Did the economic crisis have the same effect on home-owners and renters in terms of employment?

  1. Javier A. Barrios García 1
  1. 1 Universidad de La Laguna
    info

    Universidad de La Laguna

    San Cristobal de La Laguna, España

    ROR https://ror.org/01r9z8p25

Revista:
Revista de economía aplicada

ISSN: 1133-455X

Año de publicación: 2017

Volumen: 25

Número: 75

Páginas: 53-85

Tipo: Artículo

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR

Otras publicaciones en: Revista de economía aplicada

Resumen

Investigamos el efecto de la forma de tenencia de la vivienda habitual (propiedad/alquiler) sobre la situación de empleo de los individuos (empleado/desempleado) mediante la estimación empírica de diferentes modelos dinámicos con datos de panel de la Encuesta de Condiciones de Vida para España a lo largo del período 2004-2012. Teniendo en cuenta el efecto de la heterogeneidad inobservada, la endogeneidad de la elección de forma de tenencia de la vivienda, y distinguiendo la dependencia del estado espuria de la verdadera, encontramos que no hay evidencia de ningún efecto indirecto sobre la probabilidad de empleo inducido por la tasa de vivienda en propiedad regional, mientras que el efecto medio sobre esta probabilidad de la forma de tenencia de vivienda es robusto y significativamente positivo, manteniéndose en torno a 3.8 puntos porcentuales para el conjunto de propietarios de la vivienda, y aumentando hasta los 4.3 puntos porcentuales para aquellos propietarios con hipoteca.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Akay, A. (2012): “Finite-sample comparison of alternative methods for estimating dynamic panel data models”, Journal of Applied Econometrics, vol. 27, pp. 1189-1204.
  • Arulampalam, W. and Stewart, M.B. (2009): “Simplified implementation of the Heckman estimator of the dynamic probit model and a comparison with alternative estimators”, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, vol. 71 (5), pp. 659-681.
  • Arellano, M., Bond, S. (1991): “Some tests of specification for panel data: Montecarlo evidence and an application to employment equations”, The Review of Economic Studies, vol. 58, pp. 277-297.
  • Barrios, J.A. and Rodríguez, J.E. (2004): “User cost changes, unemployment and home-ownership: evidence from Spain”, Urban Studies, vol. 41 (3), pp. 563-578.
  • Battu, H., Ma, A. and Phimister, E. (2008): “Housing tenure, job mobility and unemployment in the UK”, The Economic Journal, vol. 118, pp. 311-328.
  • Bentolila, S., Cahuc, P., Dolado, J.J. and Le Barbanchon, T. (2012): “Two-tier labour markets in the great recession: France versus Spain”, The Economic Journal, vol. 122, pp. F155-F187.
  • Blanchflower, D.G. and Oswald, A.J. (2013): “Does high home-ownership impair the labor market?”, NBER Working Paper No. 19079.
  • Blundell, R. and Bond, S. (1998): “Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models”, Journal of Econometrics, vol. 87, pp. 115-143.
  • Brunet, C. and Lesueur, J. (2009): “Do homeowners stay unemployed longer? A French microeconometric study”, in Van Ewijk, C. and Van Leuvenjstein, M., (eds.), Homeownership and the labour market in Europe, New York, Oxford University Press, pp. 137-160.
  • Chamberlain, G. (1980): “Analysis of covariance with qualitative data”, The Review of Economic Studies, vol. 47, pp. 225-238.
  • Coulson, N.E. and Fisher, L.M. (2002): “Tenure choice and labour market outcomes”, Housing Studies, vol. 17, pp. 35-49.
  • Coulson, N.E. and Fisher, L.M. (2009): “Housing tenure and labor market impacts: the search goes on”, Journal of Urban Economics, vol. 65 (3), pp. 252-264.
  • Coulson, N.E. and Grieco, P.L. (2013): “Mobility and mortgages: Evidence from the PSID”, Regional Science and Urban Economics, vol. 43, pp. 1-7.
  • Della Vigna, S. and Paserman, M.D. (2005): “Job search and impatience”, Journal of Labor Economics, vol. 23 (3), pp. 527-588.
  • Dohmen, T.J. (2005): “Housing mobility and unemployment”, Regional Science and Urban Economics, vol. 35, pp. 305-325.
  • Dujardin, C. and Goffette-Nagot, F. (2010): “Neighborhood effects on unemployment? A test à la Altonji”, Regional Science and Urban Economics, vol. 40, pp. 380-396.
  • Farber, H.S. (2012): “Unemployment in the great recession: Did the housing market crisis prevent the unemployed from moving to take jobs?”, American Economic Review, vol. 102 (3), pp. 520-525.
  • Flatau, P., Forbes, M. and Hendershott, P.H., Wood, G. (2003): “Homeownership and unemployment: The roles of leverage and public housing”, NBER Working paper No. 10021.
  • Green, R.K. and Hendershott, P.H. (2001): “Home-ownership and unemployment in the US”, Urban Studies, vol. 38 (9), pp. 1509-1520.
  • Head, A. and Lloyd-Ellis, H. (2012): “Housing liquidity, mobility and the labour market”, The Review of Economic Studies, vol. 79 (4), pp. 1559-1589.
  • Heckman, J.J. (1981): “The incidental parameters problem and the problem of initial conditions in estimating a discrete time-discrete data stochastic process”, in Manski, C. F. and McFadden, D. (eds.): Structural Analysis of Discrete Data with Econometric Applications, Cambridge, MA, The MIT Press, pp. 179-195.
  • Hyslop, D.R. (1999): “State dependence, serial correlation and heterogeneity in intertemporal labor force participation of married women”, Econometrica, 67 (6), pp. 1255-1294.
  • Ioannides, M. and Loury, L.D. (2004): “Job information networks, neighborhood effects, and inequality”, Journal of Economic Literature, vol. XLII, pp. 1056-1093.
  • Isebaert, D., Heylen, F., Smolder, C. (2015): “Houses and/or jobs: ownership and the labour market in Belgian districts”, Regional Studies, forthcoming.
  • James, R.N. (2009): “Tenant time preference as a barrier to homeownership”, Applied Economics Letters, vol. 16, pp. 1073-1077.
  • Laamanen, J-P. (2013): “Home ownership and the labour market: Evidence from rental housing market deregulation”, Tampere Economic Working Paper, No. 89, University of Tampere, Finland. Downloadable at http://tampub.uta.fi/handle/10024/68116.
  • Mortensen, D.T. (1986): “Job search and labour market analysis”, en: Ashenfelter, O. and Card, D. (Eds.), Handbook of Labor Economics Vol. II, Amsterdam, North Holland, pp. 849-919.
  • Munch, J.R., Rosholm, M. and Svarer, M. (2006): “Are homeowners really more unemployed?”, The Economic Journal, vol. 116, pp. 991-1013.
  • Munch, J.R., Rosholm, M. and Svarer, M. (2008): “Home ownership, job duration and wages”, Journal of Urban Economics, vol. 63, pp. 130-145.
  • Mundlak, Y. (1978): “On the pooling of time series and cross section data”, Econometrica, vol. 46, pp. 69-85.
  • Nickell, S. (1998): “Unemployment: questions and some answers”, The Economic Journal, vol. 108, pp. 802-816.
  • Nickell, S., Layard, R. (1999): “Labor market institutions and economic performance”, in Ashenfeiter, O. and Card, D. (Eds.): Handbook of Labor Economics Vol. 3c, New York, North Holland, pp. 3029-3084.
  • Oswald, A.J. (1996): “A conjecture on the explanation for high unemployment in the industrialized nations: Part I”, Warwick Economics Research Paper, #475, University of Warwick.
  • Oswald, A.J. (1999): “The housing market and Europe’s unemployment: A non technical paper”, Unpublished manuscript, University of Warwick.
  • Pissarides, C.A. (2000): Equilibrium unemployment theory, Cambridge, MIT Press.
  • Rodríguez, J.E. and Barrios, J.A. (2012): “¿Incide la forma de tenencia de la vivienda habitual sobre la situación de empleo en España?”, Estudios de Economía Aplicada, vol. 30 (2), p. 751 (22 pages), online version at www.revista-eea.net, ref. Ý-30201.
  • Rodríguez, J.E. and Barrios, J.A. (2013): “Una estimación del efecto de la forma de tenencia de la vivienda sobre el empleo en España”, Estadística Española, vol. 55 (181), pp. 187-212.
  • Rouwendal, J. and Nijkamp, P. (2010): “Homeownership and labour market behaviour: interpreting the evidence”, Environment and Planning A, vol. 42 (2), pp. 419-433.
  • Stewart, M.B. (2007): “The interrelated dynamics of unemployment and low-wage employment”, Journal of applied econometrics, vol. 22, pp. 511-531.
  • Van Ewijk, C. and Van Leuvenjstein, M. (2009): Homeownership and the labour market in Europe, New York, Oxford University Press.
  • Wooldridge, J.M. (2005): “Simple solutions to the initial conditions problem for dynamic, nonlinear panel data models with unobserved heterogeneity”, Journal of Applied Econometrics, vol. 20, pp. 39-54.
  • Wooldridge, J.M. (2014): “Quasi-maximum likelihood estimation and testing for nonlinear models with endogenous explanatory variables”, Journal of Econometrics, vol. 182, pp. 226-234.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet