住房资产对中国家庭风险金融资产配置的影响研究

随着时代的发展,住房资产与金融资产的联系越来越紧密,逐渐向住房资产金融产品化发展,成为一种新型金融产品,呈现出货币化和金融化的趋势。本文使用probit模型、普通最小二乘法(OLS)、中介效应以及调节效应,采用2015年中国家庭金融问卷调查微观数据(CHFS)对住房资产价值细化,从住房增值、住房贷款和住房总值三个方面对居民家庭风险金融市场进入和风险金融资产配置的影响进行研究。研究发现:(1)住房总值和住房增值对居民家庭是否参与金融市场呈现显著的负向影响,住房贷款对其具有正向影响。(2)住房贷款对居民家庭风险金融资产投资有负向影响,住房增值和住房总值对其有正向影响。(3)幸福感在居民家庭是否参与金融市场和住房增值中存在部分中介效应,安全感在居民家庭风险金融投资和住房贷款之间存在部分中介效应,未来预期在居民家庭是否参与金融市场与居民家庭是否拥有住房贷款中存在调节效应。最后,根据实证结果提出完善金融市场和优化居民金融资产结构的政策建议。     

财富效应还是挤出效应?——基于CFPS数据的住房价值增加对居民家庭消费影响的实证分析

利用中国家庭追踪调查(CFPS)2014年和2016年的数据,构造两期面板数据模型,考察住房资产价值变化对居民家庭消费变化的影响。结果表明,住房资产价值的减少会促进居民家庭的消费,即具有明显的挤出效应,不存在财富效应。进一步考察发现:就购房目的差异来看,有购房目的的家庭的住房资产挤出效应明显强于没有购房目的的家庭;就有无自有住房来看,有自有住房的家庭的住房资产挤出效应明显强于无自有住房的家庭,而没有住房且有购房目的的家庭会产生更大的挤出效应;就政策差异而言,房地产政策宽松时期的住房挤出效应略微强于房地产政策紧缩时期,而政策宽松时期有购房目的会产生更大的挤出效应。     

家庭财务杠杆率对居民消费的影响——基于中国家庭追踪调查数据的研究

本文利用中国家庭追踪调查（CFPS）数据，实证分析家庭杠杆率对居民消费的影响，结果表明：第一，家庭债务积累和财务杠杆率上升增加了居民的消费总支出和住房支出，但是在这个过程中，住房支出对日常生活消费产生了挤出效应。第二，异质性分析表明，对于拥有住房产权的家庭和中低收入家庭，其财务杠杆率上升对居民消费具有显著正向影响，而无住房产权家庭、高收入家庭的财务杠杆率对居民消费的影响不显著。第三，住房支出在家庭财务杠杆率增加消费总支出过程中发挥了显著的中介效应，而举债带来的还本付息压力在家庭财务杆杆率反向影响日常生活开支过程中发挥了明显的遮掩效应。上述研究结论的政策启示：实施扩大内需战略，要合理控制家庭部门财务杠杆率的上升，谨防债务过度积累给家庭和社会消费带来的负面影响；坚持“房住不炒”政策，缓解居民购房支出压力；提升中低收入群体的收入，提高居民的边际消费倾向，充分发挥居民消费对经济的拉动效应。     

家庭持有住房、金融负债和金融市场参与——基于CFPS(2018)的实证检验

房产具有投资和必需品的双重属性,家庭无论是出于投资需要还是出于生活需要而配置房产,都会占用家庭大量资产与负债,这无疑会对金融市场参与产生挤出效应。基于2018年中国家庭追踪调查(CFPS)的相关数据,本文利用工具变量法,实证检验了家庭持有住房对金融市场参与的影响。实证结果表明,家庭持有住房显著降低家庭金融市场参与,异质性检验显示该效应在非农业户口家庭以及购房成本较低的居民家庭中更为显著。同时,中介效应检验表明,家庭持有住房会通过减少家庭的金融负债降低金融市场参与。因此,政府应更加关注居民住房问题,缓解居民住房贷款压力,从而促进金融市场繁荣,增强经济活力。     

