千篇一律的契约:监管诱导的房主协会同质性

Michael Makovi
{"title":"千篇一律的契约:监管诱导的房主协会同质性","authors":"Michael Makovi","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3194419","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Several authors have argued that homeowners associations (HOAs) constitute an ideal institution for implementing Buchanan and Tullock's Calculus of Consent. HOAs provide collective goods and mitigate collective action problems. Developers offer constitutions ready-made, economizing on the decision-making costs which render unanimity infeasible. Competition will constrain real-estate developers to offer exactly those constitutions which consumers themselves would have crafted. However, critics of HOAs have voiced a variety of criticisms. For example, they allege that HOAs often suffer from a high degree of conflict and consumer dissatisfaction. I argue that government regulation – especially FHA mortgage underwriting – has homogenized HOAs, reducing the scope for competition and product differentiation. Developers often adopt legal boilerplate, lifting their HOA contracts from government handbooks. This reduced competition undercuts the economic justification of HOAs. To some degree, the flaws and shortcomings of HOAs may owe themselves to regulatory-induced homogeneity.","PeriodicalId":365118,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Other Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making (Topic)","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cookie Cutter Covenants: Regulation-Induced Homogeneity of Homeowners Associations\",\"authors\":\"Michael Makovi\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3194419\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Several authors have argued that homeowners associations (HOAs) constitute an ideal institution for implementing Buchanan and Tullock's Calculus of Consent. HOAs provide collective goods and mitigate collective action problems. Developers offer constitutions ready-made, economizing on the decision-making costs which render unanimity infeasible. Competition will constrain real-estate developers to offer exactly those constitutions which consumers themselves would have crafted. However, critics of HOAs have voiced a variety of criticisms. For example, they allege that HOAs often suffer from a high degree of conflict and consumer dissatisfaction. I argue that government regulation – especially FHA mortgage underwriting – has homogenized HOAs, reducing the scope for competition and product differentiation. Developers often adopt legal boilerplate, lifting their HOA contracts from government handbooks. This reduced competition undercuts the economic justification of HOAs. To some degree, the flaws and shortcomings of HOAs may owe themselves to regulatory-induced homogeneity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":365118,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ERN: Other Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-06-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ERN: Other Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3194419\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Other Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3194419","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

一些作者认为,业主协会(hoa)构成了实施布坎南和图洛克同意演算的理想机构。hoa提供集体商品,减轻集体行动问题。开发商提供现成的章程,以节省决策成本,使一致同意成为不可能。竞争将迫使房地产开发商提供消费者自己制定的那些条款。然而,hoa的批评者提出了各种各样的批评。例如,他们声称hoa经常遭受高度冲突和消费者不满。我认为,政府监管——尤其是联邦住房管理局(FHA)的抵押贷款承销——使自有住房贷款机构同质化,减少了竞争和产品差异化的空间。开发商通常采用法律模板,将他们的居屋合同从政府手册中移除。这种竞争的减少削弱了hoa的经济合理性。在某种程度上,hoa的缺陷和缺点可能是由于监管导致的同质性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Cookie Cutter Covenants: Regulation-Induced Homogeneity of Homeowners Associations
Several authors have argued that homeowners associations (HOAs) constitute an ideal institution for implementing Buchanan and Tullock's Calculus of Consent. HOAs provide collective goods and mitigate collective action problems. Developers offer constitutions ready-made, economizing on the decision-making costs which render unanimity infeasible. Competition will constrain real-estate developers to offer exactly those constitutions which consumers themselves would have crafted. However, critics of HOAs have voiced a variety of criticisms. For example, they allege that HOAs often suffer from a high degree of conflict and consumer dissatisfaction. I argue that government regulation – especially FHA mortgage underwriting – has homogenized HOAs, reducing the scope for competition and product differentiation. Developers often adopt legal boilerplate, lifting their HOA contracts from government handbooks. This reduced competition undercuts the economic justification of HOAs. To some degree, the flaws and shortcomings of HOAs may owe themselves to regulatory-induced homogeneity.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Realignment of Political Tolerance in the United States The Financial Drivers of Populism in Europe The Confidence Earthquake: Seismic Shifts in Trust Why Biased Endorsements Can Manipulate Elections The Advantage of Incumbents in Coalitional Bargaining
×
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