Housing Search and Rental Market Intermediation

Desen Lin
{"title":"Housing Search and Rental Market Intermediation","authors":"Desen Lin","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3714128","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Rental brokers as the matchmakers between tenants and landlords contribute 80% of the rental listings in certain markets, but how they smooth the search friction and transmit policy impacts is not well understood. This paper is the first to use a listing-agent matched data set from an online platform to show the heterogeneous impact of the listing capacity of a broker, i.e. the agent size, on the rental market outcomes. I document that brokers with greater listing capacity are related to lower rents and shorter listing duration. The dispersion cannot be fully explained by the amenity difference of rentals and points to a sizable agent impact that a broker with greater capacity lists a rental at a lower rent. I develop a search model that features a search-and-matching process in which the capacity constraints of brokers interact with the tenant coordination friction. The capacity constraints differentiate brokers’ ability to coordinate tenant search. The smaller rent premium for listings by larger brokers reflects the capacity benefit that larger brokers coordinate tenant search better by reducing the likelihood of facing a binding capacity constraint. An endogenous agent distribution of the listing capacity, which summarizes how frictional the rental market is, arises in the model. I evaluate the counterfactual effects of two rental market policies. First, I show that expanding the brokerage sector will not benefit tenants in the search process. As the mean agent size decreases, the rental market becomes more frictional. Second, I evaluate the impact of shifting the commission liability from tenants to landlords, which is central to the New York rental market reform. As the equilibrium rent increase cannot fully compensate the commission cost on landlords, the policy decreases rental supply and makes searching tenants worse off. I characterize the optimal allocation of the broker’s fee and show that brokers with greater listing capacity should list more rentals with the fee paid by landlords.","PeriodicalId":21047,"journal":{"name":"Real Estate eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Real Estate eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3714128","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Rental brokers as the matchmakers between tenants and landlords contribute 80% of the rental listings in certain markets, but how they smooth the search friction and transmit policy impacts is not well understood. This paper is the first to use a listing-agent matched data set from an online platform to show the heterogeneous impact of the listing capacity of a broker, i.e. the agent size, on the rental market outcomes. I document that brokers with greater listing capacity are related to lower rents and shorter listing duration. The dispersion cannot be fully explained by the amenity difference of rentals and points to a sizable agent impact that a broker with greater capacity lists a rental at a lower rent. I develop a search model that features a search-and-matching process in which the capacity constraints of brokers interact with the tenant coordination friction. The capacity constraints differentiate brokers’ ability to coordinate tenant search. The smaller rent premium for listings by larger brokers reflects the capacity benefit that larger brokers coordinate tenant search better by reducing the likelihood of facing a binding capacity constraint. An endogenous agent distribution of the listing capacity, which summarizes how frictional the rental market is, arises in the model. I evaluate the counterfactual effects of two rental market policies. First, I show that expanding the brokerage sector will not benefit tenants in the search process. As the mean agent size decreases, the rental market becomes more frictional. Second, I evaluate the impact of shifting the commission liability from tenants to landlords, which is central to the New York rental market reform. As the equilibrium rent increase cannot fully compensate the commission cost on landlords, the policy decreases rental supply and makes searching tenants worse off. I characterize the optimal allocation of the broker’s fee and show that brokers with greater listing capacity should list more rentals with the fee paid by landlords.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
房屋搜寻及租赁市场中介
在某些市场中,租房中介作为租客和房东之间的媒人,贡献了80%的房源,但他们是如何消除搜索摩擦并传递政策影响的,我们还不太清楚。本文首次使用来自在线平台的上市代理匹配数据集来显示经纪人的上市能力(即代理规模)对租赁市场结果的异质影响。我的文件表明,拥有更大上市能力的经纪人与更低的租金和更短的上市时间有关。这种差异不能完全用租金的舒适度差异来解释,它指出了一个相当大的代理影响,即一个更有能力的经纪人以更低的租金列出租金。我开发了一个搜索模型,其特点是搜索和匹配过程,其中代理的容量约束与租户协调摩擦相互作用。容量限制区分了代理协调租户搜索的能力。较大的经纪人提供的房源租金溢价较小,这反映了容量效益,即较大的经纪人通过减少面临约束性容量约束的可能性,更好地协调租户搜索。在模型中,出现了一个内源性代理的上市容量分布,它概括了租赁市场的摩擦程度。我评估了两项租赁市场政策的反事实效应。首先,我表明,扩大经纪行业不会使租户在寻找过程中受益。随着平均代理规模的减小,租赁市场变得更加摩擦。其次,我评估了将佣金责任从租户转移到房东的影响,这是纽约租赁市场改革的核心。由于均衡的租金增长不能完全补偿房东的佣金成本,该政策减少了租金供应,使寻找租户的情况更加糟糕。我描述了经纪人费用的最优分配,并表明具有更大上市能力的经纪人应该列出更多的租金,并由房东支付费用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Financial Cycles Across G7 Economies: A View from Wavelet Analysis Assessing Lithuanian housing market for bubble Household Income, Asset Location and Real Estate Value: Evidence from REITs Household Debt and Labour Supply Decomposing Industry Leverage in the U.S.: the REIT Debt Puzzle
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1