Please wait a minute...
金融研究  2016, Vol. 432 Issue (6): 97-111    
  本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
租金率折价视角的学区价值测度——来自上海二手房市场的证据
张牧扬, 陈杰, 石薇
上海财经大学中国公共财政研究院/公共经济与管理学院/高等研究院和不动产研究所,上海 200433;
上海金融学院浦东研究院,上海 201209
The Values of Good School from the Perspective of Rent Yields Discounts: Empirical Evidence from the Second-Hand Housing Market in Shanghai
ZHANG Muyang, CHEN Jie, SHI Wei
China Public Finance Institute/School of Public Economics and Administration/Institute for Advanced Research, and Institute of Real Estate Research, Shanghai University of Finance and Economics;
Pudong Research Institute, Shanghai Finance University
下载:  PDF (1718KB) 
输出:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 近年来,国内主要城市学区房现象持续升温,成为社会关注热点。由于学区房可以再出售,现有文献基于学区房溢价的研究并不能准确体现学区自身价值。本文提出租金率折价的概念,基于对上海二手房挂牌出售和出租数据的联动使用,应用特征价格模型和边界固定效应的方法对学区房的租金率折价进行系统分析,对优质教育资源的意愿支付价格做出更准确估计。实证结果表明,学区房的租金收益率平均而言比非学区房低5%,对于小户型住宅更可达19%,且租金率折价存在较大的波动,受教育部门公立学校入学政策冲击的影响大,证实学区房存在较大的政策风险。本文据此提出,实施基础教育阶段公共学校入学资格的“租买同权”,将有助于促进基础性公共教育资源的更公平利用,同时也有助于防范房地产市场价格过度波动。
服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
张牧扬
陈杰
石薇
关键词:  租金率折价  租买不同权  学区房    
Abstract:  Real estate property price has surged dramatically in school districts with high-quality primary schools in major Chinese cities, while rents do not see much increase. This is due to the policy that in most cases only owners have the privilege to access local public schools in China. In this paper, we use the discounts of rent yields as a measurement willingness-to-pay to high-quality primary public school using micro data in Shanghai. We find that the rent-to-sale ratio is about 5 percent lower on average in the neighborhoods in good-school districts, compared to those in ordinary school districts. The gap can be as large as 19 percent in apartments with smaller square footage and is sensitive to changes of policies regarding public school enrollment. We suggest that if the quality of primary schools cannot be fully equalized in the near future, allowing tenants to enjoy the same privilege as owners can not only significantly cut the rent-to-sale ratio discount of the good-school-district apartments, but also improve intergenerational mobility in education attainment, and improve the efficiency of capital uses.
Key words:  Rent-to-sale Ratio Discount    Unequal Privilege for Owners and Tenants    Willingness to Pay for Education
JEL分类号:  H75   I24   R31  
基金资助: 作者感谢陆铭、刘志阔、宋志刚、朱旭峰以及在2014年中国青年经济学者联谊会、第十四届中国经济学年会等论坛上为本文提出建设性意见和建议的学者,特别感谢匿名审稿人对于本文提出的建设性意见。本文得到国家自然科学基金项目(NSF71173045;NSFG031302)、教育部重大攻关课题(13JZD009)、上海市曙光学者计划(13SG35)、上海财经大学基本科研业务费(2015110119)和上海财经大学创新团队支持计划的资助,在此一并致谢。
通讯作者:  陈 杰,经济学博士,上海财经大学公共经济与管理学院、高等研究院、公共政策与治理研究院教授,Email:chen.jie@mail.shufe.edu.cn.   
作者简介:  张牧扬,经济学博士,上海财经大学中国公共财政研究院讲师,Email:zhang.muyang@mail.shufe.edu.cn;石 薇,管理学博士,上海金融学院浦东研究院副研究员,Email:shiwei@sfu.edu.cn.
引用本文:    
张牧扬, 陈杰, 石薇. 租金率折价视角的学区价值测度——来自上海二手房市场的证据[J]. 金融研究, 2016, 432(6): 97-111.
ZHANG Muyang, CHEN Jie, SHI Wei. The Values of Good School from the Perspective of Rent Yields Discounts: Empirical Evidence from the Second-Hand Housing Market in Shanghai. Journal of Financial Research, 2016, 432(6): 97-111.
链接本文:  
http://www.jryj.org.cn/CN/  或          http://www.jryj.org.cn/CN/Y2016/V432/I6/97
[1] 陈杰和郝前进,2014,《快速城市化进程中的居住隔离——来自上海的实证研究》,《学术月刊》第5期,第17~28页。
[2] 冯皓和陆铭,2010,《通过买房而择校:教育影响房价的经验证据与政策含义》,《世界经济》第12期,第89~104页。
[3] 郝前进和陈杰,2012,《房龄、折旧率与住房价格——基于上海数据的实证研究》,《世界经济文汇》第6期,第64~77页。
[4] 胡婉旸、郑思齐和王锐,2014,《学区房的溢价究竟有多大:利用“租买不同权”和配对回归的实证估计》,《经济学(季刊)》第3期,第1195~1214页。
[5] 孔行、刘治国和于渤,2010,《使用者成本、住房按揭贷款与房地产市场有效需求》,《金融研究》第1期,第186~196页。
[6] 李珍珍、蒋仕卿和陆铭,2010,《警惕教育均等化过度──对“铜陵经验”的调研与评价》,《学习与探索》第5期,第171~173页。
[7] 刘德炳,2014,《最高每平方米达34万元,均价每平方米超过5万元北京“学区房”疯了》,《中国经济周刊》第29期42页。
[8] 刘祖云和毛小平,2012,《中国城市住房分层:基于2010年广州市千户问卷调查》,《中国社会科学》第2期,第94~109页。
[9] 吕江林,2010,《我国城市住房市场泡沫水平的度量》,《经济研究》第6期,第28~41页。
[10] 蒙彦宏和贾士军,2014,《广州市小学质量特征对学区房价格的影响研究》,《工程管理学报》第3期,第133~137页。
[11] 史可,2012,《明星学区房尴尬褪色》,《安家》第4期,第124~128页。
[12] 阎宇,2011,《城乡基础教育均等化的国际经验及借鉴》,《社会科学战线》第9期,第272~273页。
[13] 袁梅,2012,《为让子女上名校,购买“学区房”遭遇纠纷怎么办?》,《中华建设》第11期,第54~55页。
[14] 张浩、李仲飞和邓柏峻,2014,《教育资源配置机制与房价——我国教育资本化现象的实证分析》,《金融研究》第5期,第193~206页。
[15] 周京奎,2012,《住宅市场风险、信贷约束与住宅消费选择——一个理论与经验分析》,《金融研究》第6期,第28~41页。
[16] Black S. E., 1999, “Do Better Schools Matter Parental Valuation of Elementary Education.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114, pp. 577~599.
[17] Blanchard O. J. and M. W. Watson. “Bubbles, Rational Expectations and Financial Markets.” Wachtel, P. Crises in the Economic and Financial Structure. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heathand Company, 1982.
[18] Bogart W. T. and B. A. Cromwell, 2000, “How Much Is a Neighborhood School Worth?” Journal of Urban Economics, 47, pp. 280~305.
[19] Brasington D. M., 1999, “Which Measures of School Quality Does the Housing Market Value?” Journal of Real Estate Research, 18, pp. 395~413.
[20] Brasington D. and D. R. Haurin., 2006, “Educational Outcomes and House Values: A Test of the Value Added Approach.” Journal of Regional Science, 46, pp. 245~268.
[21] Brunner E. J., J. Murdoch and M. Thayer, 2002, “School Finance Reform and Housing Values: Evidence from the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area.” Public Finance and Management, 2, pp. 535~565.
[22] Clapp J. M., A. Nanda and S. L. Ross, 2008, “Which School Attributes Matter? The Influence of School District Performance and Demographic Composition on Property Values.” Journal of Urban Economics, 2, pp. 451~466.
[23] Deming D. J., J. S. Hastings, T. J. Kane and D. O. Staiger, 2014, “School Choice, School Quality, and Postsecondary Attainment.” American Economic Review, 3, pp. 991~1013.
[24] Dhar P. and S. L. Ross, 2012, “School District Quality and Property Values: Examining Differences along School District Boundaries.” Journal of Urban Economics, 1, pp. 18~25.
[25] Downes T. A. Z., 2002, “The Impact of School Characteristics on House Prices: Chicago 1987-1991.” Journal of Urban Economics, 1, pp. 1~25.
[26] Epple D. and H. Sieg, 1999, “Estimating Equilibrium Models of Local Jurisdictions.” Journal of Political Economy, 4, pp. 645.
[27] Epple D. and R. E. Romano, 1998, “Competition between Private and Public Schools, Vouchers, and Peer-Group Effects.” The American Economic Review, 88, pp. 33~62.
[28] Fack G. and J. Grenet, 2010, “When do Better Schools Raise Housing Prices? Evidence from Paris Public and Private Schools.” Journal of Public Economics, 1-2, pp. 59~77.
[29] Figlio D. N. and M. E. Lucas, 2004, “What’s in a Grade School Report Cards and the Housing Market.” The American Economic Review, 94, pp. 591~604.
[30] Gibbons S. and S. Machin, 2003, “Valuing English Primary Schools.” Journal of Urban Economics, 2, pp. 197~219.
[31] Gibbons S., S. Machin and O. Silva, 2013, “Valuing School Quality Using Boundary Discontinuities.” Journal of Urban Economics, pp. 15~28.
[32] Hayes K. J. and L. L. Taylor, 1996, “Neighborhood School Characteristics: What Signals Quality to Homebuyers?”, unpublished manuscript.
[33] Hilber C. A. L. and C. Mayer, 2009, “Why Do Households Without Children Support Local Public Schools? Linking House Price Capitalization to School Spending.” Journal of Urban Economics, 1, pp. 74~90.
[34] Nguyen-Hoang P. and J. Yinger, 2011, “The Capitalization of School Quality into House Values: A Review.” Journal of Housing Economics, 1, pp. 30~48.
[35] Oates W. E., 1969, “The Effects of Property Taxes and Local Public Spending on Property Values: An Empirical Study of Tax Capitalization and the Tiebout Hypothesis.” The Journal of Political Economy, 77, pp. 957~971.
[36] Ren Y., C. Xiong and Y. Yuan, 2012, “House Price Bubbles in China.” China Economic Review, 4, pp. 786~800.
[37] Rosen H. S. and D. J. Fullerton, 1977, “A Note on Local Tax Rates, Public Benefit Levels, and Property Values.” Journal of Political Economy, 85, pp. 433~440.
[38] Rosenthal L., 2003, “The Value of Secondary School Quality.” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 65, pp. 329~355.
[39] Rothstein J., 2006, “Good Principals or Good Peers? Parental Valuation of School Characteristics, Tiebout Equilibrium, and the Incentive Effects of Competition among Jurisdictions.” The American Economic Review, 96, pp. 1333~1350.
[40] Tiebout C. M., 1956, “A Pure Theory of Local expenditures.” Journal of Political Economy, 64, pp. 416~424.
[41] Weimer D. L. and M. J. Wolkoff, 2001, “School Performance and Housing Values: Using Non-Contiguous District and Incorporation Boundaries to Identify School Effects.” National Tax Journal, 54, pp. 231~253.
[42] Yinger J.,1982,“Capitalization and the Theory of Local Public Finance.”Journal of Political Economy,90,pp.917~943.
[1] 余靖雯, 陈晓光, 龚六堂. 财政压力如何影响了县级政府公共服务供给?[J]. 金融研究, 2018, 451(1): 18-35.
[1] 王曦, 朱立挺, 王凯立. 我国货币政策是否关注资产价格?——基于马尔科夫区制转换BEKK多元GARCH模型[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 1 -17 .
[2] 刘勇政, 李岩. 中国的高速铁路建设与城市经济增长[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 18 -33 .
[3] 况伟大, 王琪琳. 房价波动、房贷规模与银行资本充足率[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 34 -48 .
[4] 祝树金, 赵玉龙. 资源错配与企业的出口行为——基于中国工业企业数据的经验研究[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 49 -64 .
[5] 陈德球, 陈运森, 董志勇. 政策不确定性、市场竞争与资本配置[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 65 -80 .
[6] 牟敦果, 王沛英. 中国能源价格内生性研究及货币政策选择分析[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 81 -95 .
[7] 高铭, 江嘉骏, 陈佳, 刘玉珍. 谁说女子不如儿郎?——P2P投资行为与过度自信[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 96 -111 .
[8] 吕若思, 刘青, 黄灿, 胡海燕, 卢进勇. 外资在华并购是否改善目标企业经营绩效?——基于企业层面的实证研究[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 112 -127 .
[9] 姜军, 申丹琳, 江轩宇, 伊志宏. 债权人保护与企业创新[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 128 -142 .
[10] 刘莎莎, 孔高文. 信息搜寻、个人投资者交易与股价联动异象——基于股票送转的研究[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 143 -157 .
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
版权所有 © 《金融研究》编辑部
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发 技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn
京ICP备11029882号-1