Exploring the nexus of house price,income,homeownership types,and electoral democracy: Heterogeneous effects of housing wealth on political outcomes in OECD countries
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online April, 2025
Exploring the nexus of house price,income,homeownership types,and electoral democracy: Heterogeneous effects of housing wealth on political outcomes in OECD countries
This study investigates the heterogeneous impacts of housing wealth on political outcomes in OECD countries, with a particular focus on how different forms of homeownership interact with house price-to-income ratios. The analysis explores the relationship between these factors and their influence on electoral democracy. The findings reveal that as house price-to-income ratios rise, electoral democracy tends to decline in contexts with a higher proportion of outright homeowners, while it is strengthened in contexts with a growing proportion of mortgaged homeowners. By examining the dual role of housing assets, this study underscores their potential to both stabilize and destabilize democratic processes, depending on the type of ownership. This research highlights the crucial connection between economic conditions and political stability, calling for informed policy interventions to preserve and enhance democratic institutions.
AalbersMB (2016) The Financialization of Housing: A Political Economy Approach. New York, NY: Routledge.
2.
AbrahamJMHendershottPH (1996) Bubbles in metropolitan housing markets. Journal of Housing Research7(2): 191–207.
3.
AcemogluDRobinsonJA (2006) Economic Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
4.
AdkinsLCooperMKoningsM (2020) The Asset Economy. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.
5.
AlessiLDetkenC (2011) Quasi real time early warning indicators for costly asset price boom/bust cycles: a role for global liquidity. European Journal of Political Economy27(3): 520–533.
6.
AndréSDewildeC (2016) Home ownership and support for government redistribution. Comparative European Politics14: 319–348.
7.
AndréSDewildeCLuijkxR, et al. (2018) Housing wealth and party choice in a multiparty system: The Netherlands 2006–2012. Comparative Politics50(4): 565–592.
8.
AnsellB (2014) The political economy of ownership: housing markets and the welfare state. American Political Science Review108(2): 383–402.
9.
BaccaroLPontussonJ (2016) Rethinking comparative political economy: the growth model perspective. Politics & Society44(2): 175–207.
10.
BerryC (2021) The substitutive state? Neoliberal state interventionism across industrial, housing and private pensions policy in the UK. Competition & Change26(2): 242–265.
11.
BlekesauneMQuadagnoJ (2003) Public attitudes toward welfare state policies: a comparative analysis of 24 nations. European Sociological Review19(5): 415–427.
12.
BoeseVALindbergSILührmannA (2021) Waves of autocratization and democratization: a rejoinder. Democratization28(6): 1202–1210.
13.
BoixCStokesSC (2003) Endogenous democratization. World Politics55(4): 517–549.
14.
CarrollC (1997) Buffer-stock saving and the life cycle/permanent income hypothesis. Quarterly Journal of Economics112(1): 1–55.
15.
CatterbergGMorenoA (2006) The individual bases of political trust: trends in new and established democracies. International Journal of Public Opinion Research18(1): 31–48.
16.
CausaOWoloszkoNLeiteD (2019) Housing, wealth accumulation and wealth distribution: evidence and stylized factsOECD Economics Department Working Papers, No. 1588. Paris: OECD Publishing.
17.
Cohen RavivOHinzT (2022) Intergenerational wealth transmission and homeownership in Europe–a comparative perspective. PLoS One17(9): e0274647.
18.
ColemanJS (1990) Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
19.
CrouchC (2009) Privatised keynesianism: an unacknowledged policy regime. The British Journal of Politics & International Relations11: 382–399.
20.
CurtisJ (2016) Social mobility and class identity: the role of economic conditions in 33 societies, 1999–2009. European Sociological Review32(1): 108–121.
21.
DesaiROlofsgårdAYousefT (2003) Democracy, inequality, and inflation. American Political Science Review97(3): 391–406.
22.
DolingJRonaldR (2010) Homeownership and asset-based welfare. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment25: 165–173.
23.
DucaJVMuellbauerJMurphyA (2010) Housing markets and the financial crisis of 2007–2009: lessons for the future. Journal of Financial Stability6(4): 203–217.
24.
DynanKE (2012) Is Household Debt Overhang Holding Back Consumption? Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
25.
DynanKEKohnDL (2007) The rise in US household indebtedness: causes and consequencesFinance and Economics Discussion Series. Washington, DC: Federal Reserve Board.
26.
EndoC (2023) Structural change through ‘collective action as democratic practice’: linking grassroots democracy with social justice. Political Studies72(4): 1354–1372.
27.
Esping-AndersenG (1990) The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.
28.
FernandezRAalbersMB (2016) Financialization and housing: between globalization and varieties of capitalism. Competition & Change20(2): 71–88.
29.
Fernandez-NaviaTPolo-MuroETercero-LucasD (2021) Too afraid to vote? The effects of COVID-19 on voting behavior. European Journal of Political Economy69: 102012.
30.
FlavinM (1985) Excess sensitivity of consumption to current income: liquidity constraints or myopia?Canadian Journal of Economics18(1): 117–136.
31.
FoaRSMounkY (2016) The danger of deconsolidation: the democratic disconnect. Journal of Democracy27(3): 5–17.
32.
ForrestRHirayamaY (2015) The financialisation of the social project: embedded liberalism, neoliberalism and home ownership. Urban Studies52(2): 233–244.
33.
FoucaultM (1980) Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.
34.
FriedmanM (1957) The permanent income hypothesis. In: FriedmanM (ed) A Theory of the Consumption Function. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 20–37.
35.
FukuyamaF (1995) Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity. New York, NY: The Free Press.
36.
FullerGWJohnstonAReganA (2020) Housing prices and wealth inequality in Western Europe. West European Politics43(2): 297–320.
37.
GanongPNoelPJ (2019) Consumer spending during unemployment: positive and normative implications. The American Economic Review109(8): 2383–2424.
38.
GlasgowGWeberRA (2005) Is there a relationship between election outcomes and perceptions of personal economic well-being? A test using post-election economic expectations. Electoral Studies24(4): 581–601.
39.
GurneyCM (1999) Lowering the drawbridge: a case study of analogy and metaphor in the social construction of home-ownership. Urban Studies36(1): 1705–1722.
40.
GyourkoJTracyJ (2014) Reconciling theory and empirics on the role of unemployment in mortgage default. Journal of Urban Economics80: 87–96.
41.
HadeniusATeorellJ (2005) Assessing alternative indices of democracy. European Journal of Political Research44(2): 219–246.
42.
HainmuellerJMummoloJXuY (2019) How much should we trust estimates from multiplicative interaction models? Simple tools to improve empirical practice. Political Analysis27(2): 163–192.
43.
HallPASoskiceD (2001) Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
44.
HallABYoderJ (2022) Does homeownership influence political behavior? Evidence from administrative data. The Journal of Politics84(1): 351–366.
45.
HanS (2024a) Housing wealth and political outcomes: a multi-dimensional analysis at the local level in South Korea. Japanese Journal of Political Science25(2): 75–101.
46.
HanS (2024b) The erosion of democracy in an age of wealth inequality: unraveling the impact of subjective socioeconomic stratification. British Journal of Politics and International Relations. Available at:https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/13691481241287184.
47.
HanS (2024c) Homeownership, income and social trust: exploring dynamics between homeownership, income, and individuals’ perceptions of autonomy and social trust in South Korea. Social Indicators Research. Available at:https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11205-024-03481-x.
48.
HanSKwonHY (2023) Inequality, social context, and income bias in voting: evidence from South Korea. International Journal of Public Opinion Research35(2): edad018.
49.
HanSKwonHY (2024) Homeownership, house prices, and belief in meritocracy: evidence from South Korea and 34 countries. Political Studies72(3): 1071–1089.
50.
HasenfeldYRaffertyJA (1989) The determinants of public attitudes toward the welfare state. Social Forces67(4): 1027–1048.
51.
HilberCALSchöniO (2016) Housing policies in Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States: lessons learned. ADBI Working Paper 569.
52.
HongJRyuD (2023) Expectations and the housing market: a model of house price dynamics. Bulletin of Economic Research75(4): 1242–1266.
53.
Housing Europe (2021) The State of Housing in Europe 2021. Brussels: Housing Europe.
54.
HuckfeldtR (2014) Networks, contexts, and the combinatorial dynamics of democratic politics. Political Psychology35(1): 43–68.
55.
HünermundPLouwB (2023) On the nuisance of control variables in causal regression analysis. Organizational Research Methods28(1): 138–151.
56.
IversenTSoskiceD (2006) Electoral institutions and the politics of coalitions: why some democracies redistribute more than others. American Political Science Review100(2): 165–181.
57.
JakobssonNMuttarakRSchoyenMA (2018) Dividing the pie in the eco-social state: exploring the relationship between public support for environmental and welfare policies. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space36(2): 313–339.
58.
JohnstonAReganA (2017) Global finance, labor politics, and the political economy of housing prices. Politics & Society45(3): 327–358.
59.
KahnemanDTverskyA (1984) Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist39(4): 341–350.
60.
KemenyJ (1981) The myth of home ownership: private versus public choicesHousing Tenure. London, UK: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
61.
KemenyJ (1992) Housing and Social Theory. London, UK: Routledge.
62.
KemenyJ (2005) The really big trade-off between home ownership and welfare: castles’ evaluation of the 1980 thesis, and a reformulation 25 years on. Housing, Theory and Society22(2): 59–75.
63.
KohlS (2021) Too much mortgage debt? The effect of housing financialization on housing supply and residential capital formation. Socio-Economic Review19(2): 413–440.
64.
KumhofMRancièreRWinantP (2015) Inequality, leverage, and crises. The American Economic Review105(3): 1217–1245.
65.
KuttnerKNShimI (2013) Can non-interest rate policies stabilize housing markets? Evidence from a panel of 57 economies. NBER Working Paper No. 19723.
66.
LandmanT (2006) Measuring Democracy: A Bridge between Scholarship and Politics. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
67.
LarsenMVHjorthFDinesenPT, et al. (2019) When do citizens respond politically to the local economy? Evidence from registry data on local housing markets. American Political Science Review113(2): 499–516.
68.
LevitskySZiblattD (2018) How Democracies Die. New York, NY: Crown Books.
69.
LijphartA (2012) Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
70.
LipsetSM (1960) Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics. New York, NY: Doubleday.
71.
LovelessM (2013) The deterioration of democratic political culture: consequences of the perception of inequality. Social Justice Research26: 471–491.
72.
LührmannALindbergSI (2019) A third wave of autocratization is here: what is new about it?Democratization26(7): 1095–1113.
73.
MandičS (2010) The changing role of housing assets in post-socialist countries. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment25: 213–226.
74.
McPhersonMSmith-LovinLCookJM (2001) Birds of a feather: homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology27: 415–444.
75.
MeltzerARichardS (1981) A rational theory of the size of government. Journal of Political Economy89(5): 914–927.
76.
MianASufiA (2009) The consequences of mortgage credit expansion: evidence from the US mortgage default crisis. Quarterly Journal of Economics124(4): 1449–1496.
77.
MianASufiA (2014) House of Debt: How They (And You) Caused the Great Recession, and How We Can Prevent it from Happening Again. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
78.
ModiglianiF (1986) Life cycle, individual thrift, and the wealth of nations. Science234(4777): 704–712.
79.
MounkY (2018) The People vs. Democracy: Why Our Freedom is in Danger and How to Save It. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
80.
MuddeC (2007) Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
81.
NayyarD (2012) Macroeconomics and human development. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities13(1): 7–30.
82.
NordMLundstedtMAltmanD, et al. (2024) Democracy Report 2024: Democracy Winning and Losing at the Ballot. University of Gothenburg: V-Dem Institute.
83.
NorthDCWeingastBR (1989) Constitutions and commitment: the evolution of institutions governing public choice in seventeenth-century England. The Journal of Economic History49(4): 803–832.
84.
O’BrienD (2000) Reconstructing social democracy: new labour and the welfare state. The British Journal of Politics & International Relations2(3): 403–413.
85.
PainterGReadfearnCL (2002) The role of interest rates in influencing long-run homeownership rates. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics25: 243–267.
86.
PaudynB (2022) Financially engineering a “self-generative” political economy of creditworthiness: expertocratic exemption problems for sustainable debt and democracy. Competition & Change27(2): 354–379.
87.
PikettyT (2014) Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
88.
PikettyT (2020) Capital and Ideology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
89.
PutnamRD (1993) The prosperous community: social capital and public life. The American Prospect13: 35–42.
90.
RobertsKWS (1977) Voting over income tax schedules. Journal of Public Economics8(3): 329–340.
91.
RobinsonJA (2006) Economic development and democracy. Annual Review of Political Science9: 503–527.
92.
RomerT (1975) Individual welfare, majority voting, and the properties of a linear income tax. Journal of Public Economics4(2): 163–185.
93.
RosenauJN (1988) Patterned chaos in global life: structure and process in the two worlds of world politics. International Political Science Review9: 327–364.
94.
RudraN (2007) Welfare states in developing countries: unique or universal?The Journal of Politics69(2): 378–396.
95.
SaundersP (1978) Domestic property and social class. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research2: 233–251.
96.
SaundersP (1990) A Nation of Homeowners. London, UK: Unwin Hyman.
97.
ScheveKStasavageD (2017) Wealth inequality and democracy. Annual Review of Political Science20: 451–468.
98.
SchwartzHSeabrookeL (2008) Varieties of residential capitalism in the international political economy: old welfare states and the new politics of housing. Comparative European Politics6: 237–261.
99.
SmithJAMcPhersonMSmith-LovinL (2014) Social distance in the United States: sex, race, religion, age, and education homophily among confidants, 1985 to 2004. American Sociological Review79(3): 432–456.
100.
SoudrietteRWEllisA (2006) Electoral systems today: a global snapshot. Journal of Democracy17(2): 78–88.
101.
StandingG (1997) Globalization, labour flexibility and insecurity: the era of market regulation. European Journal of Industrial Relations3(1): 7–37.
102.
SteeleL (2021) Wealth and preferences for redistribution: the effects of financial assets and home equity in 31 countries. International Journal of Comparative Sociology61(5): 331–362.
103.
StiglitzJE (2012) The Price of Inequality: How Today’s Divided Society Endangers Our Future. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company.
104.
Van GuntenTKohlS (2020) The inversion of the ‘really big trade-off’: homeownership and pensions in long-run perspective. West European Politics43(2): 435–463.
105.
ViebrockEClasenJ (2009) Flexicurity and welfare reform: a review. Socio-Economic Review7(2): 305–331.
106.
WerczbergerE (1997) Home ownership and rent control in Switzerland. Housing Studies12(3): 337–353.
107.
WiedemannA (2023) A social policy theory of everyday borrowing: on the role of welfare states and credit regimes. American Journal of Political Science67(2): 324–341.
108.
WiedemannA (2024) The electoral consequences of household indebtedness under austerity. American Journal of Political Science68(2): 354–371.
109.
WillSRenzT (2023) My home is my burden? Homeownership, financial burden and subjective well-being in a unitary rental market. Applied Research in Quality of Life18: 2227–2257.
110.
WoodJDG (2020) Can household debt influence income inequality? Evidence from Britain: 1966–2016. The British Journal of Politics & International Relations22(1): 24–46.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
