统计研究
統計研究
통계연구
Statistical Research
2014年
11期
50~57
,共null页
房价调控 限购政策 倍差法 倾向得分匹配 双重倍差法
房價調控 限購政策 倍差法 傾嚮得分匹配 雙重倍差法
방개조공 한구정책 배차법 경향득분필배 쌍중배차법
Housing Price Control; Quantity Limit Policy; Difference-in-Difference Method; Propensity Score Matching; Difference-in-Difference-in-Difference Method
本文利用38个已颁布房产限购政策的城市和17个未颁布限购政策的城市2008年第1季度至2013年第2季度的数据,在使用倾向得分对样本进行匹配的基础上对匹配后的样本进行倍差法估计,探讨了房地产限购政策对房价的调控效果。实证结果表明,限购政策具有良好的调控效果,有效地抑制了房价的上涨;限购政策具有一定的时滞性,随着时间的推移其效果越来越明显。为了进一步研究限购政策对＂房价过高,上涨过快＂的城市是否具有额外的调控作用,本文使用双重倍差法进行分析,发现限购政策对＂房价上涨过快＂的城市具有额外的调控效果,实现了抑制过度投机的政策初衷;但限购政策在＂房价过高＂城市的治理上并没有体现出额外的抑制作用。
本文利用38箇已頒佈房產限購政策的城市和17箇未頒佈限購政策的城市2008年第1季度至2013年第2季度的數據,在使用傾嚮得分對樣本進行匹配的基礎上對匹配後的樣本進行倍差法估計,探討瞭房地產限購政策對房價的調控效果。實證結果錶明,限購政策具有良好的調控效果,有效地抑製瞭房價的上漲;限購政策具有一定的時滯性,隨著時間的推移其效果越來越明顯。為瞭進一步研究限購政策對＂房價過高,上漲過快＂的城市是否具有額外的調控作用,本文使用雙重倍差法進行分析,髮現限購政策對＂房價上漲過快＂的城市具有額外的調控效果,實現瞭抑製過度投機的政策初衷;但限購政策在＂房價過高＂城市的治理上併沒有體現齣額外的抑製作用。
본문이용38개이반포방산한구정책적성시화17개미반포한구정책적성시2008년제1계도지2013년제2계도적수거,재사용경향득분대양본진행필배적기출상대필배후적양본진행배차법고계,탐토료방지산한구정책대방개적조공효과。실증결과표명,한구정책구유량호적조공효과,유효지억제료방개적상창;한구정책구유일정적시체성,수착시간적추이기효과월래월명현。위료진일보연구한구정책대＂방개과고,상창과쾌＂적성시시부구유액외적조공작용,본문사용쌍중배차법진행분석,발현한구정책대＂방개상창과쾌＂적성시구유액외적조공효과,실현료억제과도투궤적정책초충;단한구정책재＂방개과고＂성시적치리상병몰유체현출액외적억제작용。
This paper examines the effect of the house purchase quota policy on housing prices using the data of 38 cities that promulgated the regulation policy and 17 cities that did not issue between 2008 Q1 and 2013 Q2. This paper first uses the propensity score to match the sample,and then applies the difference-in-difference（ DID） method to estimate the matched sample. The result shows that the house purchase quota policy has significant regulation effect,where the rise in housing prices is effectively inhibited. However,the effect of the house purchase quota policy has a certain degree of lag,which becomes more evident as time goes by. Further,this paper adopts the difference-in-difference-in-difference（ DDD）method in estimation to undergo analysis. It is found that,compared to cities with low growth rate in housing prices,the house purchase quota policy has extra regulatory effect on cities with high growth rate,thereby effectively restraining the housing prices of these cities with high growth rate and helping to realize the original intention of the policy to curb the excessive speculation. Nevertheless,there is no such additional regulatory effect on cities with high housing prices,in comparison with cities with low housing prices.
