加州大学伯克利分校经济系教授John M. Quigley(1942-2012)，国际城市和房地产经济学与公共政策研究的领军人物，上周末不幸逝世。
John Quigley–Leading Scholar of Housing Markets, Energy Efficient Buildings, Homelessness, and Racial Discrimination
http://gspp.berkeley.edu/news-events/quigleyObit.html
John M. Quigley, a leading scholar of housing markets, local public finance, energy efficient buildings, homelessness, and racial discrimination in housing, passed away in Berkeley, California on May 12, 2012. Quigley, the I. Donald Terner Distinguished Professor of Public Policy, Business, and Economics at the University of California, Berkeley, was a campus leader, an inspirational mentor, and a leading figure in urban economics and housing policy. During his career he produced fourteen books and over 150 scholarly articles. Quigley excelled at finding clever ways to use empirical data about housing and urban areas to answer important public policy questions such as the macro-economic impact of rising housing prices on consumption behavior, the impact of segregation on African Americans' opportunities to accumulate wealth through investment in housing, the effect of governmental and voluntary energy standards on energy efficiency and the value of buildings, and the relationship between housing markets and homelessness. He combined boundless energy with an infectious laugh, which he often followed with a sharp intellectual insight. When Quigley saw an issue that was important he immersed himself in research to figure it out.
In the 1970s, Quigley showed, with John F. Kain, that racial segregation not only ghettoized black families, it also reduced their chances of developing savings through home ownership. In later work, Quigley went on to show how segregation reduced job opportunities for minority youth. Kain and Quigley also pioneered the quantitative measurement of housing quality. Their work made it possible to study housing markets where the basic commodity, "housing," is a bundle of structural and neighborhood characteristics that cannot be completely captured by one number such as the square footage of a home. In their 1975 book, Housing Markets and Racial Discrimination they demonstrated that statistical tools could be used effectively to value housing attributes and to control for differences in them across space and over time. Using these techniques, they showed that in many cities blacks paid substantially more than whites for comparable housing.
In the 1980s, Quigley began to study how government building regulations and voluntary energy standards affected energy efficiency in residential and commercial real estate. In recent work he showed that buildings complying with voluntary Energy Star or LEED standards receive higher rents and higher selling prices—partially because of their energy savings but also because of intangible effects of the label itself due to beliefs about improved worker productivity and improved corporate image from "green" buildings.
In the 1990s, Quigley turned to the study of homelessness. Most scholars focused on the personal characteristics, the mental and physical disabilities and substance abuse problems, of the chronically homeless, but with co-authors Steve Raphael and Gene Smolensky, Quigley showed how housing markets, especially those with limited supplies of low quality and inexpensive rental housing, were part of the problem. In these markets, even the lowest priced housing was often too expensive for those in extreme poverty, and small reductions in its supply due to higher government housing standards or demolition greatly elevated the risk of homelessness.
Quigley also made fundamental contributions to the study of housing markets. A highly influential and prescient 2001 article with Karl Case and Robert Shiller anticipated the 2001-2006 economic expansion by showing that increases in housing wealth, just like increases in stock market wealth, increased consumer spending and fueled macro-economic growth. In recent years when many questions arose about the efficacy of mortgage markets, Quigley wrote about how better government policy and mortgage products could protect homeowners.
Quigley also investigated the impact of regulations on housing prices, the economics of refuse collection, how university decentralization stimulated regional economies, the impact of rent control, public support for congestion pricing, the economics of rebuilding cities after disasters, and many other topics.
One other theme ran through Quigley’s life and research: his knowledge and love of Sweden. His first publication appeared in the Swedish Journal of Economics in 1966. He would go on to write many articles on all aspects of the Swedish economy. He was elected a foreign member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Engineering Sciences in 2006, and he received an honorary degree from Sweden’s Royal Institute of Technology in 2007.
Quigley’s wide-ranging and prolific scholarship was matched by his generous teaching and mentoring. He served as a committee member for over one hundred PhD dissertations during his career, chairing twenty-six since 1990. His was noted for his devotion to his students, his exceptionally high standards and expectations, his wide-ranging intellectual curiosity, his availability, his quick-turn-around of manuscripts and papers, his generosity and humor, and his ability to get graduate students to perform at levels beyond what they thought possible by treating them as peers and partners. His students have positions in universities, research institutes, and governmental agencies around the world.
Quigley was also a leader in service to the University and his profession. He was editor in chief of Regional Science and Urban Economics from 1986 to 2003, and he served on over two dozen editorial boards for scholarly journals during his career. He advised over twenty research and governmental agencies including the World Bank, General Accounting Office, Urban Institute, Federal Home Loan Bank Board, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, and institutions in Indonesia, Hungary, Germany, Sweden, and China. Quigley was Chair of the Department of Economics from 1992 to 1995, Chair of the Berkeley Division of the Senate of the University of California from 1996 to 1997, Director of the Berkeley Program on Housing and Urban Policy since 1999, and Interim Dean of the Goldman School of Public Policy in 2008. He was elected a fellow of the Homer Hoyt Institute in 1992 and the Regional Science Association in 2004. He was president of the American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association from 1996 to 1998, President of the Western Regional Science Association from 1998 to 2000, and President of the North American Regional Science Council from 2009 to 2010.
Quigley was born in New York, New York in 1942. He graduated from the United States Air Force Academy with distinction in 1964, and he worked as an econometrician at the Pentagon from 1964 to 1968, leaving the Air Force with the rank of Captain and an Air Force Commendation Medal in 1968. He earned his doctorate from Harvard University in 1971 and taught at Yale University from 1972 until he joined the faculty at the University of California, Berkeley in 1979.
He is survived by his wife of 36 years, Mary Curran, and his four children, Sam of San Francisco, Jane-Claire of New York, and Johanna and Benjamin of Stockholm, Sweden.
Gifts and contributions should be made to the Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley.
Last Updated: 05/16/2012
本人有幸在瑞典读博士三年级时候就通过国际会议场合见教于John Quigley教授，并热情点评和引用本人最早的学术论文之一，促成最后得以在JHE顺利发表。2006年到复旦工作后还有幸邀请到John Quigley教授于2007-2009年三度参加复旦大学组织的上海论坛做主题发言。John Quigley教授还欣然答应出任复旦大学住房政策研究中心海外专家委员会主任。之后还在多个场合有幸聆听到John Quigley教授的智慧演讲和进行交流。
图文：加州大学伯克利分校教授M.Quigley
2009年5月11日-12日，由上海复旦大学主办的“上海论坛2009”隆重召开。图为加州大学伯克利分校经济学系教授John-M.Quigley。
John M.Quigley：首先我要感谢大会组织者邀请我来上海论坛，这真的是一个绝好的机会，能够结识新朋友，再见老朋友，讨论新的问题。去年上海论坛召开的时候，房地产价格在下降，其他各国都出现了这样的情况，而商业的租金下降了，所以商业地产的销售停滞不前了，全世界都是这样。最后，抵押资产也开始出现了问题。当时我们已经看到了衰退的出现，但是我们不知道衰退有多严重，自从去年的上海论坛以来，已经有美国、英国的商业银行的倒台，像华盛顿互助银行以及投行雷曼兄弟的倒台。在保险行业有了非常昂贵的救助，到了去年夏天的时候出现了一些抵押贷款发放方面的坏迹象，美国房地美和房利美只能宣布破产，但不能用“破产”的字眼，因为是政府资助的企业，但其实它们就是破产了。
在这之后商业票据的评级下降，各个公司的资产负债平衡表减值。大多数的证券特别是抵押资产的价值也缩水。所以，等到美国新政府上台之后，整个世界已经进入自1929年大萧条以后最严重的一次金融危机当中。所以，我想问一下美国的新任政府都采取了什么措施，他们已经上台100多天了，他们的措施有哪些是成功的，我们怎么才知道他们成功不成功呢？我希望我能够回答这些问题。今年1月20号新政府上台的时候，在24天里面他们成功地让他们的主要理会让国会通过，他们政府的团队实力雄厚，有很多的经济学家，还有很多的议员，但是24天就让国会通过一个法案——刺激法案，这是最重要的一条，应对经济衰退的一个法案。这个法案里面讲到了7860亿美元的支出，所以这是一个巨大的政府预算。这个法案一共有400页，是在2月13号通过的。根据人们的估计，这个法案的通过将会保住300万人的工作，并且能够刺激经济的增长。这个法案里面有一个是减税，达到了880亿美元，特别是针对低收入家庭的，还有430亿美元是用在可再生能源，还有500亿是用在人力资本和大学的发展上，还有医疗的现代化，还有1500亿美元是用在道路等基础设施的建设上，这些是由地方政府规划的。
此外，地方政府也出台了相应的法案，这是世界上最单一的刺激法案。我们来看一下这个法案通过以后都做了哪些事情。有很多的网站，我们可以获得每月的报告，看一看这个法案每月实施到什么程度了，当然根据在一些特定的网站上看到一些特定项目的进展情况。比如说，我有一天就会发现在威斯康辛州有5亿元已经花在保住教师的饭碗上，否则老师只能离开学校，因为州政府没有足够的钱支付他们的工资。这也是从刺激法案里面拨款出来的，还有8亿美元的投资，是投资于生物能源，是加利福尼亚上周宣布的一个项目。有几种不同的方法供我们评估政府的政策反映，但是想到这样的刺激计划的时候，你首先要想，我们是不是把足够的刺激以很快的速度注入到体系当中去了呢？这里一个关键的逻辑就是我们希望有足够的资源注入到经济当中，而且希望尽可能的快，因为经济的衰退非常的严重。所以，我们动作有多快，这一点很重要。这些资源注入到私有经济之后就会拉动需求，会有一个成熟的效应，就会出现国民经济的增长。
你可能会这样想，我们能以多快的速度把资源注入到经济中去，自从法案通过之后到上周五为止，他们每天用掉了10亿美元，或者说每天就拨款了10亿美元。这是资源的分配情况。当然了，我们还有一些企业的转换设置的成本。我们预计做了这么多的先期投资的铺垫之后，夏天的时候有很多的钱就会真正用到经济的刺激上去了。如果我们在重大的几个月资本投资项目的投资之后，我说是在很短时间里面很大的经济刺激，看起来这些刺激方案的设计是符合目标的。听说已经保住了15万人的工作，或者是创造了15万个新岗位吧。
第二种评估法案的方法，很显然从凯恩斯主义的角度来说，如果你挖一个洞再补上，可以利用闲置的资产，刺激实体经济。但这样真的能够带动实体经济投资的增加吗？现在还为时太早，没有办法预测长远的影响。我们来看一下目前的情况，目前大概有300亿美元已经被拨款到人力资源和医疗保健服务中去，尤其是医保和医院。还有第二大的投资，就是2000万美元的教育，主要是投到中小学老师身上的，还有直接投资到大学里去的。此外，还有其他不同的项目来帮助失业人员再培训和再找就业。还有100亿用在交通，500亿用在城市化发展，还有40亿用在能源部上。看起来，各个部门都有重大的投资，但是政府在获取国际共识方面比较困难，美国和中国是目前为止经济方案刺激最大的两个国家。国际共识没有成功的达成是因为中国和美国两个国家经济体规模太大，所以欧盟推出的经济刺激方案的额度就不一定很大。此外还有银行、汽车行业救助的项目。美联储本周刚刚发布了一些银行压力测试的结果，银行的救助具体总价码是多少，现在还没有算出来，但是政府的确已经向银行体系注入很多的流动性，而这个压力测试的结果是周二才出台的，说还需要另外700亿美元来重塑银行金融机构的能力，这个数字跟我刚才说的数字比起来还是小的，但这对很多人来说带来了信心。
有一些银行在压力测试之后发现资本不足，而且很快得到了注资。这样他们再次获得了市场的信心，向市场说明他们有能力筹集资本。在住房方面这是另外一个大问题，在2月18号的时候，有一个计划出台要对抵押贷款市场进行改革，要降低利息支付，这是一个复杂的行为，其中最成功的是房地美、房利美的融资计划，使得很多家庭都得到了再次融资的机会。
汽车行业也是另外一个大问题，我们常常关注的一个住房市场的指标就是新房开工率。美国的住房价格，我们发现没办法完全的显示市场的情况。
总结来说，我们在过去的100多天上台以后奥巴马上台做了很多的工作，上周失业率宣布为8.9%，是50年以来最糟糕的一次。在过去的一个月里面有539000人失业了，这是一个大的数字，但是从环比来说已经降低下来了。也许我们真的看到了亮光，住房价格下降了8%，说明市场的信心上升了，环比上升5%，这也是一个好的迹象。
最后，我们要说经济危机已经受控制的话，那大概是在6个月之后或者是1年、2年之后。我们需要进行金融机构和抵押融资的充足，这样就需要有更多的监管方面的要求。真正的让金融机构本身的动机和监管机构的动机协调一致起来，这是很困难的。政府在金融机构里面通常受金钱利益的驱动，所以他们是以交易为导向的，不一定是长远眼光的。
我就讲这么多，谢谢大家！
http://www.mlr.gov.cn/zt/tdr/2008/ydzd/200806/t20080623_106476.htm
中国城市化速度之惑提高土地利用效率成关键
城市化，这个让中国几代人或赞扬或批评的人类最浩大最复杂的系统工程，至今仍是人们乐此不彼的争论话题。
冒进还是不足
中国的城市化究竟是在冒进还是处于不足状态？4月21日，北京大学林肯研究院城市发展与土地政策研究中心在北京大学廖凯原楼举行的中心成立大会暨财产税、地方财政及城市发展研讨会上，一场来自国内外众多知名学者的观点碰撞由此展开。
当天上午，中国科学院院士陆大道在演讲中旗帜鲜明地表达了对于中国城市化冒进而导致的各种土地问题的痛心疾首。极具戏剧性的是，下午在同一个论坛上，美国加州大学伯克利分校的John Quigley教授却在演讲中提针锋相辩
陆大道将1996－2005年这段时期归为中国“冒进式城市化过程”。
而与此相反，John Quigley教授却强烈表达了中国的城市化速度还远远不够。“中国与世界其他国家不同的地方在于它受限的城市化进程，尽管现在处在新经济发展中，也拥有受过良好教育的劳动力，但城市化进程却是低速的，一部分原因是由于从1958年开始的户籍制度限制了移民。”他说。
Quigley在演讲中出示了一张图表，图表显示说明，当中国人均收入水平达到一定数值时，城市化率却反而处于平均水平以下。
“另外，城市化的分散也构成了速度过慢的原因”，Quigley补充，“中国有太多的小城市，并且效率太低。过去，国家政策鼓励投资大城市，但只允许移民流动至周边的小城市，很少有移民到很远之外的地方。如果农村的劳动力迁移至城市，将创造3倍的生产力；如果增加小城市的规模，则可以使劳动效率提高25%甚至更多”。
Quigley建议中小城市应该重点发展制造业，但他表示，尽管现在中国许多地方城市有着多种产业基础，但100万~300万人口的城市却没有专业化细分。而大城市财政和商业服务总体在快速发展，却不普及，很多服务仍然只着眼工业园区和经济开发区等。
视频：http://www.china-up.com:8080/videoplay/videoFinal.asp?id=2914&type=special&con=���л�
京公网安备 11010502034662号 