File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Is land‐use deregulation enough to deliver housing?: The case of institutional frictions in India

TitleIs land‐use deregulation enough to deliver housing?: The case of institutional frictions in India
Authors
Issue Date22-Sep-2025
PublisherWiley
Citation
Real Estate Economics, 2025 How to Cite?
Abstract

This paper examines whether land use deregulation increases housing supply in the presence of additional institutional frictions, such as ill-defined property rights. India's urban land ceiling (ULC) laws, which put limits on individual ownership of private vacant land in the largest cities, were repealed during the 2000s. Using a difference-in-difference strategy, with a panel of 201 cities, we find that the reform did not lead to housing supply growth. We posit that disputes in ownership rights for vacant parcels rendered the ULC repeal to be ineffective. The disputes led to legal battles between governments and private landowners, freezing construction on vacant land. We find that, after the repeal, the number of land-related legal proceedings in ULC-enacting cities may have been substantially higher than in cities where ULC was never enacted. The findings underscore the role of institutional frictions in impeding or delaying the potential benefits of deregulation.


Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/362744
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 2.0
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.233

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorDutta, Arnab-
dc.contributor.authorGandhi, Sahil-
dc.contributor.authorGreen, Richard K.-
dc.date.accessioned2025-09-27T00:35:32Z-
dc.date.available2025-09-27T00:35:32Z-
dc.date.issued2025-09-22-
dc.identifier.citationReal Estate Economics, 2025-
dc.identifier.issn1080-8620-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/362744-
dc.description.abstract<p>This paper examines whether land use deregulation increases housing supply in the presence of additional institutional frictions, such as ill-defined property rights. India's urban land ceiling (ULC) laws, which put limits on individual ownership of private vacant land in the largest cities, were repealed during the 2000s. Using a difference-in-difference strategy, with a panel of 201 cities, we find that the reform did not lead to housing supply growth. We posit that disputes in ownership rights for vacant parcels rendered the ULC repeal to be ineffective. The disputes led to legal battles between governments and private landowners, freezing construction on vacant land. We find that, after the repeal, the number of land-related legal proceedings in ULC-enacting cities may have been substantially higher than in cities where ULC was never enacted. The findings underscore the role of institutional frictions in impeding or delaying the potential benefits of deregulation.<br></p>-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherWiley-
dc.relation.ispartofReal Estate Economics-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.-
dc.titleIs land‐use deregulation enough to deliver housing?: The case of institutional frictions in India-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/1540-6229.70009-
dc.identifier.eissn1540-6229-
dc.identifier.issnl1080-8620-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats