اثر درآمد و تحصیلات سرپرست خانوار بر نحوه‌ی تصرف مسکن در مناطق شهری ایران

نوع مقاله: علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار گروه اقتصاد دانشگاه بوعلی سینا

2 کارشناس ارشد علوم اقتصادی دانشگاه بوعلی سینا

چکیده

مسکن یکی از اساسی‌ترین نیازهای هر خانوار است که می‌تواند در ابعاد اقتصاد کلان و خانوار نقش مهمی‌ داشته باشد و به دو شکل اجاره‌ای و ملکی تأمین شود. عوامل متعددی بر انتخاب خرید یا اجاره واحدهای مسکونی خانوارها مؤثر هستند، شناسایی این عوامل و میزان تأثیرگذاری آنها می‌تواند به سیاست‌گذاری و برنامه‌ریزی بخش مسکن کمک کند. برای این منظور از دو مدل لوجیت و پروبیت استفاده شده است و نتایج به‌دست‌آمده از برآورد دو مدل به‌ منظور تعیین بهترین مدل مقایسه شده‌اند. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که لوجیت مدل بهتری است و عوامل مؤثر بر نحوه‌ی تصرف مسکن: درآمد دائمی ‌و جاری، سن، جنسیت، سطح تحصیلات و شاغل بودن سرپرست خانوار و بعد خانوار تعیین شده‌اند. تمرکز این مقاله بر اثر درآمد و تحصیلات سرپرست خانوار بر نوع تصرف مسکن است. نتایج مطالعه نشان می‌دهد؛ درآمد و تحصیلات سرپرست خانوار اثر مثبت و معنی‌داری بر نحوه تصرف مسکن دارند.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Effect of Houshold Head’s Income & Education on housing tenure choice in Iran’s urban areas

نویسندگان [English]

  • ali akbar gholizadeh 1
  • motahareh khaksar 2
1 associate
چکیده [English]

Housing is one of the most essential needs of a household, which it can have an important role in dimensions of macroeconomics and household, being provided in both rented and ownership types. Several factors can have effect on households choosing to buy or rent,identification of these factors and amount of effect can help to make policy and housing planning. Logit and probit models are used for this purpose and the results obtained from the estimation model are compared to determine the best model. Used data are cost and income data of urban households 93. two criteria AIC and BIC have been used to determine the best model among the two predicted models of Logit and Probit. Based on these two criteria, a model with the highest likelihood and minimum BIC and AIC is selected as the optimal model. Accordingly, by comparing two models of Logit and Probit, the logit model has the maximum likelihood and minimum BIC and AIC and is selected as the best model. for choosing the best and most significant model, we use the LR statistic between the permanent income logit models and the current income logit model and assume that the model with the highest LR statistic has less bias and the best model, but in these two models (model Permanent income logit and current income logit model) Because of the equality of degrees of freedom of both models (degree of freedom 8), there is no possibility of carrying out the LR test and LR CHI ^ 2 is used to determine the best model. By comparing the value of the LR CHI ^ 2 statistic in two permanent income logit models and the current income logit model, the permanent income logit model has a higher LR CHI-2 statistic and the model has a higher degree of certainty. Following the two permanent income logit models and the current income logit model, the logit model is selected with a permanent income and the interpretation of the model results is based on the logit model with the permanent income and the effective factors on housing tenure choice are defined: permanent and current income, age, gender and education, occupied household head and size, Based on the permanent logit model, all independent variables of the model have a positive effect on the probability of ownership of the housing and all the estimated coefficients in the model, except for the household status quotient ratio, are significant but the focus of this study is on households' income and education and The results show that income and education of the head of family has positive significant impact on housing tenure choice. The results of the marginal impact assessment show that the increase of 10 million rials in the household's permanent income increases the probability of ownership of housing by 76.1% in this research. due to the use of cross-sectional data, the explanation of the type of housing tenure has been considered. Because of the lack of policy variables in household income-expenditure data, the possibility of providing policy recommendations is limited. Nevertheless, the results can provide the basis for providing policy recommendations that may be directly or indirectly related to the results of the research. The results show that the most important and effective factor influencing the increase in the share of civil housing is permanent income; in other words, one of the main tenants of low-income groups and special groups is that they do not have permanent occupation and income, and therefore policies affecting the permanence of this job At the same time, the groups will have a decisive impact on their housework.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Tenure choice
  • Housing Economics
  • Urban area
  • Logit and Probit model
  • current and permanent Income. Education

عسگری، علی و قادری، جعفر (1382)؛ «تعیین عوامل مؤثر بر مالکیت مسکن در مناطق شهری ایران»، مجلات علوم انسانی، پژوهشی علوم انسانی دانشگاه اصفهان، شماره 15.

قلی‌زاده، علی‌اکبر (1387)؛ اقتصاد مسکن، مبانی نظری و کاربردی، کارشناسی ارشد- دانشگاه بوعلی سینا.

قلی‌زاده، علی‌اکبر (1387)؛ نظریه قیمت مسکن در ایران به زبان ساده. انتشارات نور علم.

مرکز آمار ایران (1393)؛ نتایج تفصیلی آمار گیری از هزینه و در آمد خانوارهای شهری وروستایی سال 93

Spalkova, D. and Spalek, J. (2014); “Housing Tenure Choice and Housing Expenditures in the Czech Republic”. Article in Review of European Studies, 6(1): 2014

Goodman, A. C. (1988); "An Economimetric Model of Housing Price, Permanent Income, Tenure Choice and Housing Demand”, Jornal of Urban Economics, 23: 327-353

Lineman, P; Gyourko, J. and Watcher, S. (1999); “Analysing the Relationship Among Race, Wealth and Home Ownership in America”, Jornal of Housing Economics, 8: 63-89

Arbelaez, M. A. and Steiner, R. and Beccera, A and Wills, D. (2011); “Housing tenure and Housing Demand in Colombia”. 40ANOS – (Working Paper), 54: 200-211

Mcffaden, D. (1981); “Economic Models of Probablistic Choice”, I NC.F

HADJ DJ Elloul, Mohammad. (2012); “ The determinant of housing tenure choice in France insights on the eeffect of the ethnic origin diffren t"(Universite d E vry val dEssonne. EPEE, Universite de Poitiers,CRIEF ) V(12): 215-231

Morias-Cruz (2007); “Housing demand,tenure choice andHousing policy in Brazil”. LARES (Latin American Real Estate Society), 25-26

Sullivan, A.; Sexton, T. A. and Sheffrin, S. M. (1995); “Property Taxes,Mobility and Home Ownership”. Journal of Urban Economics, 37: 107-129.

Guris, S.; Caglayan, E. and Turgut un (2011); “Estimating of Probability of Home –Ownership in Rural and Urban Areas: Logit. Probit and Gombit Model”. European Journal of Social Science, 21(3).123-137

Tang, Sh.; Feng, J. and Li, M. (2016); “Housing tenure choices of rural migrants in urban destinations: a case study of Jiangsu Province, China”. Routledge.

Skaburskis, A. (1997); “Gender Differences in Housing demand”. Urban studies, 34(2): 275-320

Whelan, S. (2007); “The Dynamic of Housing Tenure in Australia”.

Yates, J. (2000); “Is Australias Home Ownership Rates Really Stable? An Examination of Change Between 1975 and 1994”. Urban Studies, 37(2): 319-342.