IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/regeco/v97y2022ics0166046222000692.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Moving to better opportunities? Housing market responses to the top 4% policy

Author

Listed:
  • Liu, Haoyang
  • Song, Yang
  • Zhang, Xiaohan

Abstract

This paper studies the housing market responses to the California Top 4% policy adopted in 2001, which guarantees that the top 4% of seniors in each high school receive admission to the University of California system. The policy increased the desirability of houses in low-ranked high schools catchment areas (HSCAs). Using transaction-level property sales data, the study finds that homes in low-ranked HSCAs experienced a five percent increase in home prices after the policy relative to those in higher-ranked HSCAs. Furthermore, we analyze heterogeneous effects using ethnic last names to identify Asian and Hispanic homeowners and find that Asian homeowners seem to be more responsive to the policy than average, while Hispanic homeowners respond similarly to an average household. Finally, by matching co-owners’ full names, we construct a household panel to understand potential moving patterns that drive the price effect. We find that households who would have moved from a bottom two quintiles HSCA to higher-ranked HSCAs were more likely to move to a similarly ranked HSCA instead.

Suggested Citation

  • Liu, Haoyang & Song, Yang & Zhang, Xiaohan, 2022. "Moving to better opportunities? Housing market responses to the top 4% policy," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:regeco:v:97:y:2022:i:c:s0166046222000692
    DOI: 10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2022.103829
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166046222000692
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2022.103829?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barrow, Lisa & Rouse, Cecilia Elena, 2004. "Using market valuation to assess public school spending," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(9-10), pages 1747-1769, August.
    2. Raj Chetty & Nathaniel Hendren, 2018. "The Impacts of Neighborhoods on Intergenerational Mobility II: County-Level Estimates," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(3), pages 1163-1228.
    3. Sandra E. Black, 1999. "Do Better Schools Matter? Parental Valuation of Elementary Education," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(2), pages 577-599.
    4. Mark C. Long, 2004. "Race and College Admissions: An Alternative to Affirmative Action?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(4), pages 1020-1033, November.
    5. Raj Chetty & Nathaniel Hendren, 2018. "The Impacts of Neighborhoods on Intergenerational Mobility I: Childhood Exposure Effects," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(3), pages 1107-1162.
    6. Song, Yang, 2019. "Sorting, school performance and quality: Evidence from China," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 238-261.
    7. Cortes, Kalena E., 2010. "Do Bans on Affirmative Action Hurt Minority Students? Evidence from the Texas Top 10% Plan," IZA Discussion Papers 5021, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Weimer, David L. & Wolkoff, Michael J., 2001. "School Performance and Housing Values: Using Non-Contiguous District and Incorporation Boundaries to Identify School Effects," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 54(n. 2), pages 231-54, June.
    9. Sandra E. Black & Jeffrey T. Denning & Jesse Rothstein, 2023. "Winners and Losers? The Effect of Gaining and Losing Access to Selective Colleges on Education and Labor Market Outcomes," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 26-67, January.
    10. Ben Backes, 2012. "Do Affirmative Action Bans Lower Minority College Enrollment and Attainment?: Evidence from Statewide Bans," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 47(2), pages 435-455.
    11. Bogart, William T. & Cromwell, Brian A., 1997. "How Much More is a Good School District Worth?," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 50(2), pages 215-32, June.
    12. Cullen, Julie Berry & Long, Mark C. & Reback, Randall, 2013. "Jockeying for position: Strategic high school choice under Texas' top ten percent plan," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 32-48.
    13. Kate Antonovics & Ben Backes, 2014. "The Effect of Banning Affirmative Action on College Admissions Policies and Student Quality," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 49(2), pages 295-322.
    14. Clapp, John M. & Nanda, Anupam & Ross, Stephen L., 2008. "Which school attributes matter? The influence of school district performance and demographic composition on property values," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 451-466, March.
    15. Niu, Sunny Xinchun & Tienda, Marta & Cortes, Kalena, 2006. "College selectivity and the Texas top 10% law," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 259-272, June.
    16. Thomas J. Nechyba, 2000. "Mobility, Targeting, and Private-School Vouchers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(1), pages 130-146, March.
    17. Peter Arcidiacono & Michael Lovenheim, 2016. "Affirmative Action and the Quality-Fit Trade-Off," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(1), pages 3-51, March.
    18. Sunny Xinchun Niu & Marta Tienda, 2010. "The impact of the Texas top ten percent law on college enrollment: A regression discontinuity approach," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(1), pages 84-110.
    19. Charles M. Tiebout, 1956. "A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 64(5), pages 416-416.
    20. Weimer, David L. & Wolkoff, Michael J., 2001. "School Performance and Housing Values: Using Non-Contiguous District and Incorporation Boundaries to Identify School Effects," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 54(2), pages 231-254, June.
    21. Cortes, Kalena E., 2010. "Do bans on affirmative action hurt minority students? Evidence from the Texas Top 10% Plan," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 1110-1124, December.
    22. Eric Chyn, 2018. "Moved to Opportunity: The Long-Run Effects of Public Housing Demolition on Children," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(10), pages 3028-3056, October.
    23. Kate Antonovics & Ben Backes, 2013. "Were Minority Students Discouraged from Applying to University of California Campuses after the Affirmative Action Ban?," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 8(2), pages 208-250, April.
    24. Stephen B. Billings & Eric J. Brunner & Stephen L. Ross, 2018. "Gentrification and Failing Schools: The Unintended Consequences of School Choice under NCLB," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(1), pages 65-77, March.
    25. Brunner, Eric J. & Cho, Sung-Woo & Reback, Randall, 2012. "Mobility, housing markets, and schools: Estimating the effects of inter-district choice programs," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(7), pages 604-614.
    26. Kalena E. Cortes, 2010. "Do Bans on Affirmative Action Hurt Minority Students? Evidence from the Texas Top 10% Plan," Upjohn Working Papers 10-168, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    27. Bogart, William T. & Cromwell, Brian A., 1997. "How Much More Is a Good School District Worth?," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 50(2), pages 215-232, June.
    28. Reback, Randall, 2005. "House prices and the provision of local public services: capitalization under school choice programs," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 275-301, March.
    29. Kalena E. Cortes & Andrew I. Friedson, 2014. "Ranking Up by Moving Out: The Effect of the Texas Top 10% Plan on Property Values," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 67(1), pages 51-76, March.
    30. Elliot Anenberg & Patrick Bayer, 2020. "Endogenous Sources Of Volatility In Housing Markets: The Joint Buyer–Seller Problem," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 61(3), pages 1195-1228, August.
    31. Bleemer, Zachary, 2021. "Top Percent Policies and the Return to Postsecondary Selectivity, by Zachary Bleemer, CSHE 1.21," University of California at Berkeley, Center for Studies in Higher Education qt6qf1888s, Center for Studies in Higher Education, UC Berkeley.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Federica Leone & Ala Hasan & Francesco Reda & Hassam ur Rehman & Fausto Carmelo Nigrelli & Francesco Nocera & Vincenzo Costanzo, 2023. "Supporting Cities towards Carbon Neutral Transition through Territorial Acupuncture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-31, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bleemer, Zachary, 2023. "Affirmative action and its race-neutral alternatives," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    2. Peter Arcidiacono & Michael Lovenheim, 2016. "Affirmative Action and the Quality-Fit Trade-Off," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(1), pages 3-51, March.
    3. Kalena E. Cortes & Andrew I. Friedson, 2014. "Ranking Up by Moving Out: The Effect of the Texas Top 10% Plan on Property Values," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 67(1), pages 51-76, March.
    4. Friedson, Andrew I. & Bogin, Alexander N., 2013. "Winning pays: High school football championships and property values," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 54-61.
    5. Klasik, Daniel & Cortes, Kalena E., 2022. "Uniform admissions, unequal access: Did the top 10% plan increase access to selective flagship institutions?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    6. Cortes, Kalena E. & Klasik, Daniel, 2020. "Uniform Admissions, Unequal Access: Did the Top 10% Plan Increase Access to Selective Flagship Institutions?," IZA Discussion Papers 13988, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Christian A. L. Hilber, 2017. "The Economic Implications of House Price Capitalization: A Synthesis," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 45(2), pages 301-339, April.
    8. Margaret Brehm & Scott A. Imberman & Michael Naretta, 2017. "Capitalization of Charter Schools into Residential Property Values," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 12(1), pages 1-27, Winter.
    9. Clapp, John M. & Nanda, Anupam & Ross, Stephen L., 2008. "Which school attributes matter? The influence of school district performance and demographic composition on property values," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 451-466, March.
    10. Hilber, Christian A.L. & Mayer, Christopher, 2009. "Why do households without children support local public schools? Linking house price capitalization to school spending," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 74-90, January.
    11. Dhar, Paramita & Ross, Stephen L, 2012. "School district quality and property values: Examining differences along school district boundaries," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 18-25.
    12. Christian A. L. Hilber & Christopher J. Mayer, 2004. "Why Do Households Without Children Support Local Public Schools?," NBER Working Papers 10804, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Andrew Bibler & Stephen B. Billings, 2020. "Win or Lose: Residential Sorting After a School Choice Lottery," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 102(3), pages 457-472, July.
    14. Hilber, Christian A. L., 2011. "The economics implications of house price capitalization a survey of an emerging literature," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 58596, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    15. Yi Huang & Sandy Dall’erba, 2021. "Does Proximity to School Still Matter Once Access to Your Preferred School Zone Has Already Been Secured?," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 62(4), pages 548-577, May.
    16. Theodore M. Crone, 2006. "Capitalization of the quality of local public schools: what do home buyers value?," Working Papers 06-15, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
    17. Xiao Tian & Jin Liu & Yong Liu, 2022. "How Does the Quality of Junior High Schools Affect Housing Prices? A Quasi-Natural Experiment Based on the Admission Reform in Chengdu, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-18, September.
    18. Fajnzylber, Eduardo & Lara, Bernardo & León, Tomás, 2019. "Increased learning or GPA inflation? Evidence from GPA-based university admission in Chile," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 147-165.
    19. Francis-Tan, Andrew & Tannuri-Pianto, Maria, 2018. "Black Movement: Using discontinuities in admissions to study the effects of college quality and affirmative action," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 97-116.
    20. Hill, Andrew J., 2017. "State affirmative action bans and STEM degree completions," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 31-40.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Housing market; California; Top 4% policy; Strategic moving;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H31 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - Household
    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods
    • H75 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - State and Local Government: Health, Education, and Welfare
    • I28 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:regeco:v:97:y:2022:i:c:s0166046222000692. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/regec .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.