Families and Housing Decisions: A Look Across OECD Countries

  • Mariacristina Rossi
  • Eva M. Sierminska


Homeownership trends developed in 22 OECD countries over the past three to four decades are examined and differences related to the homeownership gap for women and men are discussed, with a focus on most recent trends. The US and countries with varying institutional structures are compared with particular attention being paid to differences across family types. The estimation techniques allow us to discuss the role of determinants from a gender perspective. We find that single women are better off than single men without children and a reverse trend exists in families with children. The general negative effect for women remains for younger cohorts in the face of risking homeownership. The latest crisis did not change the general long-running trend of the homeownership gap except for the US and France. The findings of this chapter provide an international perspective on differential homeownership rates among women and men, across countries and over time. Given that the value of one’s own home (home equity) is the largest financial reserve in a household’s wealth portfolio, it is important to have a better understanding of the differences resulting from gender and family types.


Housing Families Cross-National Comparisons United States 


  1. Belsky, E. (2009). Demographics, markets, and future of housing demand. Journal of Housing Research, 18(2), 99–119.Google Scholar
  2. Chambers, M. S., Schlangenhauf, D. E., & Young, E. R. (2003). Are husbands really that cheap? Exploring life insurance holdings. Manuscript, Florida State University.Google Scholar
  3. Dillingh, R., Prast, H., Rossi, M., & Brancati, C. U. (2017). Who wants to have their home and eat it too? Interest in reverse mortgages in the Netherlands. Journal of Housing Economics, 38, 25–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Gabriel, S. A., & Rosenthal, S. S. (2013). Urbanization, agglomeration economies, and access to mortgage credit. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 43, 42–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Grabka, M., Marcus, J., & Sierminska, E. (2015). Wealth distribution within couples. Review of Economics of the Household, 13(3), 459–486.
  6. Haurin, D. R., Parcel, T. L., & Haurin, R. J. (2002). Does homeownership affect child outcomes? Real Estate Economics, 30(4), 635–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Luxembourg Income Study (LIS) Database. (2016). (multiple countries; 1971–2010). Luxembourg: LIS.
  8. McGinn, D. (2013). How single women—And what they want—Are shaping the new housing market. The Globe and Mail.Google Scholar
  9. Oswald, A. J. (1996). A conjecture on the explanation for high unemployment in the industrialized nations: Part I. Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS), 475.Google Scholar
  10. Rossi, M., & Sierminska, E. (2015). Single again? Saving patterns when widowhood occurs. Netspar Discussion Paper No. 02/2015-004.
  11. Wind, B., Lersch, P. M., & Dewilde, C. (2016). The distribution of housing wealth in 16 European countries: Accounting for institutional differences. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, Published Online.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mariacristina Rossi
    • 1
  • Eva M. Sierminska
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Management, School of Management and EconomicsUniversity of TorinoTorinoItaly
  2. 2.LISER - Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic ResearchEsch-BelvalLuxembourg

Personalised recommendations