Renter Nonpayment and Landlord Response: Evidence From COVID-19.

How renters respond to economic hardship, and how landlords respond when tenants fail to make rent, are understudied questions, owing largely to limited data. We use experiences from the COVID-19 pandemic to begin answering these questions. Drawing on both new census data and two original surveys of renters in Los Angeles County, we test nine hypotheses about the sources of renter distress and landlord reactions to it. We find that lost work and lost income are the primary drivers of missed or late payments. Most tenants who fell behind entered into repayment plans with their landlords. Eviction threats were uncommon but increased as the pandemic persisted. Landlords were more likely to threaten eviction as tenants fell further behind, and smaller landlords were more likely than larger ones to cut tenant services and threaten or initiate evictions. Our evidence suggests that government income support helped tenants pay rent and thus helped stave off eviction threats. We also find that tenants took on other forms of debt, such as credit cards, loans from family, etc., to make rent. These debt burdens generally will not be relieved by housing assistance, and so require other policy responses.

Zoning and affordability: A reply to Rodríguez-Pose and Storper.

Would increasing allowable housing densities in expensive cities generate more housing construction and make housing more affordable? In a provocative article, Andrés Rodríguez-Pose and Michael Storper survey the evidence and answer no. Restrictions on housing density, they contend, do not substantially influence housing production or price. They further argue that allowing more density in growing metropolitan areas would only improve housing outcomes for the affluent, and most likely harm the poor. We take issue with both of these contentions. While uncertainties remain in the study of housing prices and land use regulation, neither theory nor evidence warrant dispensing with zoning reform, or concluding that it could only be regressive. Viewed in full, the evidence suggests that increasing allowable housing densities is an important part of housing affordability in expensive regions.

Where do Property Rights Matter More? Explaining the Variation in Demand for Property Titles across Cities in Mexico.

This paper examines the variation in the value of property rights to housing in Mexico, focusing specifically on differences between urban housing markets. Roughly 30% of owner-occupied houses in Mexico do not have a proper deed. Houses with no deed are estimated to be five percent less valuable than otherwise similar houses with a full deed, yet this premium varies widely across cities. I match data from the 2012 and 2014 National Survey of Household Incomes and Expenditures to different sources of city-level data in order to examine hypotheses explaining this variation in a multilevel regression framework. I find that deeds are valued more in cities with more highly educated residents, more political competition, and more voting. Measures of local economic activity, degree of informality, and the regulatory bureaucracy are not associated with higher value to full property rights. Additionally, I find that more educated households value deeds more, and having a deed is more valuable for larger houses in neighborhoods with less vacancy and higher infrastructure quality. Based on these results, I suggest funds to subsidize titling should be redirected to places where titles are worth more. More broadly, I suggest policymakers reconsider framing property-titling programs as poverty alleviation. Low-income households would benefit more from subsidies for improvements to housing and residential infrastructure. At the same time, the federal government should further push to reduce the costs of transferring property.

Are civil-law notaries rent-seeking monopolists or essential market intermediaries? Endogenous development of a property rights institution in Mexico.

As the fourth contribution in the 'Land' section, this paper forms a research 'diptych' with the next paper by Levy. Whereas she focuses on the notarial institution in mid-nineteenth century Mexico, this contribution examines it in a contemporary context. The notary is one of the chief components of property rights protection in civil-law systems, performing various public functions such as writing deeds for real estate property. Yet notaries are considered an 'inefficient' institution by many, due to the perception of rent-seeking behavior enabled by their near-monopoly over validating property rights claims. This study examines notaries in Mexico to unpack the apparent contradiction in the role of notaries in economic development. I use a combination of interviews with notaries and clients, and data on notarial practice and bureaucratic outcomes across the country, to examine notaries' social function. The theoretical lens of endogenous development and institutional functionalism reveals an alternate explanation for their seemingly high-cost services, as well as their role in economic development. Mexican notaries have a dual social function: public representative and private service provider. They perform diverse and essential activities, which in other countries are performed by multiple actors such as real estate agents, escrow offices and title insurance companies. Thus, what is perceived as inefficiency by some can be interpreted as an efficient response to the context in which they operate, and their semi-privatized nature can overcome problems found in other bureaucratic arrangements.

Do Strict Land Use Regulations Make Metropolitan Areas More Segregated by Income?

PROBLEM RESEARCH STRATEGY AND FINDINGS: Income segregation has risen in each of the last four decades in U.S. metropolitan areas, which can have lifelong impacts on the health, economic productivity, and behaviors of residents. Although it is widely assumed that local land use regulations-such as minimum lot sizes and growth controls-exclude low-income households from wealthier neighborhoods, the empirical research is surprisingly limited. We examine the relationship between land use regulation and segregation by income using new measures for the 95 biggest cities in the United States. We find that density restrictions are associated with the segregation of the wealthy and middle income, but not the poor. We also find that more local pressure to regulate land use is linked to higher rates of income segregation, but that more state control is connected to lower-income segregation. TAKEAWAY FOR PRACTICE: Density restrictions do drive urban income segregation of the rich, not the poor, but should be addressed because rich enclaves create significant metropolitan problems. Planners at the local level need assistance from regional and state efforts to ameliorate income segregation. Inclusionary housing requirements have a greater potential to reduce income segregation than bringing higher-income households into lower-income parts of the city. Finally, comprehensive and consistent data on the impacts of local land use regulations should be collected to inform future research and planning practice.