我国保障住房供给问题的研究
|
摘要
发展住房保障,是保障和改善民生、促进社会和谐稳定的必然要求。保障住房的供给是住房保障工作的首要环节,它决定着住房保障的广度和深度,从根本上影响着住房保障的实际实施效果。从我国目前的保障住房供给现状和政府“十二五”规划来看,未来一段时间内,我国住房保障将处于从供给相对不足向供给快速增长转变的关键时期。同时我国城镇居民的住房保障需求也急剧增加,住房民生问题凸显。要突破原有住房保障供给不足的种种约束,实现供给的快速增长,并将快速增长的住房保障供给与急剧增加的住房保障需求协调起来,落实住房保障民生作用,我国保障住房供给的研究就显得尤为迫切与重要。有鉴于此,本文试图以保障住房“谁来供给、如何供给、供给多少”为研究逻辑主线,通过对保障住房供给主体、供给方式、供给水平的分析与研究,重点探讨如何构建“住有所居”的可持续性保障住房供给,以实现住房保障基本公共服务的均等化,并尝试进行保障住房供给体系的顶层设计,为政府推动保障住房供给建设提供理论依据和政策支持。
论文的主要研究内容可以分为以下六个部分：
第一,保障住房政策供给主体研究。在理解作为社会政策的公共住房政策涵义基础上,展开中央政府和地方政府在政策供给中的责任主体分析,提出地方政府应该且可以取代中央政府成为公共住房政策的供给责任主体,进而成为住房保障制度建设的能动主体,并提出公共住房政策供给责任主体转变中的若干政策建议。
第二,保障住房供给建设主体研究。通过回顾我国保障住房供给主体发展演变过程以及探求保障住房的准公共物品属性,从理论内在逻辑和实践发展需求两方面论证了保障住房应该从单一供给主体向“国家-市场-社会组织-社会公民”的多元化供给主体转变,并结合我国当前保障住房供给主体多元化的探索,指出阻碍多元化供给进一步发展的约束条件,并提出政府在推动供给主体多元化发展中应该扮演的若干角色。
第三,保障住房产权安排及产权政策研究。从资产建设的视角,构建保障住房资产的福利模型,结合我国当前的社会进程,提出住房保障福利可以通过保障住房产权安排及其政策得到供给与放大,并从基本原则和特征两方面设计了一种基于资产建设理论的“租赁—所有”公共保障住房。
第四,保障住房空间布局问题研究。在宏观层面上探讨了保障住房在城市区位空间选择的依据和原则；在微观层面上,利用深圳社区问卷调查数据,通过实证分析,从社会距离、社会资本与居民自满意度三个维度以实际数据支持了保障住房的混合建设模式,尤其肯定了其中“大混居,小聚居”的保障住房社区空间布局方式。
第五,保障住房供给体系并轨研究。以我国保障住房分类供给体系的多轨运行缺陷解析保障住房供给体系并轨改革的应然性和必然性,阐述并轨改革的目标和内容,提出“渐进式统一”的并轨改革方案,并对廉租住房、经济适用房、限价商品房等在新旧政策中的衔接问题提出若干政策建议。
第六,保障住房供给水平研究。以住房服务为度量标准分别对保障住房需求趋势和供给趋势进行动态分析,从而得到保障住房供给水平的发展趋势,并以此构建了保障住房供给水平适度性测定的基本模型,最后以2011年武汉保障住房实践为例,展开供给水平的适度性判定,揭示与探讨其政策涵义。
论文的主要创新点,有以下三点：
第一,从多元化保障住房供给主体参与的新视角,剖析了我国当前诸如限价商品房建设、投融资平台上建设公共租赁住房、集体土地上建设公共租赁住房等保障住房的探索性供给实践,研究发现：现有的多元化实践存在着政府分权不充分,使得市场主体供给的有效竞争不足,效率提高有限,难以形成吸引市场主体的长效激励机制；同时,对于培育和壮大社会组织,协调各保障住房供给主体利益,政府既没有充分放权,也没有做好角色转换的准备,阻碍了第三方部门的发展。
第二,引入资产建设理论,重新审视我国保障住房的产权安排及其政策,研究发现：住房资产福利效应可以通过保障住房资产建设得到产生并向受保障对象传递,结合我国社会在快速现代化城市化的长波进程与社会结构关键转型的特殊脉动相互交织的背景下对基本住房权和社会发展权的双重住房保障需求,设计了一种基于资产建设理论的以“租售结合的产权安排、政府家庭的资产共建、灵活多样的激励机制、封闭循环的退出机制”为基本特征的“租赁-所有”公共住房。
第三,在剖析现有保障住房分类供应体系多轨运行缺陷的基础上,尝试提出保障住房并轨改革,通过住房保障体系的“目标并轨、政策并轨、建设并轨、对象并轨、补贴方式并轨、资金并轨、腾退并轨、管理并轨”,以实现住房保障公共服务均等化的改革目标,并设计了“渐进式统一”的并轨改革实施方案,按“分类并轨”和“整合并轨”两个阶段将现有保障住房统一归并至公共住房体系中,要求把握好实施过程中的新旧政策衔接,实现并轨改革的平稳过渡。
Public housing policy is fundamental to social harmony in terms of maintaining and improving the wellbeing of people. As the first step of the work, the supply mode of public housing products decides the depth and width of the policy, waging a deep effect on the efficiency and effect of the public housing policy. From the status quo and the official public plan for housing building in the Twelve Five years, the development of public housing policy are in a critical area while the quality of public houses is experiencing a rapid increase. Meanwhile, there is also a sharp increase in the urban residents'demand for public housing, thus strengthening the housing shortage problem. It is important and urgent to make deep research in the supply mode of the public housing to make ways for the sound increase in the supply, and the more important, to coordinate the supply with the demand. This paper makes a deep discussion on how to establish a sustainable public housing supply system and a fair distribution of public housing service by analyzing the supplier, the way of supply, and the scale of the supply in terms of the logic of'who makes the serve, how to serve, and how much to serve'. It also tries to provide a top-level system building in public housing supply, which may provide theoretical basis and suggestions for construction and development of public housing supply.
This paper includes six parts. The first chapter analyzes the supplier of the public housing policy. Based on the explanation of public housing policy, this chapter analyzes the responsibility subject of houses supplier between central government and local government, and propose that the local government can be the main holder and activator in pubic houses building. Several suggestions are made on facilitating the responsibility holder transformation.
The second chapter analyzes the builder of public houses. By reviewing the evolution of public houses builder policy and seeking the public houses products as quasi-public goods, this paper emphasizes the necessity to transform the responsibility holder from the single supplier to the multiple supply mode of'government-market-Non-government organizations-citizens'. Constraint conditions for developing multiple supply modes are also analyzed in this section. It lists several roles that the government can take in facilitating the development of multi-supply mode.
The third chapter analyzes the property rights arrangement of public houses and the property rights policy. Based on an asset building perspective, a warfare mode of pubic houses asset are made. Conclusions are made that the warfare effect of public houses can be created and amplified by the property rights arrangement policy and a "rental-owned" public houses supply mode are made based on asset building theory from the perspective of basic principles and features.
The fourth sector focuses on the layout of public houses. Basis and main principles in allocating public houses in cities are discussed at a macro level. Based on the questionnaire collected from Shenzhen, the mixed building mode of public houses is supported by the empirical analysis, especially the public houses layout featuring "mixed settlement on macro level and centralized community on micro level".
The fifth chapter focuses on the reorganization and merging of the public houses supply system. The necessary of change for reorganizing and merging the public houses supply is proved by sorting out several defects existing in current supply system. After elaborating the goal and context of the system reorganization, a "gradual and overall" reform plan and several suggestions for practical operation are forged in this part.
The sixth chapter focuses on the supply level of the public houses. By doing dynamic analysis on the demand trend and supply trend of public houses with housing service being the measure standard,a future trend for public houses supply is provided. Based on the trend, a model for deciding the premium level of the supply is made. Followed the model is a practical analysis of the public houses policy in Wuhan city.
There are three innovative points in this paper.
The first innovative point lies in seeing the policy practice such as Limiting-Price Housing construction, building public rental houses on investment and financing platform, and building public rental houses on collective-owned land from a multiple supplier perspective. The research shows that the inadequate power distribution exists in current supply mode causes the inefficiency in products supply, which poses obstacles in attracting active player into the market. At the same time, the government fails to deliver power decentralization and make full prepare for the change of role, thus hinders the interests of the third player.
The second innovative point is reviewing the property rights arrangement of public houses and its policy by introducing asset building theory. The research shows that the warfare effect of housing asset can be delivered to policy targets through building public houses assets. Considering the need for public houses in a background where modernization and economic readjustment interweaving together, a "rental-owned" public houses supply mode are made based on asset building theory, featuring rental-sale property arrangement, assets co-constructing between government and households, flexible inventiveness and closed cyclic exit mechanism.
The third innovative point lies in forging a reform plan based on a deep analysis in the current supply mode. By the practical process of reorganization in terms of policy targets, different policies, construction, policy targets, ways of subsidy-delivering,finance, and management, a "gradual and overall" reform plan is designed in order to reach the equal access to public houses, which is the goal of the reform.The plan will be conducted in two phases, which are classified reorganization and mixed reorganization. By doing this, the current products will be merged into the new public housing system. The adjustments and connection in policy operation between the old and new policies are vital in reaching a steady transition.
论文的主要研究内容可以分为以下六个部分：
第一,保障住房政策供给主体研究。在理解作为社会政策的公共住房政策涵义基础上,展开中央政府和地方政府在政策供给中的责任主体分析,提出地方政府应该且可以取代中央政府成为公共住房政策的供给责任主体,进而成为住房保障制度建设的能动主体,并提出公共住房政策供给责任主体转变中的若干政策建议。
第二,保障住房供给建设主体研究。通过回顾我国保障住房供给主体发展演变过程以及探求保障住房的准公共物品属性,从理论内在逻辑和实践发展需求两方面论证了保障住房应该从单一供给主体向“国家-市场-社会组织-社会公民”的多元化供给主体转变,并结合我国当前保障住房供给主体多元化的探索,指出阻碍多元化供给进一步发展的约束条件,并提出政府在推动供给主体多元化发展中应该扮演的若干角色。
第三,保障住房产权安排及产权政策研究。从资产建设的视角,构建保障住房资产的福利模型,结合我国当前的社会进程,提出住房保障福利可以通过保障住房产权安排及其政策得到供给与放大,并从基本原则和特征两方面设计了一种基于资产建设理论的“租赁—所有”公共保障住房。
第四,保障住房空间布局问题研究。在宏观层面上探讨了保障住房在城市区位空间选择的依据和原则；在微观层面上,利用深圳社区问卷调查数据,通过实证分析,从社会距离、社会资本与居民自满意度三个维度以实际数据支持了保障住房的混合建设模式,尤其肯定了其中“大混居,小聚居”的保障住房社区空间布局方式。
第五,保障住房供给体系并轨研究。以我国保障住房分类供给体系的多轨运行缺陷解析保障住房供给体系并轨改革的应然性和必然性,阐述并轨改革的目标和内容,提出“渐进式统一”的并轨改革方案,并对廉租住房、经济适用房、限价商品房等在新旧政策中的衔接问题提出若干政策建议。
第六,保障住房供给水平研究。以住房服务为度量标准分别对保障住房需求趋势和供给趋势进行动态分析,从而得到保障住房供给水平的发展趋势,并以此构建了保障住房供给水平适度性测定的基本模型,最后以2011年武汉保障住房实践为例,展开供给水平的适度性判定,揭示与探讨其政策涵义。
论文的主要创新点,有以下三点：
第一,从多元化保障住房供给主体参与的新视角,剖析了我国当前诸如限价商品房建设、投融资平台上建设公共租赁住房、集体土地上建设公共租赁住房等保障住房的探索性供给实践,研究发现：现有的多元化实践存在着政府分权不充分,使得市场主体供给的有效竞争不足,效率提高有限,难以形成吸引市场主体的长效激励机制；同时,对于培育和壮大社会组织,协调各保障住房供给主体利益,政府既没有充分放权,也没有做好角色转换的准备,阻碍了第三方部门的发展。
第二,引入资产建设理论,重新审视我国保障住房的产权安排及其政策,研究发现：住房资产福利效应可以通过保障住房资产建设得到产生并向受保障对象传递,结合我国社会在快速现代化城市化的长波进程与社会结构关键转型的特殊脉动相互交织的背景下对基本住房权和社会发展权的双重住房保障需求,设计了一种基于资产建设理论的以“租售结合的产权安排、政府家庭的资产共建、灵活多样的激励机制、封闭循环的退出机制”为基本特征的“租赁-所有”公共住房。
第三,在剖析现有保障住房分类供应体系多轨运行缺陷的基础上,尝试提出保障住房并轨改革,通过住房保障体系的“目标并轨、政策并轨、建设并轨、对象并轨、补贴方式并轨、资金并轨、腾退并轨、管理并轨”,以实现住房保障公共服务均等化的改革目标,并设计了“渐进式统一”的并轨改革实施方案,按“分类并轨”和“整合并轨”两个阶段将现有保障住房统一归并至公共住房体系中,要求把握好实施过程中的新旧政策衔接,实现并轨改革的平稳过渡。
Public housing policy is fundamental to social harmony in terms of maintaining and improving the wellbeing of people. As the first step of the work, the supply mode of public housing products decides the depth and width of the policy, waging a deep effect on the efficiency and effect of the public housing policy. From the status quo and the official public plan for housing building in the Twelve Five years, the development of public housing policy are in a critical area while the quality of public houses is experiencing a rapid increase. Meanwhile, there is also a sharp increase in the urban residents'demand for public housing, thus strengthening the housing shortage problem. It is important and urgent to make deep research in the supply mode of the public housing to make ways for the sound increase in the supply, and the more important, to coordinate the supply with the demand. This paper makes a deep discussion on how to establish a sustainable public housing supply system and a fair distribution of public housing service by analyzing the supplier, the way of supply, and the scale of the supply in terms of the logic of'who makes the serve, how to serve, and how much to serve'. It also tries to provide a top-level system building in public housing supply, which may provide theoretical basis and suggestions for construction and development of public housing supply.
This paper includes six parts. The first chapter analyzes the supplier of the public housing policy. Based on the explanation of public housing policy, this chapter analyzes the responsibility subject of houses supplier between central government and local government, and propose that the local government can be the main holder and activator in pubic houses building. Several suggestions are made on facilitating the responsibility holder transformation.
The second chapter analyzes the builder of public houses. By reviewing the evolution of public houses builder policy and seeking the public houses products as quasi-public goods, this paper emphasizes the necessity to transform the responsibility holder from the single supplier to the multiple supply mode of'government-market-Non-government organizations-citizens'. Constraint conditions for developing multiple supply modes are also analyzed in this section. It lists several roles that the government can take in facilitating the development of multi-supply mode.
The third chapter analyzes the property rights arrangement of public houses and the property rights policy. Based on an asset building perspective, a warfare mode of pubic houses asset are made. Conclusions are made that the warfare effect of public houses can be created and amplified by the property rights arrangement policy and a "rental-owned" public houses supply mode are made based on asset building theory from the perspective of basic principles and features.
The fourth sector focuses on the layout of public houses. Basis and main principles in allocating public houses in cities are discussed at a macro level. Based on the questionnaire collected from Shenzhen, the mixed building mode of public houses is supported by the empirical analysis, especially the public houses layout featuring "mixed settlement on macro level and centralized community on micro level".
The fifth chapter focuses on the reorganization and merging of the public houses supply system. The necessary of change for reorganizing and merging the public houses supply is proved by sorting out several defects existing in current supply system. After elaborating the goal and context of the system reorganization, a "gradual and overall" reform plan and several suggestions for practical operation are forged in this part.
The sixth chapter focuses on the supply level of the public houses. By doing dynamic analysis on the demand trend and supply trend of public houses with housing service being the measure standard,a future trend for public houses supply is provided. Based on the trend, a model for deciding the premium level of the supply is made. Followed the model is a practical analysis of the public houses policy in Wuhan city.
There are three innovative points in this paper.
The first innovative point lies in seeing the policy practice such as Limiting-Price Housing construction, building public rental houses on investment and financing platform, and building public rental houses on collective-owned land from a multiple supplier perspective. The research shows that the inadequate power distribution exists in current supply mode causes the inefficiency in products supply, which poses obstacles in attracting active player into the market. At the same time, the government fails to deliver power decentralization and make full prepare for the change of role, thus hinders the interests of the third player.
