Understanding the Effects of Market Volatility on Profitability Perceptions of Housing Market Developers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drastic shifts in prices and housing market trends in recent years, representing shocks to the housing system, have led many residential developers to pause or cancel their projects. In the already heated housing markets of the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), these supply frictions can have ramifications for affordability. Our study formulates a standardized “proforma” model of the profitability of a hypothetical condominium project in the city of Toronto, Canada, scheduled between 2019 to 2023, to explore the combined effect of developers’ price expectations and market volatility on developers’ decisions. Using the proposed proforma, we first identify the key drivers of development decisions. We then evaluate the impact of the expectation formation of key factors influencing perceived development profitability, including construction costs, sales prices, and interest rates, on the financial feasibility of potential developments. The results highlight that boundedly rational expectations can cause variations in profitability perceptions and potentially reverse development decisions in volatile market conditions. Our results highlight the sources of risk and uncertainty in development decisions, facilitating the recognition of possible solutions to mitigate these risks and increase affordable housing supplies. The proposed model can also enhance the realism of decision models in agent-based representations of land and housing markets.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".