Temi di Discussione
(Working Papers)
Leaving home and housing prices.
The experience of Italian youth emancipation
Number
September 2011
by Francesca Modena and Concetta Rondinelli
818
Temi di discussione
(Working papers)
Leaving home and housing prices.
The experience of Italian youth emancipation
by Francesca Modena and Concetta Rondinelli
Number 818 - September 2011
The purpose of the Temi di discussione series is to promote the circulation of working
papers prepared within the Bank of Italy or presented in Bank seminars by outside
economists with the aim of stimulating comments and suggestions.
The views expressed in the articles are those of the authors and do not involve the
responsibility of the Bank.
Editorial Board: Marcello Pericoli, Silvia Magri, Luisa Carpinelli, Emanuela
Ciapanna, Daniela Marconi, Andrea Neri, Marzia Romanelli, Concetta Rondinelli,
Tiziano Ropele, Andrea Silvestrini.
Editorial Assistants: Roberto Marano, Nicoletta Olivanti.
LEAVING HOME AND HOUSING PRICES.
THE EXPERIENCE OF ITALIAN YOUTH EMANCIPATION
by Francesca Modena* and Concetta Rondinelli**
Abstract
This paper provides an explanation for the postponement of youth emancipation in
the Italian context mainly characterized by a sharp increase in both house and rent prices
together with stagnant disposable income over the past decade. We first assemble a unique
database related to the housing and rental market which is then matched with household
characteristics. We find that the probability of leaving home decreases by about half
percentage point and one percentage point for males and females, respectively, for a onestandard-deviation change in house prices. Together with property prices, local labour
markets play a prominent role in determining decisions by unemployed youths to postpone
the transition. The youngest cohort was mainly affected by the real estate market evolution
that occurred in the last decade.
JEL Classification: C41, D1, J12, R2.
Keywords: coresidence, moving out, real estate market, discrete time duration model.
Contents
1. Introduction.......................................................................................................................... 5
2. Determinants of home leaving decisions............................................................................. 7
2.1 Housing costs and youth emancipation ........................................................................ 8
3. The Italian setting ................................................................................................................ 9
3.1 Features of Italian emancipation................................................................................... 9
3.2 The evolution of the Italian housing and rental market............................................ . 11
4. Empirical methodology and data description .................................................................... 12
4.1 Empirical methodology ............................................................................................. 12
4.2 Data description........................................................................................................ . 14
5. Empirical results ................................................................................................................ 16
5.1 Baseline results ........................................................................................................... 16
5.2 Further extentions ..................................................................................................... . 18
5.3 A cohort and simulation exercise ............................................................................... 20
6. Conclusions........................................................................................................................ 22
Tables and figures................................................................................................................... 24
References .............................................................................................................................. 33
_______________________________________
* University of Trento, Department of Economics.
** Bank of Italy, Economic Outlook and Monetary Policy Department
Introduction1
1
In recent years house prices have more than doubled in the largest Italian cities (Panetta
et al. 2009), and similar developments were recorded in other European countries with the
exception of Germany. Developments in residential property prices are an important factor
in monetary policy decisions aimed at maintaining price stability in the euro area over the
medium term. The recent global crisis had its main origin in the financial and real estate
sector, so that developments in housing markets should be kept under control because of
their potential disruptive impact on financial stability and the real economy (Campbell et
al. 2009; Panetta et al. 2009; Muzzicato et al. 2008; Leamer 2007).
Changes in house prices may also affect residential investment, with non-negligible effects on credit developments. Households’ consumption attitudes (wealth effects) are thus
shaped by the dynamics in the real estate market, as they might have severe distributional
implications. Sharp increases in housing costs are found to lead to a postponement of youth
emancipation decisions (Haurin et al. 1993; Erimisch and Di Salvo 1997; Haurin et al. 1997
and Ermisch 1999), to discourage labor mobility choices (Bentolila and Dolado 1991; Cannari
et al. 2000), and to reduce the total fertility rate (Kohler et al. 2002).
The analysis of Italian youth emancipation is particularly interesting because Italians
leave home relatively late compared with other countries. The late transition to adulthood
relates to both cultural and economic factors, the latter prevailing in recent years. Economic
circumstances have changed significantly in Italy over the past two decades. Beside sluggish
growth, Italy has been characterized by various reforms of the labour market and the pension
system, and a sharp increase in both house prices and rents. Moreover, the Italian welfare
system is weak, with an exclusive role of the original family in supporting young people in
this transition (Iacovou 2002; Mencarini and Tanturri 2006). Another key issue distinguishes
1
We are grateful for their helpful comments and suggestions to: Gabriella Berloffa and seminar partici-
pants at Banca d’Italia, University of Trento and Verona, IGIER, Dondena (Bocconi University), European
Economic Association (Glasgow, 2010), Ecineq (Catania, 2011). Francesca Modena gratefully acknowledges
the financial support of Fondazione Caritro and of the Autonomous Province of Trento (OPENLOC research
project). The opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those
of the Bank of Italy.
5
the Italian context: the special features of the dwelling market. About 70% of Italian families
own their homes, while the share of renters amounts to about 20%. Additionally, the high
cost of rental housing prevents many youths from leaving the parental home and induces
a sort of selection effect which sorts young and lower income individuals out of the rental
market.
Several studies explore the determinants of Italian youth’s decision to leave the parental
home, but none of them focus on housing prices. While we do not rule out the importance
of other factors, in this paper we concentrate on the role played by house prices and rents
on coresidence decisions of young Italians. The empirical analysis is conducted using the
panel component of the survey of Italian households’ income and wealth carried out by
the Bank of Italy (SHIW). By assembling a unique database on housing and rental levels,
based on a semiannual survey conducted for a special review published by the Il Sole 24
Ore media group (Consulente Immobiliare, CI) on the largest Italian municipalities from
1989 to 2008, we match the SHIW household sample with the real estate market using the
municipality where the house (owned or rented) is located. As a major contribution of the
paper, our analysis is based on a detailed database of house and rent prices obtained from
the market value instead of the amount declared by the interviewed households. We find
that higher housing prices and rents decrease the probability of residing outside parental
home, the former for both sexes, the latter for females. Our results also point up the joint
effect of labour market conditions and housing costs on emancipation decisions: on the one
hand, an increase in house prices postpones home leaving decisions for employed youths
and unemployed females; on the other, the effect of the real estate market on high income
households is negligible. Cohort effects are at work, shaping the transition to adult age for
those born between 1976-1982.
The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 summarizes the main determinants of home
leaving decisions and reviews the literature on housing costs and youth emancipation. Section 3 underlines the main features of Italian adulthood and describes the evolution of the
real estate market; Section 4 presents the data and methodology adopted. The results are
summarized in Section 5, while Section 6 concludes.
6
2
Determinants of home leaving decisions
The transition to adulthood is a complex process in which youths who have been dependent
on parents throughout their childhood start taking definitive steps to achieve measures of
financial, residential and emotional independence, and to take on more adult roles as citizens,
spouses, parents and workers. The pattern of leaving the parental home has been proved to
vary with the welfare system (Aassve et al. 2002) and to be positively related to employment
and income for the countries of Southern Europe.
The postponement of youth emancipation has a long tradition in Italy. In 1983, 49% of
young people aged 18-34 lived in the parental home; in 2009 the percentage of co-resident
children was 59%, among them 43% were employed (Istat 2010). Most children stayed at
home until the age of 24, the percentage being not negligible for older cohorts: 59% for the
group aged 25-29 (69% for males and 49% for females), and 29% for those aged between 30
and 34 (30% for males and 20% for females) (Istat 2010). This phenomenon is common to
countries in Southern Europe and depends on both cultural aspects and the role played by the
family in these welfare systems. More recent data published by the Italian National Institute
of Statistics suggest that something has changed in the Italian context. The percentage of
people citing economic conditions as the main reason for staying at home has increased (34%
in 2003 and 40% in 2009) owing to the difficulty of finding a suitable dwelling and a job. As
a consequence, the transition to adulthood is becoming less a result of individual choices and
more a compromise between a growing desire for independence and the need for protection
against the poverty risk (Istat 2010).
The choice of leaving the parental home depends on both the cost of independent leaving
and the individual’s ability to pay that cost (Haurin et al. 1997). Among the 1990s house
and rent prices increased substantially, with major changes in the institutional Italian labour
market. The abolition of wage indexation, reform of the collective bargaining system, and
the introduction of atypical labour contracts, initiated a long period of wage moderation and
increased job insecurity: mean earnings declined over the period 1986-2004 (Rosolia 2009),
with a reduction in entry wages not off-set by a faster subsequent wage growth (Rosolia and
Torrini 2007). These changes gave rise to a segmentation of the labour market whereby an
7
increasing proportion of young workers had low incomes, inadequate social protection, and
discontinuous careers; they also contributed to an increase in the number of older workers enjoying higher wages, greater job security, and better opportunities for promotion (Brandolini
2009; Cipollone 2001). The recent economic crisis amplified the difficulties for young cohorts:
in 2009 the youth unemployment rate (15-24) was about 25% (Istat 2010), with increasing
disadvantages for the younger cohorts in receiving future pension benefits. The combination of these institutional and market changes has had serious negative consequences for the
younger generation in Italy (Berloffa and Villa 2010): young people are more dependent on
their parents’ resources and tend to postpone emancipation choices (delay in family formation and fertility decisions), with clear consequences for the present and future well-being of
society.
The postponement of the Italian youth emancipation is thus the product of both cultural
and structural changes (Facchini and Villa 2005), the latter prevailing in recent years owing
to significant losses by younger cohorts in their income levels.
2.1
Housing costs and youth emancipation
The role of labour market on home leaving in Italy has been analyzed by many studies,
which show that being employed and having a higher income increases the probability of
residing outside the parental home (Aassve et al. 2001; Aassve et al. 2002; Mazzucco et al.
2006; Mencarini and Tanturri 2006). The role of housing prices in youth emancipation has
received less attention and the results cover a wide range depending on the country studied.
Ermisch and Di Salvo (1997) showed that in the UK higher house prices can affect
the postponement of home leaving for women, but have an ambiguous effect for men; for
both, house prices discourage the formation of partnerships. In a subsequent work Ermisch
(1999) confirmed the negative effects of higher house prices on home leaving and partnership
formation and found that they also encourage returns to the parental home. A similar study
on the USA (Haurin et al. 1993) indicates that higher rental costs are associated with a
higher probability that American youths will remain in the parental home or live in a group.
Using Australian data, Haurin et al. (1997) found slightly different results: rental costs have
a significant negative impact on the decision to reside alone versus group residence, but they
8
have no significant effect on the probability of leaving the parental home.
The relation between housing costs and Italian youth emancipation has been studied
much less. Some authors include housing costs among the controls, but they focus on
different explanations for the high rates of coresidence among young Italians. Giannelli and
Monfardini (2003), for example, analyse the effects of expected earnings and local market
conditions on the behaviour of young adults with high school diplomas, and they jointly
model the decision to leave the parental home and the decision to work or study. Housing
costs are constructed as the ratio of the housing cost index (which includes rents, water,
maintenance and repair of domestic equipment) to the consumer price index, using Istat
data. They find that a 10% increase in housing costs reduces the propensity to leave the
parental home by the same proportion. Becker et al. (2010) test whether the job insecurity
of parents and children affects children’s moving-out decisions. The microeconomic analysis
for Italy, conducted using the 1995 wave of SHIW, includes the home rental index in the
province as a control variable, and it finds no impact of rental prices on young emancipation.
The aim of our paper is to bridge the gap in the literature by focusing on both house
prices and rents as key determinants of young home-leaving choices. The main feature of this
work is that it uses detailed data on the market value of house prices and rents, instead of the
amount declared by the interviewed household. We first assemble a unique database related
to market values, by using an external source, and we then match house and rent prices
with the household characteristics based on residential province. We estimate a discrete
time duration model considering the decision to emancipate in a year conditioned on a set
of observed characteristics.
3
3.1
The Italian setting
Features of the Italian emancipation
Several features characterize the transition to adulthood in Italy: (i) the link between marriage and emancipation, (ii) the beginning of working life in the parental home, (iii) the
strong incidence of home-owners, (iv) the increasing dependency of young people on their
9
parents. A very traditional sequence of events characterize the Italian setting: the end of
education, a stable job, and leaving home for marriage (or cohabitation) (Mazzucco et al.,
2006). The SHIW sample confirms this evidence, as on average 6 years occur between the
first experience of work and leaving home: there are regional differences, with Southern
young people staying at home for 4 and a half years after the first experience of work. The
formation of a new household or marriage is the main reason for leaving home, in particular
for women and older cohorts.2
Italian families prefer to own, as opposed to renting, their homes as documented by the
high proportion of home-owners. The share of home-owners has increased over time (62.7%
in 1989, 69.4% in 2008 in the SHIW), varying significantly by age, occupation status of the
household head and by the household’s wealth. The owner-occupancy rate at age 35 or less
is already high, about 48% in 2008, increasing as age grows. The rent option, instead, has
risen over the past two decades only at younger ages, 30 or less, and for employees. The
relationship between the rent option and poor economic conditions has grown stronger in
recent decades (D’Alessio and Gambacorta 2007).
Another feature of Italian emancipation is the increasing role of the family background.
In the SHIW, 2008, about 30% of home-owners had inherited the home or received it as a gift
(in 1989 the percentage was 26%).3 Paradoxically, in the absence of housing policy providing
social rented housing and/or subsidies, parental resources become one of the main channels
on which young Italians may rely to achieve independence from their parents. Since families
differ markedly in terms of their human and social capital, as well as economic resources,
this may amplify existing inequalities in children’s outcomes. Moreover, dependence on
intergenerational transfers is an additional factor hampering the transition to adulthood
and discouraging labour mobility choices.
2
3
The question is available for the period 1995-2008.
In the IDEA sample (Beginning of the adult age, 2004), about 65% of youths living outside the parental
home received parental transfers to purchase or rent a house, and this percentage increased to 72% for the
sample of youth aged 23 to 27 (Mencarini and Tanturri 2006).
10
3.2
The evolution of the Italian housing and rental market
Since the early 1990s Italian house prices and rents have exhibited substantial growth. Between 1989 and 2008 house prices more than doubled (Muzzicato et al. 2008), while the
Italian consumer price index increased by 75 percentage points. At the same time, rents
rose by 80 percentage points over the period 1998-2006 (Rondinelli and Veronese 2011), with
severe distributional implications.
The key variable with which to assess the role of house and rent prices in the youth
emancipation decision is obtained from the CI sample using various steps of aggregation.
We follow the same procedure as in Muzzicato et al. (2008) and Rondinelli and Veronese
(2011) to calculate a house and rent price index at the national level, respectively. As far as
rent is concerned, we first aggregate prices at the city level (center, semicenter and suburb)
using weights computed from the SHIW sample and then, using weights according to the
population residing in each town, we obtain national averages. Rental prices are available
since 1993 and their value back to 1989 is recovered using the rent price deflator from the
national accounts. We obtain real values by using the consumer price deflator for the total
of Italian households. The evolution of these indexes is depicted in Figure 1.
Over the period 1989-2008, real house prices increased by 54% (see Figure 1); the upward
increase in real rents was more severe since 1995. The sharp increase in housing and rental
prices was particularly marked after the introduction of the Euro. The household per-capita
disposable income dynamic was much more subdued, the cumulative growth between 19892008 being about 13 per cent.
We argue that the upward trend observed in housing and rental prices, together with uncertainty in the labour market and a higher unemployment rate, may have further postponed
emancipation for young Italians.
11
4
Empirical methodology and data description
4.1
Empirical methodology
We model the process of leaving home as a discrete time hazard model where young people
are potentially at risk of leaving home from the first year when they enter the panel onwards.
We assume that the probability that an i − th youth living in province j experiences
transition out of the parental home at time t, conditional on survival to t − 1, is given by:
∗
P r(dijt = 1|dijt−1 = 0) = P r(zijt
> 0|dijt−1 )
(1)
where dijt is a dummy variable indicating the event’s occurrence in t for individual i in
∗
province j, and zijt
is a continuous latent variable which is higher than zero if dijt = 1 and
lower or equal to zero otherwise. Additionally,
∗
zijt
= f (t) + βXijt + γPjt + ijt .
(2)
and f (t) is a non-parametrical function of age, chosen as a duration dependence, Xijt
is assumed to capture the demographics of both the youth and the household while Pjt
summarizes the price effects on youth emancipation at the province level. ijt is a residual
error term distributed as a logistic with zero mean and variance π 2 /3.
The duration dependence, f (t), describes how leaving home decisions change with the
age of the youth. It is parameterized as a step function given by:
f (t) =
35
X
φτ Dτ t .
(3)
τ =18
where

 1 if t = τ
Dtτ =
 0 otherwise
and φτ , τ = 18, ..., 35 are the corresponding coefficients.
The hazard probability conditioned on observed explanatory variables, Xijt and Pjt , can
thus be rewritten as a sequential logit model:
12
P r(dijt = 1|dijt−1 = 0, Xijt , Pjt ) ≡ hijt =
exp(zijt )
1 + exp(zijt )
(4)
where
zijt = f (t) + βXijt + γPjt .
(5)
Our sample includes all youths aged between 18 and 35 years over the period 1989-2008
living at home with at least one parent at the moment when the household was sampled. As
the youths enter the sample at the age of 18 we end up with a stock sample with delayed entry.
Jenkins (1995) proved that, even with a stock sample with left truncation, the likelihood
of a single spell discrete time duration model reduces to a standard likelihood function for
a binary regression model. At the age of 35 young individuals may 1) have experienced
transition out of the parental home (the likelihood contribution for each completed spell
is given by the discrete time density function); 2) be still living with their parents (the
likelihood contribution for a censored spell is given by the discrete time survivor function).
The likelihood for the whole sample can be written as:
logL =
n X
J X
T
X
(zijt log hijt + (1 − zijt ) log(1 − hijt )).
(6)
i=1 j=1 t=1
where zijt is the dependent variable and the data have been organized into person period
format, i.e. one record for each year that a person is at risk of transition out of the parental
home.
In the models considered so far, all differences between individuals are assumed to be
captured by observed explanatory variables. However, Nicoletti and Rondinelli (2010) proved
that ignoring the unobserved heterogeneity in sequential logit models causes the covariate
coefficients to be estimated up to a scale factor; this rescaling factor is found to be close to
one in presence of time varying (Pij ) observed covariates.
The set of regressors that we use to model home leaving decisions are derived from
different sources and are grouped to account for demographic, household, local, economic
and cultural conditions. Section 4.2 describes the data sources used in the paper and provides
some descriptive statistics.
13
4.2
Data description
To analyze the economic behaviour of young people in leaving the parental home we use
the biannual panel version of the Bank of Italy’s Survey on Household Income and Wealth
(1989-2008), whose sample is composed of around 8,000 households per wave drawn from
the registry office records of 330 municipalities. Data are collected by means of professional
interviews and are representative of the universe of Italian dwellings, either owned or rented.
We use the SHIW database to infer the demographic characteristics of the individual and
the household. The estimates of the value of housing stock obtained from SHIW for the
sub-sample of the home owners are a key element in measuring Italian households’ wealth
(see Cannari and Faiella, 2008). Despite this, it has been proved (Rondinelli and Veronese,
2011) that the estimated rent price measure based on the SHIW sample for a given year
is a mixture of new and renewed contracts. As the dynamics of the new rent contract are
expected to be more important for those individuals considering whether or not to change
their residence, we resort to a market price value for owners and renters from the Consulente
Immobiliare (CI).
The CI sample has been widely used to study both house (see Muzzicato et al. 2008) and
rental (Rondinelli and Veronese, 2011) price developments. In each sampled town, CI provides estimates of the average house and rent level (per square meter) of a typical apartment
located in three city areas: center, semi-center and suburbs. Houses are further distinguished
into newly built and restructured, while rents into new and renewed contracts, the latter defined as contracts negotiated with previously sitting tenants upon contract expiration. The
CI records house and rent prices at the provincial level since 1980 and 1993 respectively, and
it provides the market value for both housing and rental dwellings. House and rent prices
from the CI are then matched to each young individual of the SHIW sample on the basis of
the province of residence, year and location of the house.
The price that a youth faces when experiencing the transition out of home is expressed
in real terms and as a mean of the three quotations for center, semi-center and suburb of the
province where the youth lives (Pjt ). Our results are not compromised by this assumption
because only 1.1% per year of the youths, over total residents, aged 15 to 34 (in the period
14
2000-2005) changed their original region (Istat). This percentage amounts to 1.3%(0.7%) for
those in the age class 25-34 (15-24). Slightly higher rates (by 0.3-0.4) emerge for those with
higher education.
We try to capture the local economic conditions by constructing an indicator for the
labour and the credit market. The former is calculated by using the unemployment rate
by age, sex, education and geographical area, as derived from the official statistics of the
National Institute of Statistics. Using the Bank of Italy data (Base informativa pubblica at
August 2010), the latter is obtained as the ratio between the amount of credit received every
year by the households residing in a certain Italian region and the gross domestic product
for the same year and region.
Cultural aspects are captured by using both the World Values Survey (2005-06 wave) and
the European Values Study (waves 1999 and 1990) to account for differences in social values
across time and Italian regions (see also Chiuri and Del Boca, 2008, 2010). Our indicator
is obtained at macro-area level (North-East, North-West, Center, South, Islands) and aims
at capturing the importance that parents give to the independence of their children.4 As
a proxy for the local marriage market we use the regional sex ratio computed as the ratio
between female population and total population of the same cohort and living in the same
region.5
We study Italian youth emancipation from 1989 to 2008, where the SHIW figures for
two non-consecutive years are obtained by interpolation. The sample is restricted to include
those aged between 18 and 35 years over the studied period, living at home with at least one
parent at the moment of the interview.6
Every year about 16% of the SHIW sample is composed of young people aged between 18
and 35; the attrition for the panel dimension of the survey is about 50% over two consecutive
4
More precisely households were asked ”Here is a list of qualities that children can be encouraged to learn
at home. Which, if any, do you consider to be really important?”. Apart from citing tolerance and respect
for other people, imagination, hard work, determination, perseverance, feeling of responsibility as possible
answers, the questionnaire included independence as a value that children can be encouraged to learn at
home.
5
If the youth is a woman, the sex ratio is calculated as male population over total population.
6
Unfortunately the survey does not provide information about those who had already left the house.
15
years. Table 1 reports descriptive statistics for young people. Overall there are 4,761 (3,788)
observations in the male (female) sample (19,662 and 14,684 person period observations).
About 91% (88%) of men (women) aged 18-35 in the SHIW live with their parents; the
proportion is higher than the one recorded in the ECHP because in the SHIW sample we
condition on children with at least one parent alive. The average age is about 24, and half of
the sample is aged less than 23. 52% (64%) of males (females) aged 18-35 are not employed,
with an equal percentage of students and non-students for males; the proportion of students
is higher for women. More than half of the young people have completed high school, and
37% (25% for females) reported low education.
The average age of the household head7 is about 50, and 24% of heads are out of the
labour force. Average real wealth of the household of origin is 0.18 million Euros (Table 1).
Mean real house prices per square meter are 1.59 and 1.57 thousand Euros for males and
females respectively; annual rents are on average 0.07 thousand Euros per square meter for
both groups.
5
Empirical results
5.1
Baseline results
Table 2 reports the results for the likelihood of leaving parental home. We estimate separate
models for males and females and explore the effects of housing prices and rents on home
leaving decisions. As Italian students are more likely to reside with their parents (Mazzucco
et al., 2006) we split the sample to include non-students only (Tables 3-5).
House and rent prices are found to strongly affect the transition to adulthood. Our
results show the crucial role played by housing costs in determining young adults’ residential
choices: higher housing prices and rents decrease the probability of residing out of parental
home for both males and females, the latter for the female sample only. In order better to
grasp the size of the effect of the real estate market on co-residence choices, we compute
the change in the probability of leaving home induced by a one-standard-deviation (SD)
7
The household head is defined as the person primarily responsible for the household economic budget.
16
change in real house prices and real rents (Table 3). A one-SD change in real house prices
is equal to 730e and it would induce a reduction of 0.45 (1.18) percentage points in the
male (female) probability of moving out, from 4.1% (5.2%) to 3.7% (4.0%).8 The effect of
a one-SD change of real rents (30e per square meter) for females is in line with the one
calculated for house prices (there is no significant effect for males), amounting to slightly
more than 1 percentage point. Given a mean annual rent of about 0.07 thousand Euros per
square meter, the increase in price due to an increase in the size of the apartment from 30
to 50 square meters would decrease the probability of leaving the parental home by slightly
more than one-third of a percentage point (to 4.8%).
The strong positive impact of age on the youth emancipation is recovered from the
duration dependence depicted in Figure 2. We compute the hazard rates only for those
individuals that could potentially be observed for the entire period 18-35 (i.e. people born
between 1971 and 1973). There is an inverted U-shaped relation between the probability of
leaving parental home and age, with a maximum at 31: young people not experiencing the
transition before their 30s have a low probability of emancipating because the hazard rate
at the age of 35 is equal to the 24 age value (0.06 for males and 0.07 for females). Women
are more likely to leave home than men. Geographical differences are at play, especially for
females: at the age of 31 the hazard rate of women living in the North is 5 percentage points
higher than in the South. The subsequent downward trend is more marked in the North,
thus reducing the regional gap. We observe geographical differences for males only at older
ages, with young people in the North at a higher risk of leaving home.
The family background variables matter as well (Table 2): the number of household
members, other than the individual and parents, has a positive and significant effect for
females (in line with Mencarini and Tanturri 2006; Giannelli and Monfardini 2003). The
number of income-earners has no effect. Women with higher real wealth are less likely to
leave home, while financial wealth seems to positively affect home leaving transition for
males only. The estimated coefficients for the human capital of the household head (in
most cases the father) are not significantly different from zero, for both males and females.
As regard household head working status, we find only a small positive effect of being an
8
All other variables are at their mean.
17
employee for males. The presence of the father only has a strong negative impact on the
probability of leaving home for women aged between 25 and 35 (we interacted this variable
with cohort dummies). This suggests that a young woman may stay at home to take care
of her father when the mother is absent. Evidence for the importance of cultural aspects
for females emerges from Table 2. Living in regions with a high percentage of households
citing independence as a social value increases the probability of leaving the parental home.
Similarly, the ratio between the amount of credit received by the households corrected by
the gross domestic product of the region has a positive effect for females, highlighting the
importance of the credit market for youth emancipation.
Occupational status, and in particular the condition of not being employed (either unemployed or out of the labour force) is a key determinant variable impacting on the youth
emancipation decision (Table 2). Consistently with the previous literature, the condition of
being not employed impacts on the probability of leaving home; the employment type, i.e.
payroll employees or self-employed, is not relevant. As noted by Aassve et al. (2002), the
labour market effect, i.e. being employed or not, is particularly strong in the Italian setting,
embodied with a weak welfare system supporting young adults. Differentiating between student and other non working people, i.e. those looking for a job, we find that the negative
effect of the former is, in absolute values, much higher than that of the latter. This reflects
a typical feature of the Italian context whereby the youngest people live with their parents
while studying (Giannelli and Monfardini 2003; Mazzucco et al. 2006). As a consequence,
youths with high educations are more likely to leave the parental home.
5.2
Further extensions
Because education is one of the main reasons for people to stay at home (as shown in
Table 2), we should expect students to behave differently. Whereas housing prices have
no impact on male students, a one-SD change in house prices and rents for non-students
significantly reduces their probability of leaving the parental home by about two-thirds of
a percentage point and half a percentage point, from 5.3% to 4.6% and 4.8% respectively
(see Table 3). House and rent prices matter for both student and non-student females, the
marginal effect being higher for the latter: a one-SD change in house prices leads to a 0.6 and
18
1.6 percentage points reduction for students and non-students respectively (from 2.1% and
7.7%); a similar increase in rents reduces the probability by 0.5 and 1.4 percentage points for
the two categories (to 1.6% and 6.3%). Our results confirm that emancipation is subsequent
to the end of education, and suggest that this sequence is more rigid for men: young men
do not leave the parental home while they are studying irrespectively of house prices.
Given the different behaviour between students and non-students, we conduct a further
robustness check for our results focusing on the sample of non-students (see Tables 4 and 5).
We test whether the effect of housing costs varies across segment of populations, impacting
particularly on lower-income and non-employed young people. Table 4 reports the results
for the interactions between house (and rent) prices and the dummies for being employed or
otherwise (unemployed or out of the labor force). Housing costs have a significant impact for
both groups of females with a higher effect for not employed (and not student) individuals
(a one-SD change in house prices decreases the probability of 7.7% by one percentage point
when employed, 2.5 percentage point when not employed). House prices matter only for
employed males, while rents do for young females not employed. These results support the
idea that a very low proportion of males would quit the parental home when not employed;
some evidence of the role of the marriage market emerges for unemployed women.
The effects of housing costs interacted with quartiles of household income are shown in
Table 5. Housing costs have an impact on male (not student) decisions for all low income
levels but the highest one: the effect of a one-SD change in house prices amounts to 1.7 percentage points for the first quartile and to 1.0 for the second and third quartiles, respectively
(from 5.3% to 3.6% and 4.3%). Rents only have an effect for low and high income levels for
the sample of non-student males with a slightly smaller effect than house prices (see Table
5). House prices and rents have no impact for non-student women whose household income
is high and very high. An increase in housing prices induces a larger decrease for medium
income households than for the poorest ones: a one-SD change in house prices reduces the
probability by 1.7 and 5 percentage points for the first and the second household income
quartiles, respectively (to 6.0% and 2.7%). The coefficient of rents for poor females is not
statistically different from zero.
Dummies for household income quartiles are not statistically significant. We would have
19
expected a stronger impact of household income given the high incidence of intra-household
transfers on youth emancipation in Italy due to mortgage market imperfections and the
absence of public housing policy. As pointed out by Aassve et al. (2002), the weakness
of the effect may be caused by the double role of family income on leaving home: on the
one hand, high income households may give financial support to youths and thus facilitate
their emancipation; on the other, parents may have a preference for co-habitation and thus
transfer resources to the children living with them (Manacorda and Moretti 2006).
One possible shortcoming of our analysis is that Pjt may capture both time-varying
differences in house prices and structural differences across cities that do not vary with time.
