The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
New Study Highlights Housing Shortages Caused by Regulatory Barriers to Construction
The study by leading housing economists Edward Glaeser and Joseph Gyourko finds there are 15 milion fewer housing units in the US than there would be if construction in 2000-2020 had continued at the same pace as in 1980-2000.

An important new National Bureau of Economic Research study by leading housing economists Edward Glaeser and Joseph Gyourko concludes that reductions in housing construction - likely caused by regulatory barriers such as zoning restrictions - have greatly exacerbated housing shortages and increased prices since 2000. Here is the abstract:
Housing prices across much of America have hit historic highs, while less housing is being built. If the U.S. housing stock had expanded at the same rate from 2000-2020 as it did from 1980-2000, there would be 15 million more housing units. This paper analyzes the decline of America's new housing supply, focusing on large sunbelt markets such as Atlanta, Dallas, Miami and Phoenix that were once building superstars. New housing growth rates have decreased and converged across these and many other metros, and prices have risen most where new supply has fallen the most. A model illustrates that structural estimation of long-term supply elasticity is difficult because variables that make places more attractive are likely to change neighborhood composition, which itself is likely to influence permitting. Our framework also suggests that as barriers to building become more important and heterogeneous across place, the positive connection between building and home prices and the negative connection between building and density will both attenuate. We document both of these trends throughout America's housing markets. In the sunbelt, these changes manifest as substantially less building in lower density census tracts with higher home prices. America's suburban frontier appears to be closing.
This adds to an already extensive body of research reaching similar conclusions. The new NBER paper is notable because it covers such a wide swath of evidence, particularly with respect to Sunbelt cities.
In a 2024 Texas Law Review article coauthored with Josh Braver, we argue that exclusionary zoning that greatly limits housing construction violates the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment, and outline ways in which a combination of litigation and political action can be used to combat it. See also our much shorter non-academic article on the same topic, in the Atlantic.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Cue all those posters who insist that Ilya is a Marxist.
Somin is a Democrat operating on behalf of the tech bros that own that party. They must be stopped.
Somin opposes regulatory barriers. I suggest importing a million Indian lawyers. Remove the regulatory barriers to their taking the state bar exam after a brief bar review course. They passed the Indian Bar exam with its 51% pass rate. Because they are used to working for $12000 a year, I would like to pay $10/hour for the writing of a will instead of $500 an hour. They speak the King's English, have very high IQs, and will know a lot after their bar review course.
“Somin is a Democrat operating on behalf of the tech bros”
Didn’t keep up with recent news in the asylum?
Yes, this is yet another Marxist post. He is against Americans living in single-family houses. He wants to move us all into Marxist communes to make room for Third World migrants. No matter what the problem is, he blames it on the American way of life.
The MAGA bros can't decide whether the almost libertarian movement to reduce government regulation of real estate is Marxist or run by Capitalist real estate and tech. They just know that they want to continue to use Big Government as protection for the biggest grift in America -- the continued artificial unearned increase in the value of their real estate holdings.
Your use of “Bro” tells me everything I need to know about you, an Over Ed-Jew-ma-cated Scmuck driving a Prius
Reported for anti-Semitism. Oh and I drive a Subaru, not a Toyota.
That was my second guess, and how do you report to Ham-Ass? Online or in some Turkish Bathhouse? I’ll keep an eye out for A-rabs bearing Molotov Cocktails
Marxists are all about being anti-zoning!
You’re beclowning yourself.
Is Karl Marx in the room with you at the moment?
There would not be a need for 15 million homes if the Democrat had not imported 20 million illegal aliens to increase the census of blue areas. They have 5 anchor children per couple, defrauding the immigration system. The majority are tax sucking parasites costing far more than they pay in taxes. They are being fast tracked to citizenship to make our nation a permanent one party state as Venezuela and Cuba are. The lawyer and the judge are in full lawfare support of this attack on our nation. The billionaire oligarchs funding this campaign must be investigated, arrested, and imprisoned. Their assets must be seized in civil forfeiture. To deter.
Somin is a Russian Jew who hates White Americans. Everything he posts is against American interests.
Ah, the anti-Semitism strikes again.
Some of us Jews do suck
The writer of the Frank Fakeman character surely sucks, writing him as a person educated in the US for decades but without the writing skills of a third grader.
Idiot. There aren't anywhere near 20 million illegal aliens.
Hello Idiot. How many are there?
How do you know? The government does not even track them.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/07/22/what-we-know-about-unauthorized-immigrants-living-in-the-us/
“Pew”?? There name says it all
That article estimates 11.0 "unauthorized immigrants" in 2022. It does not count those with parole, temporary status, deferred action, asylum claims, and anchor babies.
Trying to remember which ones Kill-more Garcias claimed, I think all of them
Probably because most of those are not illegals.
Wait, it doesn't count people who are authorized to be here in the unauthorized category?