The second innovative point is reviewing the property rights arrangement of public houses and its policy by introducing asset building theory. The research shows that the warfare effect of housing asset can be delivered to policy targets through building public houses assets. Considering the need for public houses in a background where modernization and economic readjustment interweaving together, a "rental-owned" public houses supply mode are made based on asset building theory, featuring rental-sale property arrangement, assets co-constructing between government and households, flexible inventiveness and closed cyclic exit mechanism.
The third innovative point lies in forging a reform plan based on a deep analysis in the current supply mode. By the practical process of reorganization in terms of policy targets, different policies, construction, policy targets, ways of subsidy-delivering,finance, and management, a "gradual and overall" reform plan is designed in order to reach the equal access to public houses, which is the goal of the reform.The plan will be conducted in two phases, which are classified reorganization and mixed reorganization. By doing this, the current products will be merged into the new public housing system. The adjustments and connection in policy operation between the old and new policies are vital in reaching a steady transition.
引文
[1]Harsman, B,and Quigley, J. Housing Markets and Housing Institutions in a Comparative Context.In Harsman and Quigley(eds), Housing Markets and Housing Institutions:An International Comparison. Kluwer.1991
[2]Clapham,D. Housing and the Economy:Broadening Comparative Housing Research. Urban Studies.1996
[3]Burns, L.and Grebler, L. The Housing of Nations:Analysis and Policy in a Comparative Framework. Macmillan.1977
[4]Eamonn.D'Arcy and Georffrey Keogh,. The Property Market and Urban Competi-Tiveness:A Review[J] Urban Studies.1999
[5]Lund,B. Understanding Housing Policy. [M].Bristol:Policy Press.2006
[6]Malpass, P,and Murie, A. Housing Policy and Practice..5th edition. Macmillan,1999
[7]Legrand J. Motivation,Agency and Public Policy:of Knightsand Knaves,Pawns and Queens[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press.2003
[8]Ball M. Improving Housing Markets. RICS Leading Edge Series,2003
[9]Donnison D.V. The Government of Housing.[M].Harmondsworth:Penguin.1967
[10]Esping-Andersen,G The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. [M].Cambring:Polity Press.1990
[11]Doling,J. Comparative Housing Policy:Government and Housing in Advanced Industrialized Countries. St.Martin's Press,1997
[12]Spink,B. What Has the State Ever Done for USA.In Somerville and Sprigings (eds), Housing and Social Policy.Routledge,2005
[13]Shidlo G. Housing policy in developing countries.[M].New York:Routledge,1990
[14]Groves R,Murie A,Watson C. Housing and the New Welfare State:Perspectives from East Asia and Europe[M].Farnham:Ashgate Press.2007
[15]James C. Ohls. Public police toward low income housing and filtering in housing markets [J]. Journal of Urban Economics,1975
[16]Arnott R J, Braid R M, Davidson R, et al. A general equilibrium spatial model of housing quality and quantity [J].Regional Science and Urban Economics,1999
[17]Apgar, William C.. "Which Housing Policy Is Best". Housing Policy Debate,1990
[18]Laferrere, Anne and David Le Blanc. "How do housing allowances affect rents? An empirical analysis of the French case". Journal of Housing Economics, March 2004
[19]Murray, Michael P. "Subsidized and Unsubsidized HousingStocks1935-1987:Crowding Out and Cointegration". Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics,1999
[20]Stephen Malpezzi and Kerry Vandell. "Does the low-income housing tax credit increase the supply of housing?" Journal of Housing Economics,2002
[21]郑思齐,符育明,任荣荣.住房保障的财政成本承担：中央政府还是地方政府?[J].公共行政评论,2009(6)：109-125.
[22]张双甜,罗晓庚.保障性住房供给的博弈分析[J].工程管理学报,2010(5)：568-573.
[23]蔡冰菲.保障性住房建设中地方政府与中央政府的博弈分析[J].社会科学家,2009(12)：40-43.
[24]欧阳希玲,刘祁,刘源.改善保障性住房供给的克拉克机制探析[J].中国房地产金融,2011(4)：33-36.
[25]冯念一,陆建忠,朱嬿.对保障性住房建设模式的思考[J].建筑经济,2007(8)：27-30.
[26]蒋华东.住房保障：建立健全政府主导的多元供给体制[J].经济体制改革,2009(3)：153-156.
[27]王松华.我国住房保障体系非均衡供给的实证分析[J].经济问题,2009(4)：41-42.
[28]厉伟.非营利组织建设与住房供给[J].城市问题,2007(12)：55-59.
[29]谭禹,刘辉煌,夏励嘉.启动中低收入者住房需求与合作建房研究[J].经济纵横,2009(7)：114-116.
[30]宋博通.政府兴建住房与货币补贴成本比较研究[J].深圳大学学报,2001(1)：71-77.
[31]宋博通.三种典型住房补贴政策的“过滤”研究[J].城乡建设,2002(8)：27-29.
[32]赖华东,蔡靖方.城市住房保障政策效果及其选择——基于住宅过滤模型的思考[J].经济评论,2007(3)：136-140.
[33]方建国.政府住房保障制度新政的经济学分析——重新认识“实物补贴”和“货币补贴”问题[J].中山大学学报(社会科学版),2008(6)：194-198.
[34]邓中美.社会保障性住房类型的评价[J].厦门理工学院学报,2009(2)：67-71.
[35]邬丽萍.住房保障及其形式选择[J].改革与战略,2004(7)：32-34.
[36]徐姗姗.国内外住房补贴模式研究述评[J].理论月刊,2006(S1)：68-70.
[37]孟勉.谈中低收入阶层住房供给问题[J].城市开发,2004(13)：58-61.
[38]孙冰,刘洪玉,卢玉玲.中低收入家庭住房补贴的形式与效率[J].经济体制改革,2005(4)：20-24.
[39]姚珍珍.中国公共住房政策模式研究[M].上海：上海财经大学出版社.2009
[40]陈劲松.公共住房浪潮[M].北京：机械工业出版社.2006
[41]李国栋,梁平,张娅岚.公共政策视野下城市中低收入群体住房供给调整思路探讨——对现行经济适用房问题的反思[J].科技创业月刊,2007(6)：71-72.
[42]郭士征,张腾.中国住房保障体系构建研究——基于“三元到四维”的视角[J].广东社会科学,2010(6)：5-11.
[43]陈淮.住房保障体系的认识问题探析[J].江南论坛,2009(4)：49-51.
[44]曾国安,胡晶晶.论中国城镇住房保障体系改革和发展的基本思路与目标构架[J].江汉论坛,2011(2)：15-20.
[45]褚超孚.城镇住房保障模式及其在浙江省的应用研究[D].浙江大学,2005.
[46]徐虹.住房保障水平发展趋势分析[J].兰州学刊,2011(5)：58-63.
[47]陶雪良,刘洪玉.北京市经济适用住房供给规模影响因素的实证分析[J].系统工程理论与实践,2010(3)：464-468.
[48]关静.如何把握住房保障之“度”[J]中国房地产,2006(10)：69-71.
[49]焦怡雪,尹强.关于保障性住房建设比例问题的思考[J].城市规划,2008(9)：38-45.
[50]尚梅.中低收入阶层居民住房问题研究——探索西安市城镇居民保障性住房与商品性住房供给比例[J].价格理论与实践,2008(5)：44-45.
[51]张文君,刘超.保障性住房供给量的合理确定—以陕西省为例[J].现代经济信息,2010(7)：201-241.
[52]陈斌,李旻.基于住房过滤模型的南宁市廉租房供给模式研究[J].广西经济管理干部学院学报,2011(1)：15-21.
[53]徐琴.制度安排与社会空间极化——现行公共住房政策透视[J].南京师大学报(社会科学版),2008(3)：26-31.
[54]李健正.住房政策、住房自有与资产建设：东亚社会政策的一种新视角[J].公共行政评论,20]0(3)：48-70.
[55]汤林弟.论基于公民住房权的住房政策架构[J].理论导刊,2012(2)：19-22.
[56]易宪容.中国住房市场的公共政策研究[J].管理世界,2009(10)：62-71.
[57]程大涛.中国住房政策社会目标及供应体系重构的设想[J].经济学家,2010(12)：50-57.
[58]王玉琼.“政策异变”及其解读：以住房政策为例[J].中国行政管理,2007(5)：14-16.
[59]张劲松,林莉.论公共政策制定过程中政府与公民的互动[J].中共福建省委党校学报,2006(2)：24-27.
[60]朱水成.“精英决策”模式下的公民参与研究[J].理论探讨,2008(5)：156-158.
[61]张晖.央地关系变迁、分权与地方政府竞争——对中国经济增长动因的思考[J].商业时代,2011(29)：4-5.
[62]张丽娟.法国中央与地方事权配置模式及其启示[J].中共中央党校学报,2010(3)：93-96.
[63]钟开斌.中国中央与地方关系基本判断：一项研究综述[J].上海行政学院学报,2009(3)：20-29.
[64]谭羚雁,娄成武.保障性住房政策过程的中央与地方政府关系——政策网络理论的分析与应用[J].公共管理学报,2012(1)：52-63.
[65]李斌.分化的住房政策：一项对住房改革的评估性研究[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,2009.
[66]任兴洲.中国住房市场发展趋势与政策研究[M].北京：中国发展出版社,2012.
[67]樊丽明.中国公共品市场与自愿供给分析[M].上海：上海人民出版社,2005.
[68]彭华民等.西方社会福利理论前沿——论国家、社会、体制与政策[M].北京：中国社会出版社,2009.
[69]王春福.公共产品多元治理模式的制度创新[J].管理世界,2007(3)：160-161.
[70]周燕,梁樑.国外公共物品多元化供给研究综述[J].经济纵横,2006(2)：74-76.
[71]余晖,秦虹.公私合作制的中国试验[M].上海：世纪出版集团,上海人民出版社,2005.
[72]郑慧.加拿大公共服务改革研究——公共服务供给机制的重构[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,2011.
[73]尹华,朱明仕.论我国公共服务供给主体多元化协调机制的构建[J].经济问题探索,2011(7)：13-17.
[74]蒋枢泓.成都市限价房的现状及问题分析[J].经营管理者,2011(3)：76-78.
[75]住房和城乡建设部政策研究中心中冶置业集团有限公司联合课题组.求索公共租赁住房之路[M].北京：中国建筑工业出版社,2011.
[76]凤凰网财经.做大做强并非国企改革唯一选项[EB/OL].
[77]李响,周楚军.“破冰”之举,还是“突围”之策?——聚焦北京上海集体建设用地建设租赁住房试点[N].中国国土资源报.
[78]广州提出集体建设用地可建设保障房[J].城市规划通讯,2009(9)：12.
[79]赵飞飞.沪公租房“试探”集体建设用地[N].21世纪经济报道.
[80]陈小君,戴威.对“集体土地上建公租房”政策的法律思考[J].法律科学(西北政法大学学报),2012(3)：154-161.
[81]迈克尔·谢若登.资产与穷人——项新的美国福利政策[M].北京：商务印书馆,2005.
[82]Washingtonpost.Share the Ownership[EB/OL].
[83]迈克尔·谢若登.美国及世界各地的资产建设[J].山东大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2005(1)：23-29.
[84]Gilbert Neil, Terrell Paul.社会福利政策导论[M].上海：华东理工大学出版社,2003.
[85]杨团,孙炳耀.资产社会政策与中国社会保障体系重构[J].江苏社会科学,2005(2)：206-211.
[86]张时飞.引入资产建设要素,破解农保工作困局——呼图壁县的经验与启示[J].江苏社会科学,2005(2)：232-236.
[87]刘振杰.资产建设：新农保的新理念和新范式[J].中共中央党校学报,2011(4)：49-52.
[88]姜丽美.资产建设——失地农民可持续发展的突破点[J].理论导刊,2010(6)：63-64.
[89]钟玉英.美国“资产建设”对消减我国城市低保“负激励效应”的启示[J].特区经济,2011(12)：122-124.
[90]迈克尔·史乐山,邹莉.个人发展账户——“美国梦”示范工程[J].江苏社会科学,2005(2)：201-205.
[91]Reid C K.Achieving the American Dream? A Longitudinal Analysis of the Homeownership Experiences of Low-Income Households[R].Center for Social Development Working Paper,2005.
[92]Carasso M.The Balance Sheets of Low-Income Households:What We Know about Their Assets and Liabilities.[R].Washington, DC:The Urban Institute. Poor Finances:Assets and Low-Income Households Report,2006.
[93]Yadama N, Sherraden M.Effects of assets on attitudes and behaviors:Advance test of a social policy proposal[J].Social Work Research,1996,20(1):3-11.
[94]毛小平,罗建文.影响居民幸福感的社会因素研究——基于CGSS2005数据的分析[J].湖南科技大学学报(社会科学版),2012(3)：42-45.
[95]Moore M, Vonderlack.Saving, IDA Programs, and Effects of IDAs:A Survey of Participants.[R].St. Louis, MO:Washington University in St. Louis, Center for Social Development ,2001.
[96]迈克尔·史乐山,邹莉.美国的资产建设：政策创新与科学研究[Z].2005.
[97]Dietz D.The Social and Private Micro-Level Consequences of Homeownership[J] Journal of Urban Economics,2003(54):401-450.
[98]Haurin D.The Impact of Neighborhood Homeownership Rates:A Review of the Theoretical and Empirical Literature[J].Journal of Housing Research,2003,12(2):119-151.
[99]Williams R.The Impact of Household Wealth and Poverty on Child Development Outcomes: Examining Asset Effects[D]. Washington University:St. Louis.,2003.
[100]Zhan Min and Sherraden M. Assets, Expectations, and Educational Achievement[J].Social Service Review,2003,77(2):191-211.
[101]Shapiro H.Family Assets and School Access:Race and Class in the Structuring of Educational Opportunity[Z].New York:Oxford University Press,2005.112-127.
[102]李春玲.比较视野下的中产阶级形成[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,2009,430.
[103]王卉书胡安其Author.通货膨胀形成的深层次原因探究——基于我国2008-2011年的数据分析[J].商业时代,2012(07)：52-53.
[104]张晓晶,孙涛.中国房地产周期与金融稳定[J].经济研究,2006(1)：23-33.
[105]季明明.国家社会福利保障体系的成功典范——新加坡中央公积金制度研究[J].改革,2000(2)：107-117.
[106]廖俊平.面向城市低收入移民的住房股权计划[J].经济社会体制比较,2007(5)：141-143.
[107]陈淑云.共有产权住房：我国住房保障制度的创新[J].华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2012(1)：48-58.
[108]冯希莹.社会福利政策范式新走向：实施以资产为本的社会福利政策——-对谢若登的《资产与穷人：一项新的美国福利政策》的解读[J].社会学研究,2009(2)：216-227.
[109]朱晨,岳岚.基于规划调控的英国住房保障措施研究[J].城市发展研究,2007(2)：23-28.
[110]汪冬宁,汤小橹,金晓斌,等.基于土地成本和居住品质的保障住房选址研究——以江苏省南京市为例[J].城市规划,2010(3)：57-61.
[111]宋伟轩.大城市保障性住房空间布局的社会问题与治理途径[J].城市发展研究,2011(8)：103-108.
[112]赵明,弗兰克·合雷尔.法国社会住宅政策的演变及其启示[J].国际城市规划,2008(2)：62-66.
[113]孙斌栋,刘学良.美国混合居住政策及其效应的研究述评——兼论对我国经济适用房和廉租房规划建设的启示[J].城市规划学刊,2009(1)：90-97.
[114]刘志林,韩雅飞.规划政策与可支付住房建设——来自美国和英国的经验[J].国际城市规划,2010(3)：90-96.
[115]焦怡雪.促进居住融和的保障性住房混合建设方式探讨[J].城市发展研究,2007(5)：57-61.
[116]孙斌栋,刘学良.欧洲混合居住政策效应的研究述评及启示[J].国际城市规划,2010(5)：96-102.
[117]黄匡时,嘎日达.社会融合理论研究综述[J].新视野,2010(6)：86-88.
[118]卢国显.中西方社会距离的研究综述[J].学海,2005(5)：119-125.
[119]桂勇,黄荣贵.社区社会资本测量：一项基于经验数据的研究[J].社会学研究,2008(3)：122-142.
[120]李强,李洋.居住分异与社会距离[J].北京社会科学,2010(1)：4-11.
[121]吴莉萍,黄茜,周尚意.北京中心城区不同社会阶层混合居住利弊评价——对北太平庄和北新桥两个街道辖区的调查[J].北京社会科学,2011(3)：73-78.
[122]边燕杰.城市居民社会资本的来源及作用：网络观点与调查发现[J].中国社会科学,2004(3)：136-146.
[123]田野,栗德祥,毕向阳.不同阶层居民混合居住及其可行性分析[J].建筑学报,2006(4)：36-39.
[124]钟涨宝,陶琴.外来务工人员子女和本地学生的社会距离研究——基于双向度社会距离测量[J].南京社会科学,2010(8)：76-84.
[125]边燕杰,王文彬,张磊,等.跨体制社会资本及其收入回报[J].中国社会科学,2012(2)：110-126.
[126]高春凤.标签理论视角下流动人口融入城市问题研究[J].农业考古,2011(6)：234-237.
[127]苏振民,林炳耀.城市居住空间分异控制：居住模式与公共政策[J].城市规划,2007(2)：45-49.
[128]洪波.租售并举、以租为主——经济适用房政策“变脸”进入倒计时[J].中国经济周刊,2006(42)：26-27.
[129]贾海峰.地方住房保障重心下移[N].21世纪经济报道,2008-12-10.
[130]赵沛楠.加快建设保障性安居工程多渠道解决住房困难家庭的住房问题专访住房和城乡建设部住房保障司司长侯淅珉[J]中国投资,2009(12)：50-53.
[131]沈卫平.我国住房保障制度建设：经验、问题与发展[J].现代经济探讨,2009(10)：43-47.
[132]曹建海,林延.构建住房的“大保障”体系研究[J].现代城市研究,2009(12)：12-16.
[133]张齐武,徐燕雯.经济适用房还是公共租赁房?——对住房保障政策改革的反思[J].公共管理学报,2010(4)：86-92.
[134]任俊生,程秀梅.“有尊严”的城镇居民住房及其实现途径[J].福建论坛(人文社会科学版),2011(3)：9-12.
[135]鲍家伟.廉租住房与经济适用住房衔接问题研究[J].湖北社会科学,2008(7)：91-93.
[136]汪利娜.住房保障需要新思路新举措[J].中国建设信息,2011(5)：18-21.
[137]廖阳,李陈广,庞欣.我国保障性住房融合问题初探[J].商业时代,2011(20)：109-110.
[138]曾国安,张倩.论发展公共租赁住房的必要性、当前定位及未来方向[J].山东社会科学,2011(2)：79-85.
[139]宋伟轩.大城市保障性住房空间布局的社会问题与治理途径[J].城市发展研究,2011(8)：103-108.
[140]陈淮.建立符合中国国情的住房保障体系[J].宏观经济管理,2010(11)：11.
[141]朱莉萍.城镇住房保障水平研究[D]同济大学,2008.
[142]李娜.中国城镇适度住房保障水平研究[D].中国人民大学,2006.
[143]郭晓宇.基于住房服务和类别选择的住房需求研究——理论和来自杭州的实证[M].经济科学出版社,2010.
[144]许云华,张显武,刘冬华.城市化进程中住房需求影响因素的实证分析——以合肥市为例[J].特区经济,2011(11)：202-205.
[145]徐虹.住房保障水平发展趋势分析[J].兰州学刊,2011(5)：58-63.
[146]杨霞,徐邓耀.城市发展中人口结构变化与住房需求的研究[J].开发研究,2011(2)：84-87.
[147]刘贵文,李婧.我国家庭住房适宜居住面积研究[J].住宅科技,2007(2)：5-9.
[148]李娟.基于政府财政能力的住房保障适度水平研究——以南京市为例[J].中国房地产金融,2008(1)：41-44.
[149]杨阳,谢京华.我国城镇住房保障的财力保障机制研究[J].前沿,2009(6)：67-71.
[150]莫雪娟.我国城镇居民住房保障适度规模研究[D].暨南大学,2008.
[151]贾春梅,葛扬.对地方政府保障房支出缺口的估计——来自江苏省的证据[J].经济评论,2012(1)：67-75.
[2]Clapham,D. Housing and the Economy:Broadening Comparative Housing Research. Urban Studies.1996
[3]Burns, L.and Grebler, L. The Housing of Nations:Analysis and Policy in a Comparative Framework. Macmillan.1977
[4]Eamonn.D'Arcy and Georffrey Keogh,. The Property Market and Urban Competi-Tiveness:A Review[J] Urban Studies.1999
[5]Lund,B. Understanding Housing Policy. [M].Bristol:Policy Press.2006
[6]Malpass, P,and Murie, A. Housing Policy and Practice..5th edition. Macmillan,1999
[7]Legrand J. Motivation,Agency and Public Policy:of Knightsand Knaves,Pawns and Queens[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press.2003
[8]Ball M. Improving Housing Markets. RICS Leading Edge Series,2003
[9]Donnison D.V. The Government of Housing.[M].Harmondsworth:Penguin.1967
[10]Esping-Andersen,G The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. [M].Cambring:Polity Press.1990
[11]Doling,J. Comparative Housing Policy:Government and Housing in Advanced Industrialized Countries. St.Martin's Press,1997
[12]Spink,B. What Has the State Ever Done for USA.In Somerville and Sprigings (eds), Housing and Social Policy.Routledge,2005
[13]Shidlo G. Housing policy in developing countries.[M].New York:Routledge,1990
[14]Groves R,Murie A,Watson C. Housing and the New Welfare State:Perspectives from East Asia and Europe[M].Farnham:Ashgate Press.2007
[15]James C. Ohls. Public police toward low income housing and filtering in housing markets [J]. Journal of Urban Economics,1975
[16]Arnott R J, Braid R M, Davidson R, et al. A general equilibrium spatial model of housing quality and quantity [J].Regional Science and Urban Economics,1999
[17]Apgar, William C.. "Which Housing Policy Is Best". Housing Policy Debate,1990
[18]Laferrere, Anne and David Le Blanc. "How do housing allowances affect rents? An empirical analysis of the French case". Journal of Housing Economics, March 2004
[19]Murray, Michael P. "Subsidized and Unsubsidized HousingStocks1935-1987:Crowding Out and Cointegration". Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics,1999
[20]Stephen Malpezzi and Kerry Vandell. "Does the low-income housing tax credit increase the supply of housing?" Journal of Housing Economics,2002
[21]郑思齐,符育明,任荣荣.住房保障的财政成本承担：中央政府还是地方政府?[J].公共行政评论,2009(6)：109-125.
