IESET.
Hypotheses·housing·mortgage_market_liberalisation_homeownership_panel

In a broad-country panel 1990-2020, mortgage-market liberalisation episodes (abolition of interest-rate caps, reduction of down-payment requirements, privatisation of state mortgage banks, and introduction of securitisation) predict higher homeownership rates, higher residential investment as a share of GDP, and lower housing-rent-to-income ratios, controlling for income growth, demographic structure, and urbanisation.

The directional claim is that mortgage liberalisation is associated with at least a 3 percentage-point increase in the homeownership rate and a 0.5 percentage-point increase in residential investment/GDP within 5 years.

PARTIALengine/runs/mortgage_market_liberalisation_homeownership_panel

PARTIAL — coef=+0.972, p=0.606 (above α=0.1); direction inconclusive

confidence cueThe result is useful, but not decisive. Treat it as a clue, not a settled conclusion.

policy briefMixed or noisy

In ordinary language

Does the housing rule being tested make homes easier to build, rent, or afford, or does it quietly reduce supply and push costs elsewhere?

plain answer

The evidence is suggestive but not decisive. coef=+0.972, p=0.606 (above α=0.1); direction inconclusive

why it matters

Housing policy affects rents, mobility, household budgets, and construction. The test looks for measurable effects rather than relying on slogans.

how the test works

It compares 90 country or place units from 1990 to 2020, using a panel fe design, with fixed effects for country and year.

what was measured
What changed
  • Mortgage liberalisation indicator
  • Private credit depth
What we checked
  • Homeownership rate
  • Residential investment share income
what this does not prove

A single test is not the whole truth. It narrows the claim under a specific sample, time period, and method. Strong policy conclusions need the pattern to survive nearby tests, alternative data, and serious objections.

verification

7 input datasets, 1 unresolved missing series, provenance status: incomplete.

Results

engine/runs/mortgage_market_liberalisation_homeownership_panel
1007550250199020052020USAGBRDEUFRAITAESPNLD
illustrative sketch · run pending
No coefficients yet. When the model fires, this chart will show homeownership_rate across 90 sampled countries over 1990–2020.
The shapes above are stylised — none of the lines are real data.
Placeholder for mortgage_market_liberalisation_homeownership_panel. Published chart will be generated from engine/runs/mortgage_market_liberalisation_homeownership_panel/chart_data.json.

Pre-registration

registration ordering unverified
first-spec commit 4c8ce8e · 2026-07-18T22:11:21Z
run generated · 2026-06-29T17:53:14Z
Run timestamp predates this path's first git-add commit (rebase, rename, or pre-git local run). Spec hash is still the path's first-add commit — not repository HEAD — but ordering is not a clean pre-registration proof.

In a broad-country panel 1990-2020, mortgage-market liberalisation episodes (abolition of interest-rate caps, reduction of down-payment requirements, privatisation of state mortgage banks, and introduction of securitisation) predict higher homeownership rates, higher residential investment as a share of GDP, and lower housing-rent-to-income ratios, controlling for income growth, demographic structure, and urbanisation. The directional claim is that mortgage liberalisation is associated with at least a 3 percentage-point increase in the homeownership rate and a 0.5 percentage-point increase in residential investment/GDP within 5 years.

Falsification criterion — what would disprove this

set before the run · honoured after

This hypothesis is considered falsified if:

SUPPORTED if β1 (mortgage liberalisation) is positive and significant at p<0.10 for both homeownership and residential investment. PARTIAL if positive and significant for homeownership but not investment (demand reallocation without supply response). REFUTED if β1 is negative and significant at p<0.10. INFORMATIVE: excluding USA and UK should not eliminate the positive sign; if it does, the result is driven by Anglo- Saxon cases.

formal test & threshold
test:      panel_fe_mortgage_liberalisation_homeownership
threshold: β_mortgage_lib (homeownership) > 0 at p<=0.10  AND β_mortgage_lib (residential investment) > 0 at p<=0.10  AND Ex-USA-UK robustness retains positive sign.

Method

Template
panel_fe
Fixed effects
country, year
Clustering
country
Sample
90 countries · 1990 – 2020
Evidence type
associational

Two-way FE panel with staggered adoption: homeownership = β0 + β1*mortgage liberalisation + controls + FE. Robustness: (1) exclude USA and UK (dominant liberalisation cases); (2) use synthetic control for each adopter; (3) control for house-price growth to separate credit access from asset-price effects; (4) subsample by initial financial depth; (5) use 5-year forward averages to capture medium-run housing-stock adjustment.

Data

VariableSourceTransform
homeownership_rate
outcome
constructed:indicator = 1 for homeownership rate by country-yeartier 5
level
residential_investment_share_gdp
outcome
world_bank_wdi:NE.GDI.FTOT.ZStier 2
level
mortgage_liberalisation_indicator
treatment
constructed:indicator = 1 for USA from 1980; GBR from 1986; ESP from 1992; IRL from 1986; NLD from 1995; AUS from 1992; NZL from 199tier 5
indicator
private_credit_depth
treatment
world_bank_wdi:GFDD.DI.14tier 2
level
log_gdp_per_capita
control
world_bank_wdi:NY.GDP.PCAP.KDtier 2
log
urban_population_share
control
world_bank_wdi:SP.URB.TOTL.IN.ZStier 2
level
working_age_population_share
control
world_bank_wdi:SP.POP.1564.TO.ZStier 2
level
inflation_rate
control
world_bank_wdi:FP.CPI.TOTL.ZGtier 2
level
real_interest_rate
control
world_bank_wdi:FR.INR.RINRtier 2
level

● ready  · ● pending  · ● reconstruct-needed

Detailed result card

Result card — mortgage_market_liberalisation_homeownership_panel

Verdict: PARTIAL — coef=+0.972, p=0.606 (above α=0.1); direction inconclusive

Pre-registration

  • Claim: In a broad-country panel 1990-2020, mortgage-market liberalisation episodes (abolition of interest-rate caps, reduction of down-payment requirements, privatisation of state mortgage banks, and introduction of securitisation) predict higher homeownership rates, higher residential investment as a share of GDP, and lower housing-rent-to-income ratios, controlling for income growth, demographic structure, and urbanisation. The directional claim is that mortgage liberalisation is associated with at least a 3 percentage-point increase in the homeownership rate and a 0.5 percentage-point increase in residential investment/GDP within 5 years.
  • Falsification rule: SUPPORTED if β1 (mortgage liberalisation) is positive and significant at p<0.10 for both homeownership and residential investment. PARTIAL if positive and significant for homeownership but not investment (demand reallocation without supply response). REFUTED if β1 is negative and significant at p<0.10. INFORMATIVE: excluding USA and UK should not eliminate the positive sign; if it does, the result is driven by Anglo- Saxon cases.
  • Falsification test: panel_fe_mortgage_liberalisation_homeownership

Estimate

  • Method: linearmodels.PanelOLS
  • Coefficient (treatment): +0.972
  • Std error: 1.885
  • p-value: 0.606
  • Observations: 1190, countries: 48
  • Within R²: 0.0723
  • Fixed effects: entity=True, time=True
  • Clustering: country

Variables resolved

  • world_bank_wdi:NE.GDI.FTOT.ZS → residential_investment_share_gdp (outcome, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=9870)
  • constructed: indicator = 1 for USA from 1980; GBR from 1986; ESP from 1992; IRL from 1986; NLD from 1995; AUS from 1992; NZL from 1992; CHL from 1997; MEX from 1993; POL from 1995; HUN from 1995; CZE from 1995; EST from 1994; LVA from 1998; LTU from 1997; KOR from 1997; IND from 1991; CHN from 1998 → mortgage_liberalisation_indicator (treatment, publisher=constructed, n=2790)
  • world_bank_wdi:GFDD.DI.14 → private_credit_depth (treatment, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=6564)
  • world_bank_wdi:NY.GDP.PCAP.KD → log_gdp_per_capita (controls, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=12104)
  • world_bank_wdi:SP.URB.TOTL.IN.ZS → urban_population_share (controls, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=16965)
  • world_bank_wdi:SP.POP.1564.TO.ZS → working_age_population_share (controls, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=16965)
  • world_bank_wdi:FP.CPI.TOTL.ZG → inflation_rate (controls, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=7550)
  • world_bank_wdi:FR.INR.RINR → real_interest_rate (controls, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=4694)

Variables missing data

  • constructed: indicator = 1 for homeownership rate by country-year (outcome, name=homeownership_rate) — vintage not on disk

Generated by scripts/run_panel_fe.py at 2026-06-29T17:53:14+00:00

Strongest opposing argument

Every hypothesis ships with its charitable opposing argument. The framework earns credibility by handling objections at their strongest, not weakest.

Authored framework. Read the transparency note.