The Housing of the Future

Demand Changes and Supply Response
  • Leland S. Burns
  • Leo Grebler
Part of the Environment, Development and Public Policy book series (EDPC)


Demographic forces already under way and accelerating through the rest of this century will tend to weaken housing demand, though at a moderate degree. That prognosis, based on the analysis of previous chapters, raises a crucial question. Can one foresee countervailing forces that will offset or reduce the negative influence of demographic conditions?


Housing Market Real Income Rental Housing Mobile Home Dwelling Unit 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Avery, R. B., Elliehausen, G. E., and Canner, G. B. (1984). Survey of consumer finances, 1984. Federal Reserve Bulletin, 70(9), 679–692.Google Scholar
  2. Baer, W. C. (1979). Empty housing space—An overlooked resource. Policy Studies Journal 8(2), 220–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bank of America. (1985, August). The president’s tax proposal and real estate. Residential Mortgage Banking Economic Report, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  4. Barnett, C. L. (1979). Using hedonic indexes to measure housing quantity. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.Google Scholar
  5. Data Resources, Inc. (1983). Demographic-economic model: Forecast summary. Lexington, MA: Author.Google Scholar
  6. Downs, A. (1983). Rental housing in the 1980s. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  7. Downs, A. (1984). Blueprint for a fairer housing policy: Subsidize low-income renters, not first-time home buyers. Los Angeles Times, September 16.Google Scholar
  8. Eichler, N. (1982). The merchant builders. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
  9. Ellickson, B. B., Fisherman, B., and Morrison, P. (1977). Economic analysis of urban housing markets. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.Google Scholar
  10. Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation. (1984). Secondary mortgage markets (February and May).Google Scholar
  11. Follain, J. R., and Malpezzi, S. (1980). Dissecting housing value and rent: Estimates of hedonic indexes for thirty-nine large SMSAs. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute.Google Scholar
  12. Friedman, J., and Weinberg, D. (1983). The great housing experiment. Beverly Hüls, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  13. Gellen, M. (1983). Underutilization in American housing: Residential space Standards and social change. Working Paper 339. Berkeley, CA: Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California.Google Scholar
  14. Gellen, M. (1984). More than one: Accessory apartments in single-family housing. Berkeley, CA: Department of City and Regional Planning, University of California. (Processed)Google Scholar
  15. Glick, P. (1977). Updating the life cycle of the family. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 39(1), 5–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kain, J. F., and Quigley, J. M. (1970). Measuring the value of housing quality. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 64, 532–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kau, J. B., and Sirmans, C. F. (1985). Tax planning for real estate investors (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  18. Kendall, L. T. (1984). Caution: Innovation at work. Secondary mortgage markets (May).Google Scholar
  19. Klugman, P. R. (1985). Is the strong dollar sustainable? Working Paper No. 1644. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
  20. Linder, S. B. (1970). The harried leisure class. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Los Angeles Times. (1984). Japanese Americans meet to talk housing. Financial Section, February 16.Google Scholar
  22. Lowry, I. S. (1982). Rental housing in the 1970s: Searching for the crisis. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.Google Scholar
  23. Lowry, I. S. (Ed.). (1983). Experimenting with housing allowances: Findings of a ten-year study of housing assistance for low-income families, with implications for national housing policy. Cambridge, MA: Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Gain.Google Scholar
  24. Markusen, A. (1983). The lonely squandering of urban time. In J. Zimmerman (Ed.), The technological woman: Interfacing with tomorrow. New York: Prager Press.Google Scholar
  25. Merrill, S. R. (1980). Hedonic indices as a measure of housing quality. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates.Google Scholar
  26. MIT-Harvard Joint Center for Urban Studies. (1984). Joint Center Report, No. 34 (June).Google Scholar
  27. Nilles, J. (1976). The telecommunications-transportation tradeoff: Options for tomorrow. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  28. Noland, C. W. (1980). Hedonic indexes for St. Joseph County, Indiana. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.Google Scholar
  29. Pennisi, E. (1985). Her house is her computer castle. Los Angeles Times, September 22.Google Scholar
  30. President’s Commission on Housing. (1982). The report of the President’s Commission on Housing. Washington, D.C.: Author.Google Scholar
  31. Rempel, W. C. (1985). Electronic mail: A revolutionary carrier aims to become routine. Los Angeles Times, February 24.Google Scholar
  32. Rivera, N. (1984). Homes from factories—A new image. Los Angeles Times, January 6.Google Scholar
  33. Robinson, J. (1980). Housework technology and household work. In S. F. Berk (Ed.), Women and household labor. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  34. Rosen, S. (1974). Hedonic prices and implicit markets: Product differentiation in pure competition. Journal of Political Economy, 82, 34–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rothenberg, J. (1985). New construction vs. rehabilitation: The tradeoff in meeting America’s housing needs. Working Paper No. 85–92. Berkeley, CA: Center for Real Estate and Urban Economics.Google Scholar
  36. Scott, J. W. (1982). Mechanization of women’s work. Scientific American, 247(September), 167–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Smith, B. A., and Ohsfeldt, R. (1979). Housing price inflation in Houston: 1970 to 1976. Policy Studies Journal, 8(2), 257–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Stokes, H. K., Jr. (1981). An examination of the productivity decline in the construction industry. Review of Economics and Statistics, 63(4), 495–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Struyk, R. J., and Bendix, M. (Eds.). (1981). Housing vouchers for the poor: Lessons from a national experiment. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute.Google Scholar
  40. Szalai, A. (1966). Multinational comparative social research. American Behavioral Scientist, 18(4).Google Scholar
  41. Toffler, A. (1980). The third wave. New York: Bantam.Google Scholar
  42. Toong, H.-M. D. and Gupta, A. (1982). Personal computers. Scientific American, 247(3), 86–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1975). Historical statistics of the United States: Colonial times to 1970. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  44. U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1981). Annual housing survey: 1980. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  45. U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1984a). Money income of households, families, and persons in the United States: 1982. Current Population Reports, Series P-60, No. 142. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  46. U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1984b). Annual housing survey. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  47. U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1985a). Statistical abstract of the United States: 1985. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  48. U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1985b). Housing vacancies, first quarter 1985, Series H-111. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  49. U.S. Department of Commerce. (various). Value of new construction put in place. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  50. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (1980). The conversion of rental housing to condominiums and cooperatives: A national study of scope, causes and impacts. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  51. U.S. General Accounting Office. (1976). Operation breakthrough—Lessons learned about demonstrating new technology. Report to the Congress. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  52. Vanek, J. (1978). Household technology and social status and residence differences in housework. Technology and Culture, 19. Google Scholar
  53. Wilkinson, R. K., with Archer, C. A. (1976). The quality of housing and the measurement of long-term changes in housing prices. Urban Studies, 13. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leland S. Burns
    • 1
  • Leo Grebler
    • 1
  1. 1.University of California, Los AngelesLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations