IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jinsec/v5y2009i02p225-250_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative urban institutions and intertemporal externality: a revisit of the Coase conjecture

Author

Listed:
  • DENG, FENG

Abstract

Coase originally formulated his conjecture about intertemporal price competition in an example of land monopoly, but it has been applied almost exclusively to non-spatial markets. This paper revisits the Coase conjecture and compares four institutional arrangements based on the combination of land tenure options and local governance forms: private/rental, public/rental, private/owner, and public/owner. The two-period model developed in this paper shows that homeownership may result in more land development than leasehold. Numeric examples suggest (1) public/owner is efficient for uniform distribution of consumer; (2) rentals can be desirable for ‘poor’ communities; (3) private/owner is more efficient for ‘rich’ communities; (4) restrictive zoning reduces social surplus. These results can help explain why public institutions are dominant in the urban area and why most private communities are small, located in the suburbs, and for middle-upper class.

Suggested Citation

  • Deng, Feng, 2009. "Comparative urban institutions and intertemporal externality: a revisit of the Coase conjecture," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(2), pages 225-250, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jinsec:v:5:y:2009:i:02:p:225-250_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1744137409001313/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Feng Deng, 2017. "Homeowners association vs. leasehold," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 307-327, October.
    2. Zheng, Xian & Xie, Xiaorong & Zheng, Linzi, 2023. "Land market concentration, developers’ pricing decisions, and class monopoly rent in urban China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    3. Nestor Garza & Colin Lizieri, 2019. "An empirical approach to urban land monopoly: A case study of the city of Barranquilla, Colombia," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(10), pages 1931-1950, August.
    4. Feng Deng, 2022. "Local governments as land monopolists in Chinese cities: a natural experiment of Coase Conjecture in urban land," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 159-189, February.

    More about this item

    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:cup:jinsec:v:5:y:2009:i:02:p:225-250_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/joi .

    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.