERE; EURASIA; EUROPE; NORTHERN EUROPE; SCANDINAVIA; SWEDEN; WORLD;

EID: 22144467730     PISSN: 02673037     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02673030500114540     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Aaronson, D. (2000) A note on benefits of homeownership, Journal of Urban Economics, 47, pp. 356-369.
2. Amemiya, T. (1978) The estimation of a simultaneous equation generalized probit model, Econometrica, 46(5), pp. 1193-1205.
3. Anas, A. & Arnott, R. J. (1997) Taxes and allowances in a dynamic equilibrium model of urban housing with a size-quality hierarchy, Regional Science and Urban Economics, 27, pp. 547-580.
4. Arellano, M. & Carrasco, R. (2003) Binary choice panel data models with predetermined variables, Journal of Econometrics, 115, pp. 125-157.
5. Arendt, J. N. (2002) Endogeneity and Heterogeneity in LDV Panel Data Models. 10th International Conference on Panel Data, Berlin.
6. Åsberg, P. (1999) Housing decisions of young Swedish adults, Journal of Housing Economics, 8, pp. 116-143.
7. Baltagi, B.H. (2001) Econometric Analysis of Panel Data (New York: John Wiley and Sons)
8. Baltagi, B. H. & Y.-J. Chang (2000) Simultaneous equations with incomplete panels, Econometric Theory, 16, pp. 269-279.
9. Bollen, K. A., Guilkey, D. K. & Mroz, T.A. (1995) Binary outcomes and endogenous explanatory variables: tests and solutions with an application to the demand for contraceptive use in Tunisia, Demography, 32, pp. 111-131.
10. Buckner, J. C. (1999) Housing subsidies are critical to ending family homelessness, Evidence-based Healthcare, 3, p. 88.
11. Chay, K. Y. & Hyslop, D. (1998) Estimation of Dynamic Binary Response Panel Data Models (Berkeley, CA: University of California).
12. Coulson, N. E., Hwang, S.-J. & Imai, S. (2002) The value of owner occupation in neighborhoods, Journal of Housing Research, 13, pp. 153-174.
13. Davidson, R. & MacKinnon, J. G. (1993) Estimation and Inference in Econometrics (New York: Oxford University Press).
14. Ditch, J., Lewis, A. & Wilcox, S. (2001) Social Housing, Tenure and Housing Allowance: An international review, House Research Report no. 83, Department of Work and Pensions, York University, UK.
15. Fallis, G. (1993) On choosing social policy instruments: the case of non-profit housing, housing allowances or income assistance, Progress in Planning, 40, pp. 1-88.
16. Fallis, G., Hosios, A. J. & Jump, G.V. (1995) Housing allowances, nonprofit housing, and cost-effective program choice, Journal of Housing Economics, 4, pp. 136-152.
17. Frieden, B. J. (1980) What have we learned from the housing allowance experiment?, Habitat International, 5, pp. 227-254.
18. Galster, G. (1997) Comparing demand-side and supply-side housing policies: submarket and spatial perspectives. Housing Studies, 12, pp. 561-578.
19. Goodman, A. C. (2003) Following a panel of stayers: length of stay, tenure choice, and housing demand, Journal of Housing Economics, 12, pp. 106-133.
20. Gyourko, J. & Linneman, P. (1996) Analysis of the changing influences on traditional households' ownership: patterns, Journal of Urban Economics, 39, pp. 318-341.
21. Hausman, J.A. & Taylor, W.E. (1981) Panel data and unobservable individual effects, Econometrica, 49(6), pp. 1137-1398.
22. Heckman, J. J. & Borjas, G. J. (1980) Does unemployment cause future unemployment? Definitions, questions and answers from a continuous time model of heterogeneity and state dependence, Economica, 47, pp. 247-283.
23. Howenstine, E. J. (1986) The consumer housing subsidy approach versus producer housing subsidies: international experience, Cities, 3, pp. 24-40.
24. Ioannides, Y. M. (1987) Residential mobility and housing tenure choice, Regional Science and Urban Economics, 17, pp. 265-287.
25. Kan, K. (2000) Dynamic modeling of housing tenure choice, Journal of Urban Economics, 48, pp. 46-69.
26. Lee, L. F. (1981) Simultaneous equation models with discrete and censored dependent variables, in: C. Manski & D. McFadden (Eds) Structural analysis of discrete data with economic applications (Cambridge, MA: MIT press).
27. Painter, G. (2000) Tenure choice with sample selection: differences among alternative samples, Journal of Housing Economics, 9, pp. 197-213.
28. Painter, G. (2001) Low-income housing assistance: its impact on labor force and housing program participation, Journal of Housing Research, 12, pp. 1-26.
29. Rivers, D. & Vuong, Q. H. (1988) Limited information estimators and exogeneity tests for simultaneous probit models, Journal of Econometrics, 39, pp. 347-366.
30. SCB (2003) Statistics Sweden.
31. Shroder, M. (2002) Does housing assistance perversely affect self-sufficiency? A review essay, Journal of Housing Economics, 11, pp. 381-417.
32. The Swedish Housing Board, B. (1999) Housing allowances during the 1990s (Bostadsbidraget under 90-talet) (Karlskrona: The Housing Board (Boverket)).
33. Vella, F. & Verbeek, M. (1999) Two-step estimation of simultaneous equation panel data models with censored endogenous variables, Journal of Econometrics, 90, pp. 239-263.
34. Wooldridge, J. M. (2000) A framework for estimating dynamic, unobserved effects panel data models with: possible feedback to future explanatory variables, Economics Letters, 68, pp. 245-250.
35. Wooldridge, J. M. (2002) Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
36. World Bank (2002) Building Institutions for Markets (Paris: World Bank).
37. Zetterström, E. (2001) Residential Mobility and Tenure Choice in the Swedish Housing Market (Uppsala: Uppsala University, Department of Economics).