In order to separate these two effects we include city fixed effects among the controls. Results
strengthen the role of the real estate market on youth emancipation, since marginal effects
of house prices and rents increase.9
5.3
A cohort and simulation exercise
We present the evolution of hazards by age for cohorts of young people (non-students). Three
cohorts were constructed: individuals born between 1965 and 1970 (which will be named
cohort 1), 1971-1975 (cohort 2), 1976-1982 (cohort 3). As the econometric analysis was
limited to youths aged 18-35 from 1989 to 2008 some cohort restrictions apply: age 22-35
for cohort 1, age 18-35 for cohort 2, and age 18-29 for cohort 3 (considering the median age
of the cohort). The severe economic crisis at the beginning of the 1990s affected cohorts 1
and 2 at the age of 26 and 20 respectively. In 1993 Italian GDP decreased by about 1%.
Unemployment rates for the age groups 15-24 and 25-34 were 0.24 and 0.09 respectively
in 1991 and they increased to 0.30 and 0.12 in 1993; at the same time employment rates
decreased from 0.31 to 0.28 for the 15-24 group, and from 0.69 to 0.65 for people aged 2534 (see also Section 2). Cohorts 2 and 3 entered adulthood in a period of labour market
reforms (the introduction of the so called ”parasubordinati” in 1996 and the Biagi law in
2003), facing some of the difficulties of the recent global crisis, in terms of an upward increase
in both house prices and the unemployment rate.
9
Marginal effects of house prices (rents) are -0.02 (-0.32) and -0.04 (-0.62) for male and female respectively,
to be compared with those reported in Table 2.
20
As Figure 3 shows, the hazard rate increases with age: the probability of leaving the
parental home for male is slightly higher for cohort 1 between 22 and 25 and it is lower for
cohort 3 after 25 years of age. Cohort 2, which behaves like cohort 3 until the age of 25, has
a profile very close to cohort 1 after that age. Cohort 2 of females experienced the highest
upward increase in the hazard rate, with a pace of growth very similar to that of cohort 3
until 27. Women born between 1965 and 1970 are at a higher risk of leaving home than
other women at an early age, but the hazard is fairly stable over time, thus leading to a
lower probability to emancipate than that of cohort 2 after the age of 29.
We now focus on the relevant years in which young people are expected to leave home
(22-29), and compare the evolution of hazards with that of real house prices. The first
striking feature of Figure 5 is that cohort 2 exhibits growth rates higher than these of other
cohorts, and they face a real house price that is fairly stable. By contrast, the oldest and
the youngest cohorts faced a sharp increase in house prices prior to the two recent economic
crises. These patterns are exhibited by both males and females: the overall growth rates of
male (female) hazards are 0.7 (0.2), 1.4 (0.6) and 0.6 (0.2) for cohorts 1, 2 and 3 respectively.
Overall, those born between 1965-1970 and 1976-1982 were mainly penalized by the economic
challenges they faced during their adulthood.
To emphasize differences among sub-groups, we simulated some results so that the dimension of our estimated parameters may be realized. A clear pattern emerges when considering
the timing of the home-leaving decision according to the youth’s residence, city center or
suburbs: the transition out of the parental home is faster for those living in suburbs than
for young people resident in the center. The gap widens at older ages.
In order to highlight the role of house prices in the transition out of the parental home for
cohort 3, we simulated their survival functions at the prices faced by cohort 2 for a central
location of the house (top panel of Figure 5) and a suburban one (bottom panel of the same
Figure). Cohort 3 was expected to leave home in the years 2001-2008, while cohort 2 in 19952002. In these periods, mean real house prices were respectively 2012 (1170) e and 1583
(955) e per square meter in the center (suburbs). If cohort 3 faced the same house prices
as cohort 2, this would have increased their likelihood to emancipate. In particular, Figure
5 shows that even a decrease in house levels would have implied an identical probability of
21
staying at home for youths aged under 24. There are sizeable differences in the home leaving
process at adult ages, meaning that if house prices had decreased to the mean average of
1995-2002, the likelihood of a youth leaving the parental home would have increased by 5
percentage points in the center and 7 percentage points in the suburbs at the age of 29.
Overall, the appreciation of the real estate market in the past decade, together with
structural reforms of the labour market, have deteriorated the economic conditions of youths
born between 1976-1982.
6
Conclusions
This paper investigates the role of house and rent prices in explaining the high rate of young
Italians living with their parents. Our work is the first study to concentrate on this issue in
Italy, and the main contribution is that we have based our analysis on detailed information
about the market value of house prices and rents. We have used two different data sets,
one to infer the demographic characteristics of the household and the other to recover house
and rent prices based on the dwelling market value. House prices have been found to be
negatively correlated with the youth emancipation for both males and females: a one-SD
change in real house prices would induce a reduction of 0.45 and 1.18 percentage points in the
probability of moving out for males and females, from 4.1% to 3.7% and from 5.2% to 4.0%,
respectively. Rents strongly affect females’ decisions and have little impact on non-student
males. The magnitude, however, exhibits a sex composition with higher marginal effects for
women.
Youth emancipation has been found to be subsequent to the end of education, suggesting
a more rigid sequence for men: young men do not leave the parental home while they
are studying, regardless of house prices. Among non-student people, an increase in house
prices postpones home-leaving decisions for employed males and for unemployed females
(rents matter only for the latter): men tend to begin their working lives in the parental
home, regardless of house prices; there is evidence of the role of the marriage market for
unemployed females. As expected, the impact of the real estate market for high income
households is negligible. House and rent prices force medium-income females (non-student)
22
to postpone more than poor ones.
A cohort analysis has revealed that, owing to structural reforms of the labour market and
the sharp increase in house and rent prices at the beginning of the last decade, the economic
conditions of individuals born between 1976-1982 deteriorated when they were supposed
to enter adulthood. On the other hand, the cohort 1971-1975 faced a flat profile of house
and rent prices between 22 and 29, the age at higher risk of leaving the parental home. A
simulation exercise proved that at the age of 29 the youngest cohort would have increased
the propensity to leave parental home by about 6 percentage points if it had faced the same
house prices as the cohort born in the years 1971-1975.
Females behave quite differently from men: cultural factors prove to be significant predictors of the propensity to live with parents, reflecting the traditional Italian cultural setting
where women are primarily responsible for childcare and other nonmarket services, because
the home-leaving decision is strongly and negatively affected by the presence of the father
only for women aged 25-35. Living in regions with a high percentage of households citing
independence as a social value increases the probability of residing out of the parental home;
the credit market has also been found have a non-negligible impact on female emancipation.
Policies aimed at reducing the cost of housing would reduce the probability of co-residing
with parents, the effect being higher if they are targeted on young unemployed people and
on those youths whose parental income is medium or low. Because the housing shortage,
more marked in the last decade especially in regard to the cheapest dwellings, and the recent
global crisis have reduced both the probability of a youth being employed and the household
income, larger investments are needed in social-housing projects.
23
Table 1: Descriptive Statistics
Male
Variable
Female
Obs.
Mean
Std. Dev.
Obs
Mean
Std. Dev.
19,662
0.094
0.29
14,648
0.12
0.32
Age (18-24)
19,662
0.56
0.50
14,648
0.61
0.49
Age (25-29)
19,662
0.29
0.45
14,648
0.27
0.44
Age (30-35)
19,662
0.15
0.36
14,648
0.12
0.33
Payroll Employee
19,662
0.37
0.48
14,648
0.30
0.46
Self employed
19,662
0.11
0.31
14,648
0.05
0.23
Inactive (unemployed, students and out of the labour force)
19,662
0.52
0.50
14,648
0.64
0.48
Student
19,662
0.26
0.44
14,648
0.36
0.48
Inactive not student
19,662
0.26
0.44
14,648
0.29
0.45
None, elementary and middle school education
19,662
0.37
0.48
14,648
0.25
0.44
High school (diploma)
19,662
0.55
0.50
14,648
0.64
0.48
Bachelor’s degree and beyond
19,662
0.08
0.27
14,648
0.11
0.31
No. Component except self and parents
19,662
1.18
1.03
14,648
1.18
1.01
No. Perceivers
19,662
2.34
0.99
14,648
2.24
0.98
HH’s age
19,662
48.45
12.76
14,648
50.42
11.58
HH: none and elementary education
19,662
0.25
0.43
14,648
0.27
0.45
HH: middle school
19,662
0.34
0.47
14,648
0.28
0.45
HH: high school
19,662
0.32
0.47
14,648
0.36
0.48
HH: bachelor’s degree and beyond
19,662
0.09
0.28
14,648
0.09
0.28
HH: payroll employee
19,662
0.55
0.50
14,648
0.54
0.50
HH: self employed
19,662
0.21
0.41
14,648
0.21
0.41
HH: inactive
19,662
0.24
0.43
14,648
0.24
0.43
Only father
19,662
0.03
0.18
14,648
0.03
0.17
Only mother
19,662
0.13
0.34
14,648
0.10
0.31
Father and mother
19,662
0.84
0.37
14,648
0.87
0.34
North
19,662
0.39
0.49
14,648
0.38
0.49
Center
19,662
0.18
0.38
14,648
0.17
0.37
South/Isles
19,662
0.43
0.50
14,648
0.45
0.50
Outcome
Out of parental home
Individual’s characteristics
Household’s characteristics
Real wealth (million e)
19,662
0.18
0.31
14,648
0.18
0.31
Financial wealth (million e)
19,662
0.02
0.06
14,648
0.02
0.06
19,662
1.59
0.74
14,648
1.57
0.72
Provincial characteristics
Real house prices (m2 - thousand e)
Real rent prices
(m2
- thousand e)
19,662
0.07
0.03
14,648
0.07
0.03
Sex ratio
19,662
0.49
0.01
14,648
0.51
0.01
Independence
19,662
21.39
5.86
14,648
21.18
5.94
Loan/Value added
19,662
5.17
0.70
14,648
5.14
0.71
Unemployment rate
19,662
25.23
12.59
14,648
25.79
12.70
Source: Auhtor’s calculation from the SHIW and national statistics. Sample weights included. Youth people between 18 and 35 included in
the sample. HH= Household head. Only father(mother) is a dummy variable taking value one if the youth is living with one parent only. Father
and mother is a dummy variable taking value one if both parents are leaving with the young people.
24
Table 2: Estimates for the probability of leaving parental home
VARIABLES
House prices
(1)
male
-0.00616**
(0.00311)
Rent prices
High school diploma (middle school)
Bachelor’s degree and beyond
Not employed not student
Student
Real wealth
Financial wealth
No. components ex.parents and youth
No. perceivers
HH’s age
HH middle school
HH high school
HH bachelor’s degree
HH employee
HH self employed
Only father
(2)
male
0.00218
(0.00484)
0.0169*
(0.00893)
-0.00920*
(0.00482)
-0.0259***
(0.00507)
0.0001
(0.00393)
0.0494***
(0.0189)
-0.000195
(0.00219)
0.00271
(0.00248)
0.0001
(0.000189)
0.00135
(0.00515)
0.00154
(0.00542)
0.00230
(0.00761)
0.0104*
(0.00544)
-0.000188
(0.00620)
-0.00596
(0.00923)
-0.0828
(0.0749)
0.00236
(0.00485)
0.0170*
(0.00898)
-0.00903*
(0.00485)
-0.0258***
(0.00511)
-0.000157
(0.00409)
0.0487**
(0.0190)
-0.000175
(0.00221)
0.00286
(0.00249)
0.0001
(0.000190)
0.00116
(0.00517)
0.00127
(0.00545)
0.00206
(0.00764)
0.0105*
(0.00544)
-5.80e-05
(0.00622)
-0.00650
(0.00915)
Loan/Value added
Person period Obs.
Pseudo R2
Percentage correctly classified:
0.00444
(0.00639)
0.0245**
(0.0113)
-0.0125**
(0.00616)
-0.0429***
(0.00626)
-0.0223**
(0.0113)
0.0152
(0.0364)
0.00597**
(0.00279)
-0.000197
(0.00325)
-0.0001
(0.000246)
0.00114
(0.00669)
-0.00955
(0.00703)
-0.00297
(0.00936)
0.00494
(0.00674)
0.0103
(0.00877)
-0.362***
(0.117)
0.00392
(0.00642)
0.0241**
(0.0112)
-0.0127**
(0.00616)
-0.0429***
(0.00627)
-0.0226**
(0.0114)
0.0191
(0.0360)
0.00602**
(0.00281)
0.000191
(0.00323)
-0.0001
(0.000246)
0.000932
(0.00669)
-0.0101
(0.00703)
-0.00366
(0.00929)
0.00545
(0.00672)
0.0115
(0.00888)
0.0885
(0.0589)
-0.0395***
(0.00595)
0.428
(0.520)
0.00133**
(0.000527)
0.0104**
(0.00408)
14,648
0.1
94%
0.455
(0.375)
0.000679*
(0.000359)
0.00256
(0.00292)
0.429
(0.375)
0.000579
(0.000357)
0.00166
(0.00299)
0.0871
(0.0583)
-0.0391***
(0.00598)
0.426
(0.515)
0.00144***
(0.000530)
0.0109***
(0.00400)
19,662
0.1
95%
19,662
0.1
95%
14,648
0.1
94%
Only father * age (25-35)
Independence
(4)
female
-0.0161***
(0.00429)
Only father * age (18-24)
Sex ratio
(3)
female
N otes: Marginal effects for the probability of leaving home. HH= Household head. A weighed discrete time duration model with single spell is
assumed. Duration dependence not reported, but depicted in Figure 2. The sample includes all people aged between 18 and 35. Robust standard
errors in parentheses. Real house and rent prices in thousand e. *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1.
25
Table 3: Housing prices and end of education
One-SD change
All
Person period obs.
Observations
Students
Person period obs.
Observations
Not students
Person period obs.
Observations
Male
House price
-0.45**
19,662
4,761
0.12
5,557
1,384
-0.73**
14,105
3,377
Female
House price
Rent
-1.18***
-1.06***
14,648
3,788
-0.57***
-0.48**
5,463
1,437
-1.62***
-1.44**
9,185
2,351
Rent
-0.24
0.40**
-0.54*
N otes: Effect of a one-SD change in house prices and rents on the probability of leaving home (percentage points). A weighed discrete time
duration model with single spell is assumed. The sample includes all people aged between 18 and 35. Regressors listed in Table 2 included. Real
house and rent prices in thousand e. *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1.
Table 4: Housing prices and occupational status
VARIABLES
Male
House prices × employed
House prices × not employed
Rent prices × employed
Rents prices × not employed
Duration dependence
Education
Occupation
No. components ex.parents and youth
No. perceivers
Wealth
HH’s variable (age, education, occupation)
Marriage market
Credit market
Cultural variables (independence)
Person period obs.
Observations
One-SD change
Female
-0.72*
-0.76
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
-1.12*
-2.54***
-0.49
-0.69
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
14,105
3,377
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
-0.94
-2.32***
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
9,185
2,351
N ote: Effect of a one-SD change in house prices and rents on the probability of leaving home (percentage points). HH= Household head. A
weighed discrete time duration model with single spell is assumed. The sample includes all non student male and female aged between 18 and 35.
Real house and rent prices in thousand e. *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1.
26
Table 5: Housing prices and household income
VARIABLES
Male
House prices × low HI
House prices × medium HI
House prices × high HI
House prices × very high HI
Rent prices × low HI
Rent prices × medium HI
Rent prices × high HI
Rent prices × very high HI
Duration dependence
Education
Occupation
Household income (quartiles)
No. components ex.parents and youth
No. perceivers
Wealth
HH’s variable (age, education, occupation)
Marriage market
Credit market
Cultural variables (independence)
Person period obs.
Observations
One-SD change
Female
-1.66**
-1.04*
-1.02**
-0.10
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
-1.74**
-4.94***
-0.89
-0.36
-1.16*
-0.75
-0.75*
-0.12
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
14,105
3,377
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
-1.16
-5.64***
-0.98
0.26
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
9,185
2,351
N ote: Effect of a one-SD change in house prices and rents on the probability of leaving home (percentage points). HH= Household head. A
weighed discrete time duration model with single spell is assumed. The sample includes all non student male and female aged between 18 and 35.
Robust standard errors in parentheses. Real house and rent prices in thousand e. *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1.
27
Figure 1: Real house and rent prices and per-capita disposable income
190
170
150
130
110
90
70
1989
1991
1993
1995
House Prices
1997
1999
Rent Prices
2001
2003
2005
2007
Disposable Income
N otes: Our calculation from CI, national account and Bank of Italy. Annual data; indexes: 1995= 100
28
Figure 2: Age effect and leaving home
0.20
Hazard
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
32
34
Age
Male All
Male North
Male South
0.20
Hazard
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
Age
Female All
Female North
Female South
N otes: Duration dependence for male and female, by geographical area. Youths born between 1971-73 included in the
sample.
29
Figure 3: Simulated hazard by cohorts
Male
0.14
0.12
Hazard
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
Age
Cohort 1 (1965-1970)
Cohort 2 (1971-1975)
Cohort 3 (1976-1982)
Female
0.14
0.12
Hazard
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
18
19
20
21 22
23 24
25
26
27
28 29
30
31
32
33
34
Age
Cohort 1 (1965-1970)
Cohort 2 (1971-1975)
N otes: Predicted hazard rates from SHIW for male and female.
30
Cohort 3 (1976-1982)
35
Figure 4: Simulated hazard by cohorts for youths.
Male (22-29)
0.14
90
0.12
Hazard
70
0.08
0.06
60
House prices
80
0.10
0.04
50
0.02
0.00
19
89
19
90
19
91
19
92
19
93
19
94
19
95
19
96
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
40
Cohort 1 (1965-1970)
Cohort 2 (1971-1975)
Cohort 3 (1976-1982)
Real house prices
Female (22-29)
0.14
90
0.12
80
70
0.08
0.06
60
House prices
Hazard
0.10
0.04
50
0.02
40
19
89
19
90
19
91
19
92
19
93
19
94
19
95
19
96
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
0.00
Cohort 1 (1965-1970)
Cohort 2 (1971-1975)
Cohort 3 (1976-1982)
Real house prices
N otes: Predicted hazard rates from SHIW. Youths aged from 22 to 29 included in the sample. CI’s house prices.
31
Figure 5: Predicted survival functions for center and suburb
1.00
0.95
Survival
0.90
0.85
0.80
0.75
Cohort 3 prices
0.70
18
19
20
21
22
23
Cohort 2 prices
24
25
26
27
28
29
27
28
29
a) Center
1.00
0.95
Survival
0.90
0.85
0.80
0.75
0.70
Cohort 3 prices
0.65
18
19
20
21
22
23
Cohort 2 prices
24
25
26
b) Suburb
N otes: Predicted survival functions from SHIW. Cohort 3 (1976-1982) included in the sample.
32
References
Aassve A., Billari F.C., Ongaro F. (2001) The impact of income and employment status on leaving
home: Evidence from the Italian ECHP sample, LABOUR, 15, 3, 501–529.
Aassve A., Billari F.C. , Ongaro F. (2002) Leaving home: a comparative analysis of ECHP data,
Journal of European Social Policy, 12, 4, 259–275.
Becker S.O., Bentolila S., Fernandes A. , Ichino A. (2010) Youth emancipation and perceived job
insecurity of parents and children, Journal of Population Economics, 23, 1175–1199.
Bentolila S., Dolado J.J. (1991) Mismatch and internal migration in Spain, 1962-1986, in: Mismatch
and Labour Mobility, Padoa Schioppa F., ed., Cambridge University Press, New York, 182–234.
Berloffa G., Villa P. (2010) Differences in equivalent income across cohorts of households: evidence
from Italy, Review of Income and Wealth, 56, 693–714.
Brandolini A. (2009) Dimensioni della disuguaglianza in Italia: povertà, salute, abitazione, in:
L’evoluzione recente della distribuzione del reddito in Italia, Brandolini A. S.C., Schizzerotto A.,
eds., Il Mulino, Bologna.
Campbell S.D., Davis M.A., Gallin J., Martin R.F. (2009) What moves housing markets: A variance
decomposition of the rent-price ratio, Journal of Urban Economics, 66, 2, 90–102.
Cannari L. , Faiella I. (2008) House prices and housing wealth in Italy, in: Household Wealth in
Italy, Banca d’Italia (ed.), Rome, 91–110.
Cannari L., Nucci F., Sestito P. (2000) Geographic labour mobility and the cost of housing: evidence
from Italy, Applied Economics, 32, 1899–1906.
Chiuri M.C., Del Boca D. (2008) Household membership decisions of adult children: Does gender
and institutions matter?, Technical report.
Chiuri M.C. , Del Boca D. (2010) Home-leaving decisions of daughters and sons, IZA Discussion
Papers 4867, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
Cipollone P. (2001) Is the Italian labour market segmented?, Temi di discussione (Economic working
papers) 400, Bank of Italy, Economic Research Department.
D’Alessio G., Gambacorta R. (2007) Home affordability in Italy, Questioni di Economia e Finanza
(Occasional Papers) 9, Bank of Italy, Economic Research Department.
Ermisch J. (1999) Prices, parents, and young people’s household formation, Journal of Urban
Economics, 45, 1, 47–71.
33
Ermisch J., Di Salvo P. (1997) The economic determinants of young people’s household formation,
Economica, 64, 256, 627–44.
Facchini C. , Villa P. (2005) La lenta transizione alla vita adulta in Italia, in: Diventare adulti.
Vincoli economici e strategie familiari , Facchini C., ed., Guerini, Milano, 21–143.
Giannelli G.C., Monfardini C. (2003) Joint decisions on household membership and human capital
accumulation of youths. The role of expected earnings and local markets, Journal of Population
Economics, 16, 2, 265–285.
Haurin D.R., Hendershott P.H., Kim D. (1993) The impact of real rents and wages on household
formation, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 75, 2, 284–93.
Haurin J., Haurin D., Hendershott P., Bourassa S. (1997) Home or alone: The costs of independent
living for youth, Social Science Research, 26, 135–152.
Iacovou M. (2002) Regional differences in the transition to adulthood, Annals of Aapss, 580, 40–68.
ISTAT (2010) Rapporto annuale, Technical report.
Jenkins S.P. (1995) Easy estimation methods for discrete-time duration models, Oxford Bulletin of
Economics and Statistics, 57, 1, 129–38.
Kohler H., Billari F.C., Ortega J.A. (2002) The emergence of Lowest-Low fertility in Europe during
the 1990s, Population and Development Review , 28, 4, 641–680.
Leamer E. (2007) Housing and the business cycle, presented at ”Jackson Hole Symposium”, Federal
Reserve Bank, Kansas City.
Manacorda M. , Moretti E. (2006) Why do most Italian young men live with their parents?
Intergenerational transfers and household structure, Journal of the European Economic Association, 4, 4, 800–829.
Mazzucco S., Mencarini L., Rettaroli R. (2006) Similarities and differences between two cohorts of
young adults in italy: Results of a cati survey on transition to adulthood, Demographic Research,
15, 105–146.
Mencarini L. , Tanturri M. (2006) Una casa per diventare grandi. I giovani italiani, l’autonomia
abitativa e il ruolo della famiglia d’origine, Polis, 20, 3, 405–430.
Muzzicato S., Sabbatini R., Zollino F. (2008) Prices of residential property in Italy: constructing
a new indicator, Questioni di Economia e Finanza 17, Banca d’Italia.
Nicoletti C. , Rondinelli C. (2010) The (mis)specification of discrete duration models with unobserved heterogeneity: A monte carlo study, Journal of Econometrics, 159, 1, 1–13.
34
Panetta F., Sabbatini R., Zollino F., Bianchi M., Bofondi M., Borselli F., Bulligan G., Buoncompagni A., Cappabianca M., Carpinelli L., Chiabrera A., Columba F., de Blasio G., D’Ignazio A.,
Fabrizi C., Gola C., Signoretti F.M. (2009) The performance of the Italian housing market and
its effects on the financial system, Questioni di Economia e Finanza 59, Banca d’Italia.
Rondinelli C. , Veronese G.F. (2011) Housing rent dynamics in Italy, Economic Modelling, 28,
540–548.
Rosolia A. (2009) L’evoluzione delle retribuzioni in Italia tra il 1986 e il 2004 secondo i dati
dell’archivio whip, Technical report, Lavoro preparatorio per la Commissione interistituzionale
di Indagine sul Lavoro.
Rosolia A. , Torrini R. (2007) The generation gap: relative earnings of young and old workers in
Italy, Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 639, Bank of Italy, Economic Research
Department.
35
RECENTLY PUBLISHED “TEMI” (*)
N. 796 – Securitization is not that evil after all, by Ugo Albertazzi, Ginette Eramo, Leonardo
Gambacorta and Carmelo Salleo (February 2011).
N. 797 – Reserve management and sovereign debt cost in a world with liquidity crises, by
Flavia Corneli and Emanuele Tarantino (March 2011).
N. 798 – Managerial incentives, financial constraints and ownership concentration, by
Marco Protopapa (March 2011).
N. 799 – Bootstrap LR tests of stationarity, common trends and cointegration, by Fabio
Busetti and Silvestro di Sanzo (March 2011).
N. 800 – Performance pay and shifts in macroeconomic correlations, by Francesco Nucci
and Marianna Riggi (March 2011).
N. 801 – Monetary and macroprudential policies, by Paolo Angelini, Stefano Neri and
Fabio Panetta (March 2011).
N. 802 – Imperfect information, real-time data and monetary policy in the euro area, by
Stefano Neri and Tiziano Ropele (March 2011).
N. 803 – Financial subsidies and bank lending: substitutes or complements? Micro level
evidence from Italy, by Amanda Carmignani and Alessio D’Ignazio (April 2011).
N. 804 – Il miglioramento qualitativo delle produzioni italiane: evidenze da prezzi e
strategie delle imprese, by Valter di Giacinto and Giacinto Micucci (April 2011).
N. 805 – What determines annuity demand at retirement?, by Giuseppe Cappelletti,
Giovanni Guazzarotti and Pietro Tommasino (April 2011).
N. 806 – Heterogeneity and learning with complete markets, by Sergio Santoro (April
2011).
N. 807 – Housing, consumption and monetary policy: how different are the U.S. and the
euro area?, by Alberto Musso, Stefano Neri and Livio Stracca (April 2011).
N. 808 – The monetary transmission mechanism in the euro area: has it changed and why?,
by Martina Cecioni and Stefano Neri (April 2011).
N. 809 – Convergence clubs, the euro-area rank and the relationship between banking and
real convergence, by Massimiliano Affinito (June 2011).
N. 810 – The welfare effect of foreign monetary conservatism with non-atomistic wage
setters, by Vincenzo Cuciniello (June 2011).
N. 811 – Schooling and youth mortality: learning from a mass military exemption, by Piero
Cipollone and Alfonso Rosolia (June 2011).
N. 812 – Welfare costs of inflation and the circulation of US currency abroad, by Alessandro
Calza and Andrea Zaghini (June 2011).
N. 813 – Legal status of immigrants and criminal behavior: evidence from a natural
experiment, by Giovanni Mastrobuoni and Paolo Pinotti (June 2011).
N. 814 – An unexpected crisis? Looking at pricing effectiveness of different banks, by Valerio
Vacca (July 2011).
N. 815 – Skills or culture? An analysis of the decision to work by immigrant women in Italy,
by Antonio Accetturo and Luigi Infante (July 2011).
N. 816 – Home bias in interbank lending and banks’ resolution regimes, by Michele Manna
(July 2011).
(*) Requests for copies should be sent to:
Banca d’Italia – Servizio Studi di struttura economica e finanziaria – Divisione Biblioteca e Archivio storico – Via
Nazionale, 91 – 00184 Rome – (fax 0039 06 47922059). They are available on the Internet www.bancaditalia.it.
"TEMI" LATER PUBLISHED ELSEWHERE
2008
P. ANGELINI, Liquidity and announcement effects in the euro area, Giornale degli Economisti e Annali di
Economia, v. 67, 1, pp. 1-20, TD No. 451 (October 2002).
P. ANGELINI, P. DEL GIOVANE, S. SIVIERO and D. TERLIZZESE, Monetary policy in a monetary union: What
role for regional information?, International Journal of Central Banking, v. 4, 3, pp. 1-28, TD No.
457 (December 2002).
F. SCHIVARDI and R. TORRINI, Identifying the effects of firing restrictions through size-contingent
Differences in regulation, Labour Economics, v. 15, 3, pp. 482-511, TD No. 504 (June 2004).
L. GUISO and M. PAIELLA,, Risk aversion, wealth and background risk, Journal of the European Economic
Association, v. 6, 6, pp. 1109-1150, TD No. 483 (September 2003).
C. BIANCOTTI, G. D'ALESSIO and A. NERI, Measurement errors in the Bank of Italy’s survey of household
income and wealth, Review of Income and Wealth, v. 54, 3, pp. 466-493, TD No. 520 (October 2004).
S. MOMIGLIANO, J. HENRY and P. HERNÁNDEZ DE COS, The impact of government budget on prices:
Evidence from macroeconometric models, Journal of Policy Modelling, v. 30, 1, pp. 123-143 TD No.
523 (October 2004).
L. GAMBACORTA, How do banks set interest rates?, European Economic Review, v. 52, 5, pp. 792-819,
TD No. 542 (February 2005).
P. ANGELINI and A. GENERALE, On the evolution of firm size distributions, American Economic Review,
v. 98, 1, pp. 426-438, TD No. 549 (June 2005).
R. FELICI and M. PAGNINI, Distance, bank heterogeneity and entry in local banking markets, The Journal
of Industrial Economics, v. 56, 3, pp. 500-534, No. 557 (June 2005).
S. DI ADDARIO and E. PATACCHINI, Wages and the city. Evidence from Italy, Labour Economics, v.15, 5,
pp. 1040-1061, TD No. 570 (January 2006).
S. SCALIA, Is foreign exchange intervention effective?, Journal of International Money and Finance, v. 27, 4,
pp. 529-546, TD No. 579 (February 2006).
M. PERICOLI and M. TABOGA, Canonical term-structure models with observable factors and the dynamics
of bond risk premia, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, v. 40, 7, pp. 1471-88, TD No. 580
(February 2006).
E. VIVIANO, Entry regulations and labour market outcomes. Evidence from the Italian retail trade sector,
Labour Economics, v. 15, 6, pp. 1200-1222, TD No. 594 (May 2006).
S. FEDERICO and G. A. MINERVA, Outward FDI and local employment growth in Italy, Review of World
Economics, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, v. 144, 2, pp. 295-324, TD No. 613 (February
2007).
