Investigating and Modelling the link between planning law and real-estate prices with business cycles, economic productivity and new business creation

有很多研究将家庭资产负债表和房价变动与总体经济活动联系起来（Mian and Sufi, 2010; Adelino et al., 2015）。同样，也有大量的工作建立了土地使用法规和房价之间的紧密联系（Glaeser, 2005; Green, Malpezzi, and Mayo, 2005; Cheshire and Hilber, 2008）。在我的博士研究中，我的目标是调查第一股和第二股文学之间的联系。特别是，我的目的是了解土地使用和规划法规如何通过房价变化影响总体经济活动，如产出、就业、生产率、投资、消费、创业和新企业创造。在英国，关于住房和土地使用的辩论是当今政治格局中最突出的问题之一。英国的住宅和商业地产价格是经合组织（OECD）成员国中最高的。Cheshire和Shepphard（2002）表明，英国土地使用规划政策的估计净成本高达家庭年收入的3.9%。Cheshire和Hilber（2008）估计了14个英国和8个欧洲大陆办公地点的监管税。作者发现，在样本期内，伦敦西区的影子税平均为边际建筑成本的800%，布鲁塞尔为68%。最近的研究还揭示了土地使用法规对经济活动的重大长期影响。Hseih和Moretti（2019）使用空间均衡模型和来自220个大都市区的数据发现，对新住房供应的严格限制有效地限制了进入美国高生产率城市和地区的工人数量。土地使用法规如何与金融创新、法规和技术等其他因素相互作用，从而决定房价？危机后文献中的论文发现，限制性土地使用法规通过降低房价弹性，加剧了危机的影响。例如，Mian和Sufi（2010）报告说，2002年至2006年期间，美国房价弹性较低的县的杠杆率比其他县上升得更快，这反过来导致耐用消费支出下降更大，随后失业率大幅上升。因此，我的博士学位将专注于将上述言论整合到用于理解和模拟经济增长的理论框架中。戴维斯和希思科特（2007）开发的多部门增长模型将被用作起点，其中建筑、制造业和服务业以不同的比例组合在一起，以产生消费、商业投资和住宅结构。在这个起点上，将增加有助于模型的组成部分：不同信贷制度、不同城市发展风格和房地产价格弹性的时空变化对总体经济措施的影响，以一种更现实和有启发性的方式。

There exists much research linking household balance sheets and house price movements to aggregate economic activity (Mian and Sufi, 2010; Adelino et al., 2015). Equally, there exists a thriving body of work that has established strong links between land use regulations and house prices (Glaeser, 2005; Green, Malpezzi, and Mayo, 2005; Cheshire and Hilber, 2008). In my PhD research I aim to investigate the link between the first and the second strands of literature. In particular, my aim is to understand how land use and planning regulations, through house price changes, affect aggregate economic activity like output, employment, productivity, investment, consumption and entrepreneurship and new business creation. The debate over housing and land use in the UK is one of the most prominent in today's political landscape. House and commercial property prices in the UK are among the most expensive in the OECD. Cheshire and Shepphard (2002) have shown that estimated net costs of land use planning policies in the UK amount to as much as 3.9% of annual household incomes. Cheshire and Hilber (2008) estimate the regulatory tax for 14 British and 8 continental European office locations. The authors find an average shadow tax, of 800% of marginal construction costs in the West End of London and 68% in Brussels, over the sample period.Recent research has also uncovered significant long-term impact of land use regulations on economic activity. Hseih and Moretti (2019) using a spatial equilibrium model and data from 220 metropolitan areas find that stringent restrictions to new housing supply effectively limit the number of workers who have access to high productivity cities and regions in the US. How do land use regulations interact with other factors such as financial innovations, regulation and technology in determining house prices? Papers in the post-crisis literature find that restrictive land use regulations, through a lower house price elasticity, worsened the effects of the crisis. For example, Mian and Sufi (2010) report that between 2002 to 2006 counties in the US with lower house price elasticity experienced sharper increases in leverage than others which in turn caused larger drops in durable consumption expenditure, and later, large increases in unemployment. Thus my PhD will focus on integrating the above remarks into the theoretical framework used to understand and model economic growth. The multisector growth model developed in Davis and Heathcote (2007) will be used as a starting point where construction, manufacturing, and services are combined, in different proportions, to produce consumption, business investment, and residential structures. To this starting point will be added components that will contribute to model: the effects of varying credit regimes, different styles of urban development and temporal and spatial variation of real-estate price elasticity on aggregate economic measures in a more realistic and enlightening manner.