This last chapter draws some conclusions from all the studies presented in this book. A first issue concerns the structural characteristics of emergence: spatial scale, temporal spans, abrupt changes and discontinuities, threshold effects.
Moreover an attempt to put together the common findings on residential choice and gentrification is carried out by synthesizing the more relevant results in the different chapters.
Probably the most important message of this chapter is that, beside the emergence in residential mobility, which is the topic of this book, other relevant phenomena in housing market could benefit of the micro bottom up perspective pointed out in this book.
The most relevant are cycles and bubbles. These are emergent phenomena, caused by a myriad of interacting investors and buyers. The unsatisfied demand triggers increasing investments, but, as the construction takes time, investors risk to overshot the demand and prices/rents fall. Cycles and bubbles can be explained in terms of time lag between demand and supply. This assumption merits to be verified and could contradict the prevailing view of economists, by which cycles are dismissed as being the outcome of macroeconomic factors.
KeywordsReal Estate House Price Housing Market Urban Space Physical Market
- Abraham J, Hendershott PH (1996) Bubbles in metropolitan housing market. J Housing Res 7:191–207Google Scholar
- Anglin P (2006) Local dynamics and contagion in real estate market. Preliminary Draft, University of GuelphGoogle Scholar
- Bak P (1996) How nature works: the science of self-organized criticality. Copernicus, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Case KE, Shiller RJ (2003) Is there a bubble in the housing market? An analysis. Brookings papers on economic activity, vol 2003 n2 pag 299–342Google Scholar
- Diappi L, Bolchi P (2006) Gentrification waves in the inner-city of Milan: a multi agent/cellular automata model based on Smith’s rent gap theory. In: van Leeuwen JP, Timmermans HJP (eds) Innovations in design & decision support systems. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Ettema D, De Jong K, Timmermans H, Bakema A (2006) PUMA: multi-agent modeling of urban systems. In: Koomen E, Bakema A, Stillwell J, Scholten H (eds) Land use modeling. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
- Kasparova D, White M (2001) The responsiveness of house prices to macroeconomic forces: A cross-country comparison. European Journal of Housing Policy 1(3):385–416Google Scholar
- Moeckel R, Wegener M, Schwarze B (2005) Simulating land use change by modeling persons, households and dwellings. Paper presented at CUPUM conference, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Müller GR (1995) Understanding real estate’s physical and financial market cycles. Real Estate Finance 12(1):47–52, Institutional Investors, IncGoogle Scholar
- Müller GR (2002) What will the next real estate cycle look like? J Real Estate Portfolio Manag 8(2):115–125Google Scholar
- Nijkamp P, Reggiani A (1990) Interaction, evolution and Chaos in space. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
- O’Sullivan A (2003) Urban Economics. McGraw-Hill, IrwinGoogle Scholar
- Pyhrr SA, Webb JR, Born WL (1990) Analyzing real estate asset performance during periods of market disequilibrium under cyclical economic conditions. Research in real estate, vol 3. JAI Press, Greenwich, ConnGoogle Scholar
- Smith N (1979) Toward a theory of gentrification: a back to the city movement by capital, not people. APA J 45:538–548Google Scholar
- Wheaton WC (1987) The cyclic behavior of the national office market. AREUEA J 15(4):281–299Google Scholar