F. BUSETTI and A. HARVEY, Testing for trend, Econometric Theory, v. 24, 1, pp. 72-87, TD No. 614
(February 2007).
V. CESTARI, P. DEL GIOVANE and C. ROSSI-ARNAUD, Memory for prices and the Euro cash changeover: an
analysis for cinema prices in Italy, In P. Del Giovane e R. Sabbatini (eds.), The Euro Inflation and
Consumers’ Perceptions. Lessons from Italy, Berlin-Heidelberg, Springer, TD No. 619 (February 2007).
B. H. HALL, F. LOTTI and J. MAIRESSE, Employment, innovation and productivity: evidence from Italian
manufacturing microdata, Industrial and Corporate Change, v. 17, 4, pp. 813-839, TD No. 622 (April
2007).
J. SOUSA and A. ZAGHINI, Monetary policy shocks in the Euro Area and global liquidity spillovers,
International Journal of Finance and Economics, v.13, 3, pp. 205-218, TD No. 629 (June 2007).
M. DEL GATTO, GIANMARCO I. P. OTTAVIANO and M. PAGNINI, Openness to trade and industry cost
dispersion: Evidence from a panel of Italian firms, Journal of Regional Science, v. 48, 1, pp. 97129, TD No. 635 (June 2007).
P. DEL GIOVANE, S. FABIANI and R. SABBATINI, What’s behind “inflation perceptions”? A survey-based
analysis of Italian consumers, in P. Del Giovane e R. Sabbatini (eds.), The Euro Inflation and
Consumers’ Perceptions. Lessons from Italy, Berlin-Heidelberg, Springer, TD No. 655 (January
2008).
R. BRONZINI, G. DE BLASIO, G. PELLEGRINI and A. SCOGNAMIGLIO, La valutazione del credito d’imposta per gli
investimenti, Rivista di politica economica, v. 98, 4, pp. 79-112, TD No. 661 (April 2008).
B. BORTOLOTTI, and P. PINOTTI, Delayed privatization, Public Choice, v. 136, 3-4, pp. 331-351, TD No.
663 (April 2008).
R. BONCI and F. COLUMBA, Monetary policy effects: New evidence from the Italian flow of funds, Applied
Economics , v. 40, 21, pp. 2803-2818, TD No. 678 (June 2008).
M. CUCCULELLI, and G. MICUCCI, Family Succession and firm performance: evidence from Italian family
firms, Journal of Corporate Finance, v. 14, 1, pp. 17-31, TD No. 680 (June 2008).
A. SILVESTRINI and D. VEREDAS, Temporal aggregation of univariate and multivariate time series models:
a survey, Journal of Economic Surveys, v. 22, 3, pp. 458-497, TD No. 685 (August 2008).
2009
F. PANETTA, F. SCHIVARDI and M. SHUM, Do mergers improve information? Evidence from the loan market,
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, v. 41, 4, pp. 673-709, TD No. 521 (October 2004).
M. BUGAMELLI and F. PATERNÒ, Do workers’ remittances reduce the probability of current account
reversals?, World Development, v. 37, 12, pp. 1821-1838, TD No. 573 (January 2006).
P. PAGANO and M. PISANI, Risk-adjusted forecasts of oil prices, The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, v.
9, 1, Article 24, TD No. 585 (March 2006).
M. PERICOLI and M. SBRACIA, The CAPM and the risk appetite index: theoretical differences, empirical
similarities, and implementation problems, International Finance, v. 12, 2, pp. 123-150, TD No.
586 (March 2006).
U. ALBERTAZZI and L. GAMBACORTA, Bank profitability and the business cycle, Journal of Financial
Stability, v. 5, 4, pp. 393-409, TD No. 601 (September 2006).
S. MAGRI, The financing of small innovative firms: the Italian case, Economics of Innovation and New
Technology, v. 18, 2, pp. 181-204, TD No. 640 (September 2007).
V. DI GIACINTO and G. MICUCCI, The producer service sector in Italy: long-term growth and its local
determinants, Spatial Economic Analysis, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 391-425, TD No. 643 (September 2007).
F. LORENZO, L. MONTEFORTE and L. SESSA, The general equilibrium effects of fiscal policy: estimates for the
euro area, Journal of Public Economics, v. 93, 3-4, pp. 559-585, TD No. 652 (November 2007).
R. GOLINELLI and S. MOMIGLIANO, The Cyclical Reaction of Fiscal Policies in the Euro Area. A Critical
Survey of Empirical Research, Fiscal Studies, v. 30, 1, pp. 39-72, TD No. 654 (January 2008).
P. DEL GIOVANE, S. FABIANI and R. SABBATINI, What’s behind “Inflation Perceptions”? A survey-based
analysis of Italian consumers, Giornale degli Economisti e Annali di Economia, v. 68, 1, pp. 2552, TD No. 655 (January 2008).
F. MACCHERONI, M. MARINACCI, A. RUSTICHINI and M. TABOGA, Portfolio selection with monotone meanvariance preferences, Mathematical Finance, v. 19, 3, pp. 487-521, TD No. 664 (April 2008).
M. AFFINITO and M. PIAZZA, What are borders made of? An analysis of barriers to European banking
integration, in P. Alessandrini, M. Fratianni and A. Zazzaro (eds.): The Changing Geography of
Banking and Finance, Dordrecht Heidelberg London New York, Springer, TD No. 666 (April 2008).
A. BRANDOLINI, On applying synthetic indices of multidimensional well-being: health and income
inequalities in France, Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom, in R. Gotoh and P. Dumouchel
(eds.), Against Injustice. The New Economics of Amartya Sen, Cambridge, Cambridge University
Press, TD No. 668 (April 2008).
G. FERRERO and A. NOBILI, Futures contract rates as monetary policy forecasts, International Journal of
Central Banking, v. 5, 2, pp. 109-145, TD No. 681 (June 2008).
P. CASADIO, M. LO CONTE and A. NERI, Balancing work and family in Italy: the new mothers’ employment
decisions around childbearing, in T. Addabbo and G. Solinas (eds.), Non-Standard Employment and
Qualità of Work, Physica-Verlag. A Sprinter Company, TD No. 684 (August 2008).
L. ARCIERO, C. BIANCOTTI, L. D'AURIZIO and C. IMPENNA, Exploring agent-based methods for the analysis
of payment systems: A crisis model for StarLogo TNG, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social
Simulation, v. 12, 1, TD No. 686 (August 2008).
A. CALZA and A. ZAGHINI, Nonlinearities in the dynamics of the euro area demand for M1,
Macroeconomic Dynamics, v. 13, 1, pp. 1-19, TD No. 690 (September 2008).
L. FRANCESCO and A. SECCHI, Technological change and the households’ demand for currency, Journal of
Monetary Economics, v. 56, 2, pp. 222-230, TD No. 697 (December 2008).
G. ASCARI and T. ROPELE, Trend inflation, taylor principle, and indeterminacy, Journal of Money, Credit
and Banking, v. 41, 8, pp. 1557-1584, TD No. 708 (May 2007).
S. COLAROSSI and A. ZAGHINI, Gradualism, transparency and the improved operational framework: a
look at overnight volatility transmission, International Finance, v. 12, 2, pp. 151-170, TD No. 710
(May 2009).
M. BUGAMELLI, F. SCHIVARDI and R. ZIZZA, The euro and firm restructuring, in A. Alesina e F. Giavazzi
(eds): Europe and the Euro, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, TD No. 716 (June 2009).
B. HALL, F. LOTTI and J. MAIRESSE, Innovation and productivity in SMEs: empirical evidence for Italy,
Small Business Economics, v. 33, 1, pp. 13-33, TD No. 718 (June 2009).
2010
A. PRATI and M. SBRACIA, Uncertainty and currency crises: evidence from survey data, Journal of
Monetary Economics, v, 57, 6, pp. 668-681, TD No. 446 (July 2002).
L. MONTEFORTE and S. SIVIERO, The Economic Consequences of Euro Area Modelling Shortcuts, Applied
Economics, v. 42, 19-21, pp. 2399-2415, TD No. 458 (December 2002).
S. MAGRI, Debt maturity choice of nonpublic Italian firms , Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, v.42,
2-3, pp. 443-463, TD No. 574 (January 2006).
R. BRONZINI and P. PISELLI, Determinants of long-run regional productivity with geographical spillovers:
the role of R&D, human capital and public infrastructure, Regional Science and Urban
Economics, v. 39, 2, pp.187-199, TD No. 597 (September 2006).
E. IOSSA and G. PALUMBO, Over-optimism and lender liability in the consumer credit market, Oxford
Economic Papers, v. 62, 2, pp. 374-394, TD No. 598 (September 2006).
S. NERI and A. NOBILI, The transmission of US monetary policy to the euro area, International Finance, v.
13, 1, pp. 55-78, TD No. 606 (December 2006).
F. ALTISSIMO, R. CRISTADORO, M. FORNI, M. LIPPI and G. VERONESE, New Eurocoin: Tracking Economic
Growth in Real Time, Review of Economics and Statistics, v. 92, 4, pp. 1024-1034, TD No. 631
(June 2007).
A. CIARLONE, P. PISELLI and G. TREBESCHI, Emerging Markets' Spreads and Global Financial Conditions,
Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions & Money, v. 19, 2, pp. 222-239, TD No.
637 (June 2007).
U. ALBERTAZZI and L. GAMBACORTA, Bank profitability and taxation, Journal of Banking and Finance, v.
34, 11, pp. 2801-2810, TD No. 649 (November 2007).
M. IACOVIELLO and S. NERI, Housing market spillovers: evidence from an estimated DSGE model,
American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, v. 2, 2, pp. 125-164, TD No. 659 (January 2008).
F. BALASSONE, F. MAURA and S. ZOTTERI, Cyclical asymmetry in fiscal variables in the EU, Empirica, TD
No. 671, v. 37, 4, pp. 381-402 (June 2008).
F. D'AMURI, O. GIANMARCO I.P. and P. GIOVANNI, The labor market impact of immigration on the western
german labor market in the 1990s, European Economic Review, v. 54, 4, pp. 550-570, TD No.
687 (August 2008).
A. ACCETTURO, Agglomeration and growth: the effects of commuting costs, Papers in Regional Science, v.
89, 1, pp. 173-190, TD No. 688 (September 2008).
