Peer reviewed2023Eight U.S. metropolitan regions

Land-Use Reforms and Housing Costs

Stacy et al.

Main finding

Loosening reforms were followed by modest average supply gains, while tightening reforms reduced middle-income-affordable units and raised rents.

Loosening was associated with 0.8% more housing after 3–9 years

Most important limitation

Reforms are heterogeneous and the cross-city design remains observational.

From the publication

Inspect the authors' figure directly

Study chart · redrawn

Figure 2 · Average number of addresses before and after reform

The two groups track similarly before reform and separate gradually afterward.

REDRAWN FROM STUDY DATAFigure 2 · Average number of addresses before and after reform

Figure 2 · Average number of addresses before and after reform. Values digitized from Figure 2 in the archived publication; minor reading error is possible.
Years relative to reform	Less restrictive reform	More restrictive reform
−5	100	100
−4	100.2	100.2
−3	100.5	100.5
−2	100.8	100.8
−1	101.1	101.1
0	101.4	101.4
+1	102	101.8
+2	102.8	102.3
+3	103.6	102.9
+4	104.7	103.5
+5	105.6	104
+6	106.6	104.5
+7	107.6	105
+8	108	105.4

How this study is used

Claims this evidence supports

Established evidenceScarcity turns neighbors into bidders.See the full evidence stack →Strong evidenceA city cannot build homes it has made illegal.See the full evidence stack →Strong evidenceLegal on paper is not the same as buildable in practice.See the full evidence stack →

Reference

Stacy et al. (2023). “Land-Use Reforms and Housing Costs.”

Open publisher or paper