中国居民住房价值与储蓄行为研究

本文使用中国家庭追踪调查(CFPS)数据,分析房屋价值对家庭储蓄率的影响。通过异质性研究发现,随着年龄与收入的上升,房产价值对于储蓄的负向影响减弱,多房产家庭的房产数量上升将加强这一负向影响,在无房或单房群体以及中部地区群体中,房产价值上升时由于房奴效应较强导致这种影响不明显。最后利用第二次限购政策建立双向固定双重差分模型,识别房产价值对储蓄行为的影响。结果显示,住房限购政策通过抑制房价上涨提高家庭储蓄率。文章据此提出,要切实保障相关群体利益,稳定房价水平,完善社会保障体制,减轻居民预防性储蓄动机。     

住房差异与居民社会公平感——基于社会阶层视角

依据2017年中国综合社会调查数据,运用有序概率模型,考量住房差异对居民社会公平感的影响及作用机理。结果显示：较少住房面积和无住房产权负向影响居民社会公平感;较多住房面积和拥有住房产权正向影响居民社会公平感;一套住房产权比多套住房产权更能促进居民社会公平感的提升。社会阶层认同和社会阶层预期在较少住房面积和无住房产权群体中表现出正向调节作用;在较多住房面积和拥有住房产权群体中表现出中介作用。住房差异在社会阶层上向流动时正向影响居民社会公平感。鉴于此,应保障住房权利,强化社会阶层预期,提高居民社会公平感。     

收入波动对家庭经济脆弱性的影响研究——基于保险参与的调节效应分析

防范化解家庭经济风险对维持宏观经济的稳定具有现实意义。基于2015年、2017年和2019年三期的中国家庭金融调查数据,以微观家庭为研究对象,探究收入波动对家庭经济脆弱性的影响以及保险参与在其中所起到的调节效应。研究发现,收入波动显著提高了家庭经济脆弱性,且这种影响在经济脆弱程度更高的家庭中更加明显。而保险参与在这个过程中具有负向调节作用,能够减轻收入波动对家庭经济脆弱性的不利影响。进一步分析发现,在乡村地区或低资产水平的家庭中,收入波动使其陷入经济风险的概率更高,这会导致经济条件差的家庭更易返贫。研究结论为促进居民家庭的保险参与、提高居民家庭的风险防范意识和风险防范能力提供了参考。     

公积金制度对住房财富不平等的影响效应分析——基于CHFS数据的实证研究

住房公积金制度对住房财富积累具有较强的中介效应,其再分配机制对住房财富水平有显著影响。为此,结合中国家庭金融调查数据,引入结构方程模型和不平等回归分解法,对其影响路径进行系统性研究发现：我国住房公积金制度对高收入和高社会地位群体的住房财富积累具有稳定的正向再分配效应,对住房财富不平等的贡献较高。按照公积金的代际支付转移及分配差异的负反馈循环机制,这种不平等远未达到其最大影响。未来通过政策调整和结构优化,在公积金制度公平性和财富分配方面还蕴含着巨大的改善空间。     

住房财富对中国城镇家庭消费的影响

在构建以国内大循环为主体,国内国际双循环相互促进的新发展格局下,把握扩大内需这一战略基点,激发居民消费潜力,是推动经济高质量发展的关键之一。住房已经成为中国家庭财富的重要组成部分,一方面可通过财富效应促进家庭消费,另一方面也可能由于“房奴效应”降低家庭消费。因此,住房财富对家庭消费的影响方向并不确定。本文基于2013-2019年中国家庭金融调查数据,研究了住房财富对家庭消费的影响,并检验了住房财富影响家庭消费的可能渠道。研究发现,住房财富对城镇家庭消费有显著促进作用,并显著改善了家庭消费结构,住房资产具有财富效应。进一步研究发现,住房财富能够缓解流动性约束,从而提高家庭消费水平。异质性分析表明,住房财富对不同类型的消费具有不同的促进作用,不同地区和拥有住房数量的差别均会对住房财富产生不同影响。根据本文研究,在控制风险的前提下,可发挥既有住房财富对平滑家庭消费的积极作用,促进家庭消费增长,改善家庭消费结构,进一步推进家庭消费升级。     

户籍属性、住房拥有与家庭金融资产选择

本文采用2011年中国家庭金融调查数据(CHFS),分析了户籍属性与住房拥有对家庭金融资产选择的影响。研究表明:拥有本地户籍显著提高了家庭拥有住房率,并且对家庭参与风险资产市场的可能性和风险资产比重产生显著正向影响。这一结果在控制了家庭经济条件、人口学特征和投资风险态度等因素后仍然稳健。住房拥有对家庭风险资产市场参与、参与程度产生正效应,但是统计上不显著。进一步探讨户籍地位的城乡差异效应后发现,农业户籍地位会显著降低家庭风险资产的投资倾向。     

Risk Attitude and Housing Wealth Effect

This paper examines whether the housing wealth effect—the consumption change induced by house price appreciation is dependent upon households’ attitudes toward risk. A simple theoretical model is introduced to highlight a negative relationship between the wealth effect and risk aversion. The paper empirically tests for this negative relationship, using data from the U.S. Consumer Expenditure Survey. The investigation involves two steps. In the first step, we make use of households’ demographics and their risky and liquid asset holdings to estimate risk aversion. The Heckman correction model is applied to address the issue of limited stock market participation. For the second step, we construct pseudo panel data through grouping households by their birth years and their predicted values of risk aversion, and then, we estimate the responses of households’ consumption changes to house price fluctuations by risk-attitude group. Consistent with the prediction of the theoretical model, the estimation results suggest a significant negative relationship between the housing wealth effect and households’ risk attitudes. Households, who are less risk averse, experience greater consumption changes in response to house price appreciation.     

房产税对宏观经济的影响效应研究

本文扩展Dong et al.(2019)通过企业家对住房地产和实体经济投资进行资产组合决策,把房价、投资、消费和产出等重要经济指标纳入主流新凯恩斯框架,考虑银行能否区分贷款是投入实体经济还是房地产业两种情形,分析了房产税引入住房市场前后对宏观经济的影响效应。研究结果表明:开征房产税对房地产开发投资、房价和新住房生产具有明显的抑制作用,对实体经济投资则具有正挤入效应增加和负抵押效应减少的双重效应。从短期看,当银行无法区分企业贷款是投入实体经济还是房地产业时,因前期的负抵押效应大于正挤入效应,总实物资本减少,产出下降;当可清晰区分二者时,负抵押效应变为小于正挤入效应,总实物资本增加,产出上升。鉴于推出房产税对宏观经济影响较为复杂,应充分权衡利弊,采取必要辅助措施趋利避害。     

房产税对宏观经济的影响效应研究

本文扩展Dong et al.(2019)通过企业家对住房地产和实体经济投资进行资产组合决策,把房价、投资、消费和产出等重要经济指标纳入主流新凯恩斯框架,考虑银行能否区分贷款是投入实体经济还是房地产业两种情形,分析了房产税引入住房市场前后对宏观经济的影响效应。研究结果表明:开征房产税对房地产开发投资、房价和新住房生产具有明显的抑制作用,对实体经济投资则具有正挤入效应增加和负抵押效应减少的双重效应。从短期看,当银行无法区分企业贷款是投入实体经济还是房地产业时,因前期的负抵押效应大于正挤入效应,总实物资本减少,产出下降;当可清晰区分二者时,负抵押效应变为小于正挤入效应,总实物资本增加,产出上升。鉴于推出房产税对宏观经济影响较为复杂,应充分权衡利弊,采取必要辅助措施趋利避害。     

