IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Homeownership and labour-market behaviour: interpreting the evidence

  • Jan Rouwendal
  • Peter Nijkamp

This paper attempts to explain the repeated empirical finding that homeowners have shorter unemployment durations than tenants, even though Oswald’s hypothesis predicts longer unemployment durations for homeowners. The search models that have been proposed to motivate Oswald’s thesis have difficulties in providing an explanation for the reverse of the Oswald effect. The model proposed in this paper is close to the ones proposed earlier, in that it also studies search behaviour, but contains a richer set of effects of homeownership on search behaviour. In our model, homeowners may have a higher intensity of job search (and hence shorter unemployment durations) when their housing expenses are—all other things being equal—higher than those of tenants. Some studies have indeed found that the shorter unemployment durations occur especially among highly leveraged homeowners. We show that, in the Netherlands, many homeowners have higher housing costs than otherwise comparable tenants. The model developed in this paper is therefore able to explain the existing evidence of shorter unemployment durations for Dutch homeowners.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
File Function: abstract
Download Restriction: Fulltext access restricted to subscribers, see for details

File URL:
File Function: main text
Download Restriction: Fulltext access restricted to subscribers, see for details

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Pion Ltd, London in its journal Environment and Planning A.

Volume (Year): 42 (2010)
Issue (Month): 2 (February)
Pages: 419-433

in new window

Handle: RePEc:pio:envira:v:42:y:2010:i:2:p:419-433
Contact details of provider: Web page:

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pio:envira:v:42:y:2010:i:2:p:419-433. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Neil Hammond)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.