Pew is a Commie front organization, agents of the Chinese Commie Party, an affiliate of the United Front organization to influence culture around the world to accept Chinese world domination. All its polls are fake.
OK, you got me. The Census says, 18.6 million mostly low IQ, tax sucking, fast reproducing, shithole people overwhelming our services and returning nothing of value. Walk around the streets of nice parts of Florida, look at the products at the local Walmart, see the kids letting out of school. You will feel you live in the Aztec Empire.
Only “nice” part of Florida is the Flora-Bama
Behar is used to talking to people who don’t exist.
Somin, stop shilling for development interests. In American urban neighborhoods featuring safety and amenities, the demand side of the equation is approximately equivalent to all the wealth in the world, minus whatever can be siphoned off by the few similar havens for wealth abroad.
Nobody is going to out-build that level of demand. Your developer friends are trying to get in on it. The last thing they want is to build themselves out of a market like that.
Idiot. Somin has been HOSTILE to development interests, which are usually interlocked with politicians who grant them the necessary zoning or (in some cases) eminent domain seizures.
"In American urban neighborhoods featuring safety and amenities, the demand side of the equation is approximately equivalent to all the wealth in the world"
Nice to see you at least admitting that you hate free markets and support grifting property owners. Most of the trolls here aren't as honest.
I guess you are saying that some property owners like the illegal aliens because the increased demand for housing drives up property values.
Ab-so-two-utely
charliehall — I offered observations about supply and demand. You are the one who inferred a conclusion that regulations you apparently hate might cope with the facts as I posited them—and thus demonstrated you prefer the problem to whatever fanciful solution you cooked up. That puts you pretty far afield.
Wow, I’m agreeing with you, has the Belmont stakes been run yet?
Strictly speaking, you didn't offer "observations" about anything; you just made up shit, like you do with any of your weird monomanias (like Section 230).
Sure, it’s his developer friends, not his general opposition to government regulation.
I will stop doubting Somin is a principled advocate against development regulation after he stops rolling out the NIMBY slur to attack parties at risk of uncompensated losses from development projects.
The study does not show what Professor Somin claims it does. It only shows that housing construction slowed down. Professor Somin simply asserts on his say-so that this was due to regulatory barriers. But of course it could have been for any number of other reasons, from land being a finite resource to fewer Americans wanting to go into fields like construction to rising costs.
Indeed, Professor Somin’s logic here is a textbook example of circular reasoning. Only by first assuming that regulatory barriers are the cause of shortfalls in housing construction is Professor Somin able to conclude that shortfalls in housing construction are caused by regulatory barriers.
Somin has misrepresented every study he as ever cited.
How about changing the post to separate out what the study actually showed from what Professor Somin is surmising on his own.
1. New study shows housing construction rate slowed in recent decades.
2. I think the slowdown was due to regulatory barriers.
3. I think the slowdown means we now have a housing shortage.
This way of presenting the study would separate out what the study actually showed from what Professor Somin is adding in himself, from his own knowledge and/or belief that comes from outside the study.
I realize intellectual rigor, and for that matter intellectual honesty, seems to have gone out of fashion these days among academics. But old-fashioned concepts of intellectual rigor and intellectual honesty would require it.
You cannot expect intellectual honesty from Trump-haters.
Spoken like a true brainwashed cultist
In fairness, you learn on the first day of Econ 101 that a tax or a regulation will always represent a deadweight loss. It may very well be that the tax or regulation has a higher benefit to society than the deadweight loss, but that loss exists nonetheless.
What strikes me about some of these "regulations" is their scale. My wife and I were looking into building a house in western Maryland. The county had an "impact fee" which would have amounted to $43,000. You read that right. Not a couple of hundred bucks for a building permit.
That amount co-incidentally was the entire cost of my first house in 1998. You cannot possibly assert that such huge costs imposed by the government don't have a terrible impact on housing supply and affordability.
If there is a benefit it’s not a deadweight loss.
It is an economic deadweight loss. Remember, we're in Econ 101.
To follow up, we didn’t move. We stayed in our current house. Look at all the downstream consequences from that. Carpenters, plumbers, electricians, landscapers, etc. all lost out on a pay day for their families.
We could have been paying income and property taxes to the county. We would have paid school taxes, been members of local community groups. Our current house would have been available for purchase by a nice young couple.
None of these things happened because the government decides to enact a confiscatory tax scheme which has the only purpose of enriching the current homeowners in the area by effectively barring new construction. Why is that a noble purpose and how does that comport with my 5A right to use my property for its most reasonable and customary use?
How does that help our young people? I have a 21 year old daughter. She will need to buy her own house some day. The government is blocking her opportunity. In short, Somin is absolutely right about these protectionist laws. They didn’t exist 20 years ago.
wvattorney13 — Were you taught economics by a doctrinaire laissez-faire grad student, at a third rate institution?
Also, I am very familiar with Western Maryland. Are you talking about the Cumberland area, or closer to D.C. It matters.
