 鲜花( 0)  鸡蛋( 0)
|
During Canada’s “Housing Boom”, which ran roughly
2 H& d+ k2 i: xfrom 2002 to 2008, unsustainable price increases drove
- O1 f% w* _/ k; b l3 Y! Xunsustainable levels of building. Our view is that house# w6 B! D0 C3 ^
prices exceeded the value of housing that was justified by1 q" R& y, u, y0 o: r! H. R) |
fundamentals by approximately 9% nationwide. This
/ O) J- |4 l; ~ }overpricing compelled a level of residential construction
; b0 B6 ^5 f2 E0 Q0 F& Ithat exceeded its fundamental-justified level by approximately! v/ a5 R& y/ X0 V1 Y1 o
12%, an excess that was exaggerated in the past
$ w, i* H8 l2 Mthree years.
# S# u: G1 h9 dBy “overpricing” we mean that prices detached from' i& R5 }0 |- ~$ M) a
their fundamentals, as witnessed by a steep erosion of& K: t. e/ p& M) m; V
affordability. The current unwinding of house prices reflects
& D9 e1 T2 A/ C/ D" S5 c, }both a cyclical downturn and a return of house prices
0 ]7 ^ C+ P8 Q- M G- E4 A4 {to fundamentally justified levels.
! b, J8 }7 b! eWe consider “overbuilding” of two forms: “demanddriven”
5 x. ^( K! J! y; ewhere homebuyers buy up too many houses and# U8 Z4 K" \" N
that this demand cannot be sustained; and “supply-driven”
/ I" z- ` q( R0 |! o/ ~) Wwhere builders accumulate excessive inventories. Although- U" ? W5 @+ M+ Z$ G* j
there is evidence of both types, we contend that Canada’s* e @. W3 M3 a/ S) C, D: m
“overbuilding” was mainly of the first type, where" k9 {' `3 w4 i* R
homebuyers pushed homebuilding to an unsustainable pitch
8 i- Y1 ^* d; n( h- Uthat is now being rapidly reined in." C& y, T) ]) A0 w0 |8 p' |
While most markets won’t face U.S.-style overhangs,
3 r o$ n7 F& t. t$ qthe construction of too many new homes over the boom
) l; D1 U: ? Y b, _means a deepened slump. This overbuilding will likely weigh# A; \, f# ^; [/ m }1 j3 G
on markets over the next few years. Even as Canada recovers3 Z5 F! r) j8 w5 k9 {
from the cyclical downturn, house price growth will5 U1 c7 z& h7 e4 i0 J
remain choppy and new residential construction will be
, L6 m$ }) U5 B) X! b0 Vdampened, owing to this structural weakness. Construction% H7 C; v5 t! U- F( k# T
is now undershooting fundamentals and we expect this
# m3 {- l; B: U7 ], Y. [' _ @to persist over 2009 to 2011. We anticipate that nationwide
) L0 e( x% D2 jresidential construction will fall further to around" T8 l! I9 U: k, T0 ~
125,000 starts over 2009 with a trough around 115,000 units
) h3 ]' r- O& O5 f$ Q2 ~) }in the fourth quarter.( X V! M3 W0 Y
To quantify the degree of overpricing and overbuilding,
( S" [' `1 N" h. Twe first develop an empirical model, based on long-run' `3 Z9 ~# J% W6 k& P
fundamentals of house prices and housing starts in each
' F' o5 i# l+ m' v( gprovince. Affordability is the key concept behind home
+ C6 L) h) u8 ~7 I2 Qvalues since house prices should track incomes over the
7 d( Y: G! _. \long-run. Since homebuilders build to meet demand, we( i) J% u7 Q! R: p7 I4 I( O% ~2 v
regard housing prices and household formation as the drivers4 x5 g" O! N0 f+ D7 j) f- ]6 q
of residential construction.! Y6 E' z% g: q! t+ i+ b
To examine the degree of overbuilding, we employ a
8 v: S" O8 w. L0 B“counter-factual,” asking what level of residential construction
+ L4 V" {. M2 P/ T2 O% I9 G! Uwould have occurred if housing had been priced
) o/ s1 }) p7 w3 Y5 ~! `: ~) m5 i' Zoptimally. We find that actual homebuilding exceeded this
. F W1 e$ k# f7 B6 Tfundamental-justified level by about 12%. Although new1 r! {. p# B" P
units were being absorbed, homebuyers simply bought too
% @0 V( m! ]. S% n; _$ m& I% imany houses at prices that exceeded fundamentals.5 e! P- b' ], \3 s
Regionally, we see the greatest strains on the Prairies,0 L& }2 \$ {' N4 t \6 A
where housing demand will further contract under waning# }' O6 ?% t" f, o: X) ~. `# k
population inflows. Saskatoon, Calgary and Edmonton are& ]% H% c9 S/ o
already witnessing surges in their unsold new homes at the; U0 T1 s* Y8 v2 G
very time that the resale market has swung into strong
! q% w, t$ m; Z/ C4 \8 D; zbuyers’ territory. Homebuilding in the Atlantic provinces
' E7 }! ?4 K; m' a% n$ ^5 i, Shas been relatively balanced but, while not plagued by structural
& V0 P0 E$ w* fweakness, will be singed by the downturn nonetheless./ Y; `+ V4 J! W. o
Québec shows signs of strain – especially given the) T' g( V7 N+ _2 V. j
strange accumulation of unabsorbed multiples on l’Île de- {) M1 ~& R2 r. s7 X- M7 ]
Montréal – but recent building has been relatively balanced,
X7 G- e* x+ |9 E6 ngiven the province’s history of under-building and low ownership
. A$ l* c! O, o7 Lrates. While Ontario homebuilding will reel from a
* f+ a/ o9 Z G/ z( y, [" K5 {cyclical downturn, the degree of structural weakness appears
+ L! I& k/ S! ]" P7 o- C' tlimited – with the important exception of the Toronto
7 }4 m$ p* C- o i- v g6 Acondo market. Both in Toronto and Vancouver, historically7 _ V d! ]9 L+ A& Q
high levels of apartment-style units presently under
6 J" Q) R4 \9 m0 J& K6 R. gconstruction mean that record numbers of condos will2 Z6 W/ w% a" ]
reach completion during 2009. If absorption rates fall, as
$ e6 A9 k/ r* X: Rcyclical factors would indicate, condo inventories could
1 q% I) K. b2 z" gspike severely – particularly in Vancouver. However, while5 n: a) \0 `; h3 m
residential construction in B.C. will definitely droop, we) N, A4 z9 ]7 `5 ~# {# x0 p
anticipate that the West Coast will continue to benefit from
& Z6 H% q) G1 ^inter-provincial and international migration over the coming1 T- i. n; a, D; U1 V
years, which, along with improvements in affordability,
; E' `" C9 \- J5 Jwill alleviate some of the pressure from overbuilding.. }) h* K' q; a, Z
OVERPRICED AND OVERBUILT: CANADIAN HOUSING
! \+ |5 }9 R8 ?2 KMARKET RETURNS TO FUNDAMENTALS% ^! o) [9 W- w
Grant Bishop, Economist
* R1 S, V6 e j+ u; k' {4 |416-982-8063
0 U$ Z5 p I) N6 o- p" C( q6 w0 kPascal Gauthier, Economist& M2 M: Q; K" W9 ~) _- [0 f8 V
416-944-57301 f* B! B- C. ~; P' x& W* m0 \
" N' v! N6 U6 p1 D2 Q& n N+ R: o
http://www.td.com/economics/special/gb0409_housing_exec.pdf |
|