MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016935839 · doi:10.24149/gwp380

Why is the Hong Kong Housing Market Unaffordable? Some Stylized Facts and Estimations

2020· article· en· W3016935839 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Charles Ka Yui Leung, Joe Cho Yiu Ng, Edward Chi Ho Tang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCity University of Hong Kong
KeywordsStylized factEconomicsInvestment (military)Consumption (sociology)WageQuarter (Canadian coin)PopulationReal gross domestic productSubsidyRentingLabour economicsMonetary economicsMacroeconomicsMarket economyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The house price in Hong Kong is well-known to be "unaffordable."This paper argues that the commonly used house price-to-income ratio may be misleading in an economy with almost half of the population living in either public rental housing or subsidized ownership.Moreover, we re-focus on the relationships between economic fundamentals and the housing market of Hong Kong.While the aggregate GDP, population and longevity continue to grow, the real wage and household income fall behind.The trend component of the real GDP growth suffers a permanent downward shift after the first quarter of 1989 (a "political scar").The trend component of real wage growth is close to zero, and the counterpart of real consumption and real investment decline steadily.Meanwhile, the trend component of the real housing rent and price display patterns that decouple from the macroeconomic variables.We also discuss the directions for future research.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.235
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.172 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHousing Market and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207