Farther west, most of the land outside established urban areas and subdivisions is NOT in established and customary residential use. And in the Cumberland area—right on the WV border, of course—the notion of existing homeowners getting rich on zoning-induced appreciation remains laughable.
Closer in, around Frederick, for instance, if you had a chance to build and did not take it for the price of that fee, you made an unwise financial decision. You passed up a bargain.
Finally, rural counties in areas being converted into residential exurbs have learned a painful lesson that opening outlying ag-land to spotty residential re-zones imposes burdensome tax increases on existing residents throughout the county. Too much inefficient infrastructure has to be built to serve outliers on a basis of legally-mandated service equality with the others. So your advocacy amounts as a practical matter to a demand for a personal right to freeload.
That is one of the few disadvantages (if it is a disadvantage) of Maryland's otherwise typically well-founded system of county-based government, instead of town-based government as in MA, for instance. Because it uses county-based government, and does it well, MD's provision of services like fire, police, and schools works more efficiently, and more fairly than the system in MA. There, every town becomes a target for all kinds of willy-nilly petty corruption. That is part of the reason why you see so many MA politicos hiring out as consultants to political campaigns across the nation at election time. MA local politics functions as a system of more than 400 schools to teach all the ways to work the angles.
You are complaining about a government system more honest, and more efficient, than exists in most states. They all have characteristic disadvantages. You want to get around that in your area? Adapt yourself to local conditions instead of fighting them. Buy a good existing home to meet your needs, and enjoy the appreciation a system managed to advantage most people delivers.
As is becoming standard on this message board, you just want to lob a personal insult instead of addressing the substance. It is terribly off-putting. Every first year student knows that taxes and regulations are a deadweight loss. As I said, they might have other better purposes, but as my experience shows, they stifle creation and cause housing shortages.
Since you finally got to substantive points, I was referring to western Montgomery County, about 35 minutes from Martinsburg. Your arguments are simply the protectionists ones that the local residents use. In the 1980s the United States had 250 million people. Today we have 343 million people.
That is 93 MILLION more people that need a place to live. That requires new houses to be built. Taxes harm the least likely to be able to afford it. We could have afforded it, but after seeing how the government would treat us, we decided not to.
I don't understand why you support such government confiscation. For 1000 years, property taxes on the land supported such occupation. There was never any "freeloading." As you suggested implicitly, what these laws do is protect the existing homeowners at the expense of new buyers. If you got there in 1995, good for you. You just turned 21 years old and need a house? Get lost, we don't want you here.
That can't continue to be the policy that supports housing everyone.
A state enacts prohibitions against theft and murder. Not only are these laws a kind of regulation, but they tend to stifle and increase the costs of a whole host of potentially profitable industries – theft rings, contract assassin rings, fencers, muscle, enforcers, mob bosses, consiglieris, money launderers, and more. They certainly stifle creativity and creation in these fields.
Deadweight loss?
We need truly mobile homes and from 2 am to 5 am you can use all roads to move them without taking out any permits. So that would emulate the old Moving Day holiday that cities had that kept rents down.
Housing shortage and 10 million immigrants comes in....see a connection? Biden is stupidity incarnate. Who could not see this?
But this is an example (again the horrific Biden) of how even when a problem is identified it won't be touched if it implies morality and decency.
Pollution and environmentalism:
"In the year 2000, nearly 15 percent of U.S. households were headed by divorced people, U.S. Census Bureau data suggest. The separation of families aggravated urban sprawl, boosting the number of households by more than 6 million and increasing the number of rooms to be heated and cooled by almost 36 million, says Liu."
"Because the number of people in a household decreases after a divorce, efficiency of resource use drops as well, Liu and his colleague Eunice Yu note in an upcoming Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. As a result, average per-person costs for electricity and water in a household headed by a divorced person are about 46 percent and 56 percent higher, respectively, than in a married household."
18 years ago and NO ONE has ever acted on it in the Democrat camp,.
The current housing shortage has more to do with the Great Recession than it does with regulatory barriers. Take these two facts:
1. In the last 60 years, we've only had two periods of time when new home sales were less than 100k units per year. Once, for about a year, in the late 60s, and then again for nearly 5 years after the Recession.
2. In recent years, we've been producing more housing units each year than at any other time in our history (except only for the years leading up to the Recession and its attendant housing collapse).
Take those two facts together, and it's obvious that regulatory barriers are not the driving force behind current housing shortages. Rather, it's those five years of massive under-production, finally catching up to us and biting us in the collective ass.
Correction: Meant to say that we've only had two periods in our recent history with fewer than 200k units, not 100k units. Plus, these number are only for new single family homes.
I think #2 is under developed. How many more homes would we have produced but for the overregulation? Perhaps enough so there would not be a shortage.
Read my story above. This isn't having to fill out bothersome government paperwork. These are confiscatory taxes that were the full cost of a house in the not too distant past.