Renting versus Owning and the Role of Human Capital: Evidence from Germany

  • Rainer Schulz
  • Martin Wersing
  • Axel WerwatzEmail author


In a world with complete markets, the decision whether to rent or buy a home is not influenced by risks related to human capital. If markets are incomplete and have frictions, however, this may change. Renting should become more likely the more mobile a household has to be and the more income risk can be diversified. Using household panel data from Germany, we test both predictions. We find that mobility requirements have a positive effect on the probability of renting. This effect is robust even after controlling for state dependence, unobserved heterogeneity and other factors known to influence the tenure mode choice. Our data, however, does not support the hypothesis that the potential to diversify net income risk when renting affects the tenure mode choice.


Tenure mode choice Household mobility Background risk 

JEL Codes

R21 G11 J24 C23 C25 



We have benefited from comments on earlier versions of this paper by five anonymous referees, Bernd Fitzenberger, James Follain, Christian Hilber, Franz Hubert, Verity Watson and participants at presentations at the AREUEA Annual Conference 2009, ERES Annual Conference 2008, Regensburg Conference on Real Estate Economics and Finance 2007, University of Aberdeen, DIW Berlin, Heriot Watt University Edinburgh, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Universität Hannover, and Universität Tübingen. The usual disclaimer applies.


  1. Arellano, M. (1987). Computing robust standard errors for within-groups estimators. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 49, 431–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barsky, R.B., Juster, F.T., Kimball, M.S., Shapiro, M.D. (1997). Preference parameters and behavioral heterogeneity: An experimental approach in the health and retirement study. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112, 537–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boehm, T.P. (1981). Tenure choice and expected mobility: A synthesis. Journal of Urban Economics, 10, 375–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boehm, T.P., Herzog, H.W., Schlottmann, A.M. (1991). Intra-urban mobility, migration, and tenure choice. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 73, 59–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bunke, O., Droge, B., Polzehl, J. (1999). Model selection, transformations and variance estimation in nonlinear regression. Statistics, 33, 197–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chamberlain, G. (1980). Analysis of covariance with qualitative data. The Review of Economic Studies, 47, 225–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Davidoff, T. (2006). Labor income, housing prices, and homeownership. Journal of Urban Economics, 59, 209–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dohmen, T., Falk, D., Huffmann, U., Sunde, U., Schupp, J., Wagner, W. (2005). Individual risk attiudes. new evidence from a large, representative, experimentally-validated survey. DIW Discussion Paper 511. Berlin: German Institute for Economic Research.Google Scholar
  9. Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R.J. (1993). An Introduction to the Bootstrap. New York: Chapman and Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Haurin, D.L., & Gill, H.D. (2002). The impact of transaction costs and the expected length of stay on home ownership. Journal of Urban Economics, 51, 563–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Heckman, J.J. (1981). The incidental parameters problem and the problem of initial conditions in estimating a discrete- time-discrete data stochastic process. In C. Manski, & D. McFadden (Eds.), Structural Analysis of Discrete Data with Econometric Applications. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  12. Henderson, J.V., & Ioannides, Y.M. (1989). Dynamic aspects of consumer decisions in housing markets. Journal of Urban Economics, 26, 212–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hubert, F. (1998). Private rented housing in Germany. Netherlands Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 13, 205–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ihlanfeldt, K.R. (1981). An empirical investigation of alternative approaches to estimating the equilibrium demand for housing. Journal of Urban Economics, 9, 97–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kambourov, G., & Manovskii, I. (2009). Occupational specificity of human capital. International Economic Review, 50, 63–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kan, K. (2000). Dynamic modeling of housing tenure choice. Journal of Urban Economics, 48, 46–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. King, M.A. (1980). An econometric model of tenure choice and demand for housing as a joint decision. Journal of Public Economics, 14, 137–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kirchner, J. (2007). The declining social rental sector in Germany. European Journal of Housing Policy, 7, 85–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lai, C.D., & Xie, M. (2006). Stochastic ageing and dependence for reliability. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  20. Malpezzi, S. (1998). Private rented housing markets in the United States. Netherlands Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 13, 353–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Martin, J.P. (1996). Measure of replacement rates for the purpose of international comparison: A note. OECD Economic Studies, 26, 99–115.Google Scholar
  22. Mundlak, Y. (1978). On the pooling of time series and cross section data. Econometrica, 46, 69–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Neal, D. (1995). Industry-specific human capital: Evidence from displaced workers. Journal of Labor Economics, 13, 653–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ortalo-Magné, F., & Rady, S. (2002). Tenure choice and the riskiness of non-housing consumption. Journal of Housing Economics, 11, 266–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Painter, G., Gabriel, S., Myers, D. (2001). Race, immigrant status, and housing tenure choice. Journal of Urban Economics, 49, 150–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Poletaev, M., & Robinson, C. (2008). Human capital specificity: Evidence from the dictionary of occupational titles and displaced worker surveys. Journal of Labor Economics, 26, 387–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rosen, H.S. (1979). Housing decisions and the U.S. income tax. Journal of Public Economics, 11, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rosen, H.S., & Rosen, K.T. (1980). Federal taxes and homeownership: Evidence from time series. Journal of Political Economy, 88, 59–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rosen, H.S., Rosen, K.T., Holtz-Eakin, D. (1984). Housing tenure, uncertainty, and taxation. Review of Economics and Statistics, 66, 405–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Shiller, R.J. (1993). Macro Markets. Creating institutions for managing society’s largest economic risks. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  31. Shiller, R.J., & Schneider, R. (1998). Labor income indices designed for use in contracts promoting income risk management. Review of Income and Wealth, 44, 163–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sinai, T., & Souleles, N.S. (2005). Owner-occupied housing as a hedge against rent risk. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120, 763–789.Google Scholar
  33. Tomann, H. (1990). The housing market, housing finance and housing policy in West Germany: Prospects for the 1990s. Urban Studies, 27, 919–930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Van de Ven, W.P.M.M., & Van Praag, B.M.S. (1981). The demand for deductibles in private health insurance: A probit model with sample selection. Journal of Econometrics, 17, 229–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Voigtländer, M. (2009). Why is the German homeownership rate so low? Housing Studies, 24, 355–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wooldridge, J.M. (2005). Simple solutions to the initial conditions problem in dynamic, nonlinear panel data models with unobserved heterogeneity. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 20, 39–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Aberdeen Business SchoolEdward Wright BuildingAberdeenUnited Kingdom
  2. 2.Technische Universität BerlinInstitut für Volkswirtschaftslehre und WirtschaftsrechtBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations