Political manipulation of urban land markets: Evidence from China

被引:23
作者
Henderson, Vernon [1 ]
Su, Dongling [2 ]
Zhang, Qinghua [3 ]
Zheng, Siqi [4 ]
机构
[1] London Sch Econ & Polit Sci, London, England
[2] Shanghai Univ Finance & Econ, Shanghai, Peoples R China
[3] Peking Univ, Beijing, Peoples R China
[4] MIT, Cambridge, MA USA
关键词
INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT; FISCAL DECENTRALIZATION; ECONOMIC-GROWTH; TRADE; URBANIZATION; PRODUCTIVITY; MIGRATION; CITY; CENTRALIZATION; AGGLOMERATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.jpubeco.2022.104730
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Over the last forty years, China has experienced extraordinary growth under output market reforms, but the growth rates are now tapering off. Reforms in factor markets and city governance have been much slower and are viewed as having the potential to yield considerable efficiency gains. In this paper, we explore this possibility, tackling the key issues of local political manipulation of land markets and objec-tives of local leaders, constraints on the local budgetary process to finance infrastructure and capital mar-ket favoritism of certain cities. We use a structural general equilibrium model with trade and migration frictions, based on prefecture level data. We model the political process of land misallocation within cities which drives up housing prices and estimate city-by-city local leaders' preferences over economic perfor-mance versus residents' welfare. Counterfactual analysis shows that equalizing capital prices across cities, changing the political scorecard for city leaders to reward just maximization of local consumer welfare, and relaxing local budget constraints together increase welfare of consumers and returns to cap-ital by 13.7% and 2.25% respectively. Housing prices would decline in almost all cities; and the reforms would reduce the current excessive, often showcase investment in local public infrastructure by 49% nationally. These reforms would significantly reduce the population of favored cities with low capital costs like Tianjin and Beijing and raise the population of cities with high costs of capital and low local -leader weights on consumer welfare like Shenzhen and Dongguan.(C) 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页数:18
相关论文
共 86 条
[1]  
Adamopoulos Tasso., 2017, MISALLOCATION SELECT, DOI 10.3386/w23039
[2]   TRADE AND CIRCUSES - EXPLAINING URBAN GIANTS [J].
ADES, AF ;
GLAESER, EL .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 1995, 110 (01) :195-227
[3]  
Alder S., 2019, SSRN ELECT J
[4]   TRADE AND THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE SPATIAL ECONOMY [J].
Allen, Treb ;
Arkolakis, Costas .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 2014, 129 (03) :1085-1140
[5]  
Altshuler A.W., 1999, GOVERNANCE OPPORTUNI
[6]   Does infrastructure investment lead to economic growth or economic fragility? Evidence from China [J].
Ansar, Atif ;
Flyvbjerg, Bent ;
Budzier, Alexander ;
Lunn, Daniel .
OXFORD REVIEW OF ECONOMIC POLICY, 2016, 32 (03) :360-390
[7]   Are Chinese cities too small? [J].
Au, Chun-Chung ;
Henderson, J. Vernon .
REVIEW OF ECONOMIC STUDIES, 2006, 73 (03) :549-576
[8]   How migration restrictions limit agglomeration and productivity in China [J].
Au, Chun-Chung ;
Henderson, J. Vernon .
JOURNAL OF DEVELOPMENT ECONOMICS, 2006, 80 (02) :350-388
[9]  
Bahl R.W., 2003, Restructuring Local Government Finance in Developing Countries: Lessons from South Africa
[10]  
Bai CE, 2016, BROOKINGS PAP ECO AC, P129