Price effects of the special housing areas in Auckland

References

• Angrist, J. D., & Pischke, J.-S. (2008). Mostly harmless econometrics: An empiricist’s companion. Massachusettts I Nstitute of Technology and The London School of Economics. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
   Google Scholar
• Auckland Council. (2012). Housing Action Plan Stage 1. Auckland.
   Google Scholar
• Auckland Council. (2013). Auckland Housing Accord.
   Google Scholar
• Calavita, N., & Grimes, K. (1998). Inclusionary housing in California: The experience of two decades. Journal of the American Planning Association, 64(2), 150–169. doi: 10.1080/01944369808975973
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CoreLogic. (2018). Monthly property market & economic update.
   Google Scholar
• Fernandez, M. A. (2016). Land supply constraints and housing prices in New Zealand. Auckland Council Technical Report 2016/038. Auckland.
   Google Scholar
• Fernandez, Mario A. (2019). A matching simulation to assess additional housing capacity in Auckland, New Zealand Economic Papers. doi: 10.1080/00779954.2019.1585386
   Google Scholar
• Fernandez, Mario Andres, & Bucaram, Santiago. (2019). The changing face ofenvironmental amenities: Heterogeneity across housing submarkets and time. Land Use Policy, 83, 449–460. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.02.024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Government of New Zealand. (2013). Housing accords and special housing areas (Auckland) order 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Greenaway-McGrevy, R., & Phillips, P. C. B. (2016). Hot property in New Zealand: Empirical evidence of housing bubbles in the metropolitan centres. New Zealand Economic Papers, 50(1), 88–113. doi: 10.1080/00779954.2015.1065903
   Google Scholar
• Hughen, W. K., & Read, D. C. (2014). Inclusionary housing policies, stigma effects and strategic production decisions. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 48(4), 589–610. doi: 10.1007/s11146-013-9402-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahn-Lang, A., & Lang, K. (2018). The promise and pitfalls of differences-in differences: Reflections on ‘sixteen and pregnant’ and other applications (No. w24857). National Bureau of Economic Research.
   Google Scholar
• Kontokosta, C. E. (2014). Mixed-income housing and neighborhood integration: Evidence from inclusionary zoning programs. Journal of Urban Affairs, 36(4), 716–741. doi: 10.1111/juaf.12068
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lancaster, K. (1971). Consumer demand: A new approach. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lancaster, K. J. (1966). A new approach to consumer theory. Journal of Political Economy, 74(2), 132–157. doi: 10.1086/259131
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lechner, M. (2010). The estimation of causal effects by Difference-in-Difference methods. Foundations and Trends® in Econometrics, 4(3), 165–224. doi: 10.1561/0800000014
   Google Scholar
• Mallach, A., & Calavita, N. (Eds.). (2010). Inclusionary housing in international perspective: Affordable housing, social inclusion, and land value recapture (pp. 15–77). Washington: Lincoln Institute.
   Google Scholar
• McArthur, J. (2017). Auckland: Rescaled governance and post-suburban politics. Cities (london, England), 64, 79–87. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2017.01.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ministry for the Environment. (2013). A guide to the six-month process for notified resource consent applications.
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment. (2017). Auckland housing accord - third quarterly report for the fourth accord year. Retrieved from http://www.mbie.govt.nz/info-services/housing-property/housing-affordability/document-image-library/auckland-housing-accord-monitoring-report-06-2017.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Monk, S., Crook, T., & Lister, D. (2005). Land and finance for affordable housing: The complementary roles of social housing grant and the provision of affordable housing through the planning system. Working paper, Centre for Housing and Planning Research, Department of Land Economy, University of Cambridge.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, L. (2016). The politics of land supply and affordable housing: Auckland’s housing accord and special housing areas. Urban Studies, 53(12), 2530–2547. doi: 10.1177/0042098015594574
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Powell, B., & Stringham, E. (2004). Housing Supply and Affordability: Do Affordable Housing Mandates Work? Policy Study No. 318. Los Angeles, CA: Reason Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Preval, N., Randal, E., Chapman, R., Moores, J., & Howden-Chapman, P. (2016). Streamlining urban housing development: Are there environmental sustainability impacts? Cities (london, England), 55, 101–112. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2016.04.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schuetz, J., Meltzer, R., & Been, V. (2009). 31 Flavors of inclusionary zoning: Comparing policies from San Francisco, Washington, DC, and suburban Boston. Journal of the American Planning Association, 75(4), 441–456. doi: 10.1080/01944360903146806
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schuetz, J., Meltzer, R., & Been, V. (2011). Silver Bullet or Trojan Horse? The effects of inclusionary zoning on local housing Markets in the United States. Urban Studies, 48(2), 297–329. doi: 10.1177/0042098009360683
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stabrowski, F. (2015). Inclusionary zoning and exclusionary development: The Politics of ‘affordable housing’ in North Brooklyn. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 39(6), 1120–1136. doi: 10.1111/1468-2427.12297
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tombari, E. (2005). Smart growth, smart choices series: The builder’s perspective on inclusionary zoning. ashington, DC: National Association of Home Builders.
   Google Scholar
• Wiener, R. J., & Barton, S. E. (2014). The Underpinnings of inclusionary housing in California: Current practice and emerging market and legal challenges. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 29(3), 403–422. Springer Netherlands. doi: 10.1007/s10901-013-9355-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar