An Open World Governed by Local Institutions
How the post–Cold War international order transformed
urban housing markets without transforming the institutions responsible for
accommodating them
Introduction: The Unrecognized Consequence of an Open World
One of the most consequential yet insufficiently appreciated
developments of the post–Cold War international order has been the
globalization of demand for urban housing. Over the past several decades, the
world has progressively reduced barriers to the movement of capital, goods,
services, and, to varying degrees, people. This integration has generated
enormous economic benefits, expanding opportunities for trade, investment,
employment, education, and human mobility. It has also fundamentally transformed
the economic geography of the world's most successful cities.
Yet the institutions responsible for governing these cities
have not undergone a comparable transformation.
We have globalized demand for urban housing while leaving
the supply of urban housing overwhelmingly local.
This asymmetry lies at the heart of an important structural
problem confronting cities such as New York, London, Paris, Berlin, Amsterdam,
Toronto, and Sydney. Their housing markets increasingly respond to economic
forces operating across national borders, while the production of housing
remains constrained by municipal planning decisions, local political interests,
national construction regulations, and geographically fixed infrastructure.