Financial and Housing Wealth,Expenditures and the Dividend to Ownership

For a household, home ownership provides necessary shelter, potential investment returns associated with property appreciation and a hedge against increased housing related cash outlays. In addition to potential appreciation, individual households benefit over time from a housing dividend defined as the difference between the market rent for the individual household’s housing unit and the household’s actual house ownership costs. The purchase of a house can substantially fix a household’s recurring housing related expenditures and generates a hedge (implied housing dividend) that increases with ownership tenure. This expenditure hedge (dividend) to home ownership is documented using pooled, cross-year samples from the Consumer Expenditure Survey (CEX). The housing dividend delivers a non-trivial effect on household non-housing expenditures after controlling for housing value, housing equity, financial assets and income.     

经济集聚、人口流动与住宅价格空间溢出效应研究

基于省级面板数据,利用空间计量模型考量经济集聚、人口流动和住宅价格间的空间溢出效应关系.结果发现:中国省际住宅价格间存在着显著的正向空间相关性,即某一地区住宅价格的波动会受到周边地区或经济特征类似地区住宅价格波动的影响;人口流动在经济集聚和房价的关系中发挥着中介作用;经济集聚与住宅价格在空间上存在着显著的相关关系,经济集聚不仅会推高集聚中心住宅价格,还会通过"虹吸效应"和"涓滴效应"对周边住宅价格产生影响,而经济集聚对周边住宅价格的影响取决于人口净流入率的大小.     

Borrowing Constraints,Home Ownership and Housing Choice: Evidence from Intra‐Family Wealth Transfers

We study the impact of borrowing constraints on home ownership and housing demand by comparing the tenure choice and housing quality of consumers who receive intra‐family wealth transfers to those that do not. Our analysis is based on household‐level panel data providing information on the receipt of wealth transfers, changes in tenure status as well as changes in the size and quality of housing. On average we find that the receipt of a wealth transfer increases the propensity of consumers to transition from renters to home‐owners by 6–8 percentage points (35% of the sample mean). Additional analyses suggest that this effect is unlikely to be driven by wealth effects and can thus be attributed to the relaxation of borrowing constraints. By contrast, wealth transfers do not increase the likelihood that existing homeowners “trade‐up” to larger homes in better locations.     

Does Residential Housing Crowd Out or Promote Households’ Stock Investment? Evidence from China

Limited participation in risky financial markets has long been a puzzle. Empirical evidence shows a strong relationship between housing and investment of risky financial assets, but with varying and conflicting results. We contribute to the literature by distinguishing housing for consumption and for investment, and by considering the role of housing price expectation when exploring households’ participation in stock markets. We find that home equity ratio and housing area play significant roles in households’ participation in stock markets. Households with higher home equity ratio or larger housing are less likely to own, and hold fewer stock assets if they do. We also find that the number of houses has a positive effect on stock investment for households with the same home equity ratio and housing size, which could be explained by credit rationing. Furthermore, housing price expectation has a negative effect on stock investment; this effect is larger for homeowners with multiple houses who are more likely to take houses for investment. Our results show insights into conflicting results of the relationship between real estate and stock investment.     

Hedging Housing Risk in London

This paper investigates the benefits of allowing households to compensate the portfolio distortion due to their housing consumption through investments in housing price derivatives. Focusing on the London market, we show that a major loss from over-investment in housing is that households are forced to hold a very risky portfolio. However, the strong performance of the London housing market means that little is lost in terms of expected returns. Even households with limited wealth are better off owning their home rather than renting and investing in financial assets, as long as they are willing to face the financial risk involved. In this context, access to housing price derivatives would benefit most poor homeowners looking to limit their risk exposure. It would also benefit wealthier investors looking for the high returns provided by housing investments without the costs of direct ownership of properties. Comparisons with French, Swedish and U.S. data provide a broader perspective on our findings.