S. NOBILI and G. PALAZZO, Explaining and forecasting bond risk premiums, Financial Analysts Journal, v.
66, 4, pp. 67-82, TD No. 689 (September 2008).
A. B. ATKINSON and A. BRANDOLINI, On analysing the world distribution of income, World Bank
Economic Review , v. 24, 1 , pp. 1-37, TD No. 701 (January 2009).
R. CAPPARIELLO and R. ZIZZA, Dropping the Books and Working Off the Books, Labour, v. 24, 2, pp. 139162 ,TD No. 702 (January 2009).
C. NICOLETTI and C. RONDINELLI, The (mis)specification of discrete duration models with unobserved
heterogeneity: a Monte Carlo study, Journal of Econometrics, v. 159, 1, pp. 1-13, TD No. 705
(March 2009).
L. FORNI, A. GERALI and M. PISANI, Macroeconomic effects of greater competition in the service sector:
the case of Italy, Macroeconomic Dynamics, v. 14, 5, pp. 677-708, TD No. 706 (March 2009).
V. DI GIACINTO, G. MICUCCI and P. MONTANARO, Dynamic macroeconomic effects of public capital:
evidence from regional Italian data, Giornale degli economisti e annali di economia, v. 69, 1, pp. 2966, TD No. 733 (November 2009).
F. COLUMBA, L. GAMBACORTA and P. E. MISTRULLI, Mutual Guarantee institutions and small business
finance, Journal of Financial Stability, v. 6, 1, pp. 45-54, TD No. 735 (November 2009).
A. GERALI, S. NERI, L. SESSA and F. M. SIGNORETTI, Credit and banking in a DSGE model of the Euro
Area, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, v. 42, 6, pp. 107-141, TD No. 740 (January 2010).
M. AFFINITO and E. TAGLIAFERRI, Why do (or did?) banks securitize their loans? Evidence from Italy, Journal
of Financial Stability, v. 6, 4, pp. 189-202, TD No. 741 (January 2010).
S. FEDERICO, Outsourcing versus integration at home or abroad and firm heterogeneity, Empirica, v. 37,
1, pp. 47-63, TD No. 742 (February 2010).
V. DI GIACINTO, On vector autoregressive modeling in space and time, Journal of Geographical Systems, v. 12,
2, pp. 125-154, TD No. 746 (February 2010).
S. MOCETTI and C. PORELLO, How does immigration affect native internal mobility? new evidence from
Italy, Regional Science and Urban Economics, v. 40, 6, pp. 427-439, TD No. 748 (March 2010).
A. DI CESARE and G. GUAZZAROTTI, An analysis of the determinants of credit default swap spread
changes before and during the subprime financial turmoil, Journal of Current Issues in Finance,
Business and Economics, v. 3, 4, pp., TD No. 749 (March 2010).
P. CIPOLLONE, P. MONTANARO and P. SESTITO, Value-added measures in Italian high schools: problems
and findings, Giornale degli economisti e annali di economia, v. 69, 2, pp. 81-114, TD No. 754
(March 2010).
A. BRANDOLINI, S. MAGRI and T. M SMEEDING, Asset-based measurement of poverty, Journal of Policy
Analysis and Management, v. 29, 2 , pp. 267-284, TD No. 755 (March 2010).
G. CAPPELLETTI, A Note on rationalizability and restrictions on beliefs, The B.E. Journal of Theoretical
Economics, v. 10, 1, pp. 1-11,TD No. 757 (April 2010).
S. DI ADDARIO and D. VURI, Entrepreneurship and market size. the case of young college graduates in
Italy, Labour Economics, v. 17, 5, pp. 848-858, TD No. 775 (September 2010).
A. CALZA and A. ZAGHINI, Sectoral money demand and the great disinflation in the US, Journal of Money,
Credit, and Banking, v. 42, 8, pp. 1663-1678, TD No. 785 (January 2011).
2011
S. DI ADDARIO, Job search in thick markets, Journal of Urban Economics, v. 69, 3, pp. 303-318, TD No.
605 (December 2006).
E. CIAPANNA, Directed matching with endogenous markov probability: clients or competitors?, The
RAND Journal of Economics, v. 42, 1, pp. 92-120, TD No. 665 (April 2008).
L. FORNI, A. GERALI and M. PISANI, The Macroeconomics of Fiscal Consolidation in a Monetary Union:
the Case of Italy, in Luigi Paganetto (ed.), Recovery after the crisis. Perspectives and policies,
VDM Verlag Dr. Muller, TD No. 747 (March 2010).
A. DI CESARE and G. GUAZZAROTTI, An analysis of the determinants of credit default swap changes before
and during the subprime financial turmoil, in Barbara L. Campos and Janet P. Wilkins (eds.), The
Financial Crisis: Issues in Business, Finance and Global Economics, New York, Nova Science
Publishers, Inc., TD No. 749 (March 2010).
G. GRANDE and I. VISCO, A public guarantee of a minimum return to defined contribution pension scheme
members, The Journal of Risk, v. 13, 3, pp. 3-43, TD No. 762 (June 2010).
P. DEL GIOVANE, G. ERAMO and A. NOBILI, Disentangling demand and supply in credit developments: a
survey-based analysis for Italy, Journal of Banking and Finance, v. 35, 10, pp. 2719-2732, TD No.
764 (June 2010).
M. TABOGA, Under/over-valuation of the stock market and cyclically adjusted earnings, International
Finance, v. 14, 1, pp. 135-164, TD No. 780 (December 2010).
S. NERI, Housing, consumption and monetary policy: how different are the U.S. and the Euro area?, Journal
of Banking and Finance, v.35, 11, pp. 3019-3041, TD No. 807 (April 2011).
FORTHCOMING
M. BUGAMELLI and A. ROSOLIA, Produttività e concorrenza estera, Rivista di politica economica, TD No.
578 (February 2006).
G. DE BLASIO and G. NUZZO, Historical traditions of civicness and local economic development, Journal of
Regional Science, TD No. 591 (May 2006).
F. CINGANO and A. ROSOLIA, People I know: job search and social networks, Journal of Labor Economics,
TD No. 600 (September 2006).
F. SCHIVARDI and E. VIVIANO, Entry barriers in retail trade, Economic Journal, TD No. 616 (February 2007).
G. FERRERO, A. NOBILI and P. PASSIGLIA, Assessing excess liquidity in the Euro Area: the role of sectoral
distribution of money, Applied Economics, TD No. 627 (April 2007).
P. E. MISTRULLI, Assessing financial contagion in the interbank market: maximun entropy versus observed
interbank lending patterns, Journal of Banking & Finance, TD No. 641 (September 2007).
Y. ALTUNBAS, L. GAMBACORTA and D. MARQUÉS, Securitisation and the bank lending channel, European
Economic Review, TD No. 653 (November 2007).
M. BUGAMELLI and F. PATERNÒ, Output growth volatility and remittances, Economica, TD No. 673 (June
2008).
V. DI GIACINTO e M. PAGNINI, Local and global agglomeration patterns: two econometrics-based
indicators, Regional Science and Urban Economics, TD No. 674 (June 2008).
G. BARONE and F. CINGANO, Service regulation and growth: evidence from OECD countries, Economic
Journal, TD No. 675 (June 2008).
S. MOCETTI, Educational choices and the selection process before and after compulsory school, Education
Economics, TD No. 691 (September 2008).
P. SESTITO and E. VIVIANO, Reservation wages: explaining some puzzling regional patterns, Labour,
TD No. 696 (December 2008).
P. PINOTTI, M. BIANCHI and P. BUONANNO, Do immigrants cause crime?, Journal of the European
Economic Association, TD No. 698 (December 2008).
R. GIORDANO and P. TOMMASINO, What determines debt intolerance? The role of political and monetary
institutions, European Journal of Political Economy, TD No. 700 (January 2009).
F. LIPPI and A. NOBILI, Oil and the macroeconomy: a quantitative structural analysis, Journal of European
Economic Association, TD No. 704 (March 2009).
F. CINGANO and P. PINOTTI, Politicians at work. The private returns and social costs of political connections,
Journal of the European Economic Association, TD No. 709 (May 2009).
Y. ALTUNBAS, L. GAMBACORTA, and D. MARQUÉS-IBÁÑEZ, Bank risk and monetary policy, Journal of
Financial Stability, TD No. 712 (May 2009).
P. ANGELINI, A. NOBILI e C. PICILLO, The interbank market after August 2007: What has changed, and
why?, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, TD No. 731 (October 2009).
G. BARONE and S. MOCETTI, Tax morale and public spending inefficiency, International Tax and Public
Finance, TD No. 732 (November 2009).
L. FORNI, A. GERALI and M. PISANI, The macroeconomics of fiscal consolidations in euro area countries,
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, TD No. 747 (March 2010).
G. BARONE, R. FELICI and M. PAGNINI, Switching costs in local credit markets, International Journal of
Industrial Organization, TD No. 760 (June 2010).
G. BARONE and S. MOCETTI, With a little help from abroad: the effect of low-skilled immigration on the
female labour supply, Labour Economics, TD No. 766 (July 2010).
S. MAGRI and R. PICO, The rise of risk-based pricing of mortgage interest rates in Italy, Journal of
Banking and Finance, TD No. 778 (October 2010).
A. ACCETTURO and G. DE BLASIO, Policies for local development: an evaluation of Italy’s “Patti
Territoriali”, Regional Science and Urban Economics, TD No. 789 (January 2006).
E. COCOZZA and P. PISELLI, Testing for east-west contagion in the European banking sector during the
financial crisis, in R. Matoušek; D. Stavárek (eds.), Financial Integration in the European Union,
Taylor & Francis, TD No. 790 (February 2011).
S. NERI and T. ROPELE, Imperfect information, real-time data and monetary policy in the Euro area, The
Economic Journal, TD No. 802 (March 2011).

La formazione tecnico tattica nel calcio moderno. Con DVD: 2

Listino Prezzi Camping Mokambo

Download File - prof. luca reale

00000000000000000! # BT # FC

HOUSEREVIEWS

Specifiche prodotto

HOUSEREVIEWS

Scarica un esempio - Zanichelli online per la scuola

Articolo Italia Oggi_06-02-2014

Depliant ARTIKA DENSO