Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Network Formation and Effects: Observations from U.S. Commercial Real Estate Markets

  • Published:
The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We explore how trading networks among commercial real estate brokerage firms are formed, and the effects of network structure on centrality, assortativity and power in the six largest commercial real estate markets in the United State. Fitting the dynamic network formation model developed by Jackson and Rogers American Economic Review, 97(3), 890-915, (2007) to U.S. commercial real estate transaction data (2003–2016), we calculate the importance of network search relative to random search for commercial real estate brokerage firms. We observe that in general approximately 67% of trades of commercial properties are made through network searches. Network search is more important during the global financial crisis (2008–2010). The trading networks also show geographic heterogeneity as network search is most important in Chicago (79.7%), but relatively less important in Boston and Los Angeles (56.2% and 58.2%). Finally, brokerage firms with many trading partners are more likely to trade with those with fewer partners (negative assortativity) creating conditions for power asymmetry between firms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Jackson and Rogers (2007) and Jackson (2008) have shown that the “mean-field” approximation is quite accurate.

  2. The proof is omitted here, but is available in the proof of Prediction 1 in Xie (2019) and the proof of Lemma 1 in Jackson and Rogers (2007).

References

  • Anglin, P. M., & Arnott, R. (1991). Residential real estate brokerage as a seller-agent problem. Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 4, 99–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti, S. P., & Halgin, D. (2011). On network theory. Organization Science, 22(5), 1168–1181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti, S. P., Mehra, A., Brass, D., & Labianca, G. (2009). Network analysis in the social sciences. Science, 323(5916), 892–895.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaney, T. (2014). The network structure of international Trade. American Eco- nomic Review, 104(11), 3600–3634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, R. (1962). Power-dependence relations. American Sociological Review, 31–41.

  • Erdös, P., & Rényi, A. (1960). On the Evolution of Random Graphs. Publication of the Mathematical Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, 5, 17–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, L., & Yavas, A. (2010). A case for percentage commission contracts: The impact of a race among agents. Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economic, 40, 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, L. (1978). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Net- works, 1, 215–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geltner, D., Kluger, B., & Miller, N. G. (1991). Optimal price and selling effort from perspectives of the broker and seller. Journal of the American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, 19(1), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, M. O. (2008). Social and economic networks. Princeton University Press.

  • Jackson, M. O., & Rogers, B. W. (2007). Meeting strangers and friends of friends: How random are social networks? American Economic Review, 97(3), 890–915.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, L., & Yavas, A. (2015b). The impact of a multiple listing service. Real Estate Eco- nomics, 43, 471–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, Y., & Yavas, A. (2015a). Residential brokerage in hot and cold markets. Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 51, 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luce, R. D., & Perry, A. D. (1949). A method of matrix analysis of group structure. Psychometrika, 14(1), 95–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markovsky, B., Willer, D., & Patton, T. (1988). Power relations in exchange networks. American Sociological Review, 53, 220–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsden, P. (1983). Restricted access in networks and models of power. American Journal of Sociology, 88(4), 686–717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miceli, T. J. (1991). The multiple listing service, commission splits and broker effort. American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association Journal, 19, 548–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miceli, T. J., Pancak, K. A., & Sirmans, C. F. (2007). Is the compensation model for real estate brokers obsolete? Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 35, 7–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newman, M. (2003). The structure and function of complex networks. SIAM Review, 45(2), 167–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scofield, D., & Xie, J. (2019). The effect of dual brokerage on commercial real estate prices: Evidence from office sales in the U.S. Journal of Real Estate Research, 41(3), 347–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge University Press.

  • Watts, D. J., & Strogatz, S. (1998). Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature, 393(6684), 440–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xie, J. (2019). Importance of professional networks in trade: Evidence from real estate market. Real Estate Economics (forthcoming).

  • Yavas, A. (1992). A simple search and bargaining model of real estate market. Real Estate Economics, 20, 533–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yavas, A. (1994). Middlemen in bilateral search markets. Journal of Labor Economics, 12(3), 406–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yinger, J. (1981). A search model of real estate broker behavior. American Economic Review, 71, 591–605.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zorn, T. S., & Larsen, J. E. (1986). The incentive effects of flat-fee and percentage Commis­ sions for real estate brokers. Journal of the American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, 14(1), 24–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Real Capital Analytics for access to the data used in this research and we thank the reviewers for their suggestions. Any errors are the responsibility of the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Ted Rogers School of Management, Ryerson University, Toronto, ON, Canada

    David Scofield

  2. College of Business and Economics, California State University, Fullerton, CA, USA

    Jia Xie

Authors
  1. David Scofield
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jia Xie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jia Xie.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Scofield, D., Xie, J. Network Formation and Effects: Observations from U.S. Commercial Real Estate Markets. J Real Estate Finan Econ 66, 487–504 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11146-021-09831-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11146-021-09831-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation