菲沙研究所-2006–2016年加拿大和美国城市住房负担能力的变化（英文）-2020.8-66页_1mb

Summary of Changes in the Affordability of Housing in Canadian and American Cities, 2006-2016

Core Content

This document analyzes the changes in housing affordability in 396 Canadian and American metropolitan areas between 2006 and 2016, focusing on the relationship between housing costs, income levels, and population growth. It highlights the economic significance of cities and how housing affordability affects labor mobility and productivity.

Main Points

1. Housing Affordability Trends

• Overall Decline in Affordability: Shelter costs as a share of median income decreased in the vast majority (312) of the sample of Canadian and American metropolitan areas.
• Canada vs. United States:
  • In Canadian cities, the share of income dedicated to shelter costs increased by 7.2% (simple average) and 7.6% (population-weighted average).
  • In American cities, the share of income dedicated to shelter costs decreased by 9.5% (simple average) and 10.5% (population-weighted average).
• Key Metropolitan Areas:
  • The least affordable Canadian cities were Toronto, Vancouver, and Montreal.
  • The least affordable American cities were Los Angeles, Miami, New York, and the San Francisco Bay Area.

2. Relationship Between Affordability and Population Growth

• A majority of metropolitan areas managed to improve housing affordability while experiencing population growth.
• However, Canada showed a notable difference: 46 out of 52 Canadian cities experienced increased shelter costs as a share of income alongside population growth.
• The statistical relationship between population growth and housing affordability is weak across both countries, suggesting that housing affordability is not necessarily a direct consequence of population increases.

3. Factors Influencing Affordability

• The affordability index is defined as:
  $$
  \text{Housing Affordability} = \frac{\text{Median Monthly Shelter Costs per Bedroom}}{\text{Median Monthly Income}}
  $$
• Nominal income growth was faster in Canadian cities (30.2% simple average, 29.4% population-weighted average) than in American cities (19.3%).
• Shelter cost growth was significantly faster in Canada (39.8% simple average, 39.3% population-weighted average) than in the United States (7.8% simple average, 6.7% population-weighted average).
• This indicates that the decline in housing affordability in Canada relative to the United States is driven by faster shelter cost increases, not slower income growth.

4. Implications for Economic Policy

• Housing affordability is linked to labor mobility, which is essential for economic efficiency and productivity growth.
• Restrictions on housing supply can reduce labor mobility, leading to misallocation of resources and lower economic growth.
• The Fraser Institute suggests that policy interventions that increase the elasticity of housing supply could help improve affordability and support economic growth.

Key Findings

• Housing affordability in most Canadian cities worsened between 2006 and 2016, while it improved in most American cities.
• The relationship between population growth and housing affordability is statistically weak, indicating that other factors also influence affordability.
• Nominal income growth in Canada outpaced that in the United States, but shelter cost growth was much higher in Canada.
• Policy implications include the need to examine the regulatory and structural factors behind shelter cost increases in Canadian cities.

Future Research Directions

• Identify the structural factors that contribute to the faster growth of shelter costs in Canadian cities.
• Examine the impact of declining housing affordability on worker mobility and economic competitiveness in Canada.
• Investigate the role of government regulations and land-use policies in shaping housing affordability trends.

Conclusion

The study underscores the divergence in housing affordability trends between Canadian and American cities, with Canada experiencing a greater rise in shelter costs relative to income growth. It suggests that housing affordability is not an inevitable outcome of population growth, and that policy responses are crucial in addressing these trends.