'Revealed Preference' Can't Explain the Shortage of Urban Housing Options

"One of the chief arguments in favor of the suburbs is simply that that is where millions and millions of people actually live," according to an article by Joe Cortright that sets out to debunk that claim.

The counterargument, of course, is that people can only choose from among the options presented to them. And the options for most people are not evenly split between cities and suburbs, for a variety of reasons, including the subsidization of highways and parking, school policies, and the continuing legacies of racism, redlining, and segregation. One of the biggest reasons, of course, is restrictive zoning, which prohibits the construction of new urban neighborhoods all over the country.

Cortright wants to consider whether zoning really actually acts as a constraint on more compact, urban housing by turning to the work of Jonathan Levine and detailed in the book Zoned Out. Cortright wants to get to the bottom of the issue about whether or not there is pent up demand in the market for walkable urban places, and then whether land use regulations make it impossible to build the supply to meet that demand. The point made originally by Levine and explained here again by Cortright: it's true that in some places there is a shortage of cities and an overabundance of suburban-style house. In other metropolitan areas, there's a shortage of all kinds of housing.