[22]张双甜,罗晓庚.保障性住房供给的博弈分析[J].工程管理学报,2010(5)：568-573.
[23]蔡冰菲.保障性住房建设中地方政府与中央政府的博弈分析[J].社会科学家,2009(12)：40-43.
[24]欧阳希玲,刘祁,刘源.改善保障性住房供给的克拉克机制探析[J].中国房地产金融,2011(4)：33-36.
[25]冯念一,陆建忠,朱嬿.对保障性住房建设模式的思考[J].建筑经济,2007(8)：27-30.
[26]蒋华东.住房保障：建立健全政府主导的多元供给体制[J].经济体制改革,2009(3)：153-156.
[27]王松华.我国住房保障体系非均衡供给的实证分析[J].经济问题,2009(4)：41-42.
[28]厉伟.非营利组织建设与住房供给[J].城市问题,2007(12)：55-59.
[29]谭禹,刘辉煌,夏励嘉.启动中低收入者住房需求与合作建房研究[J].经济纵横,2009(7)：114-116.
[30]宋博通.政府兴建住房与货币补贴成本比较研究[J].深圳大学学报,2001(1)：71-77.
[31]宋博通.三种典型住房补贴政策的“过滤”研究[J].城乡建设,2002(8)：27-29.
[32]赖华东,蔡靖方.城市住房保障政策效果及其选择——基于住宅过滤模型的思考[J].经济评论,2007(3)：136-140.
[33]方建国.政府住房保障制度新政的经济学分析——重新认识“实物补贴”和“货币补贴”问题[J].中山大学学报(社会科学版),2008(6)：194-198.
[34]邓中美.社会保障性住房类型的评价[J].厦门理工学院学报,2009(2)：67-71.
[35]邬丽萍.住房保障及其形式选择[J].改革与战略,2004(7)：32-34.
[36]徐姗姗.国内外住房补贴模式研究述评[J].理论月刊,2006(S1)：68-70.
[37]孟勉.谈中低收入阶层住房供给问题[J].城市开发,2004(13)：58-61.
[38]孙冰,刘洪玉,卢玉玲.中低收入家庭住房补贴的形式与效率[J].经济体制改革,2005(4)：20-24.
[39]姚珍珍.中国公共住房政策模式研究[M].上海：上海财经大学出版社.2009
[40]陈劲松.公共住房浪潮[M].北京：机械工业出版社.2006
[41]李国栋,梁平,张娅岚.公共政策视野下城市中低收入群体住房供给调整思路探讨——对现行经济适用房问题的反思[J].科技创业月刊,2007(6)：71-72.
[42]郭士征,张腾.中国住房保障体系构建研究——基于“三元到四维”的视角[J].广东社会科学,2010(6)：5-11.
[43]陈淮.住房保障体系的认识问题探析[J].江南论坛,2009(4)：49-51.
[44]曾国安,胡晶晶.论中国城镇住房保障体系改革和发展的基本思路与目标构架[J].江汉论坛,2011(2)：15-20.
[45]褚超孚.城镇住房保障模式及其在浙江省的应用研究[D].浙江大学,2005.
[46]徐虹.住房保障水平发展趋势分析[J].兰州学刊,2011(5)：58-63.
[47]陶雪良,刘洪玉.北京市经济适用住房供给规模影响因素的实证分析[J].系统工程理论与实践,2010(3)：464-468.
[48]关静.如何把握住房保障之“度”[J]中国房地产,2006(10)：69-71.
[49]焦怡雪,尹强.关于保障性住房建设比例问题的思考[J].城市规划,2008(9)：38-45.
[50]尚梅.中低收入阶层居民住房问题研究——探索西安市城镇居民保障性住房与商品性住房供给比例[J].价格理论与实践,2008(5)：44-45.
[51]张文君,刘超.保障性住房供给量的合理确定—以陕西省为例[J].现代经济信息,2010(7)：201-241.
[52]陈斌,李旻.基于住房过滤模型的南宁市廉租房供给模式研究[J].广西经济管理干部学院学报,2011(1)：15-21.
[53]徐琴.制度安排与社会空间极化——现行公共住房政策透视[J].南京师大学报(社会科学版),2008(3)：26-31.
[54]李健正.住房政策、住房自有与资产建设：东亚社会政策的一种新视角[J].公共行政评论,20]0(3)：48-70.
[55]汤林弟.论基于公民住房权的住房政策架构[J].理论导刊,2012(2)：19-22.
[56]易宪容.中国住房市场的公共政策研究[J].管理世界,2009(10)：62-71.
[57]程大涛.中国住房政策社会目标及供应体系重构的设想[J].经济学家,2010(12)：50-57.
[58]王玉琼.“政策异变”及其解读：以住房政策为例[J].中国行政管理,2007(5)：14-16.
[59]张劲松,林莉.论公共政策制定过程中政府与公民的互动[J].中共福建省委党校学报,2006(2)：24-27.
[60]朱水成.“精英决策”模式下的公民参与研究[J].理论探讨,2008(5)：156-158.
[61]张晖.央地关系变迁、分权与地方政府竞争——对中国经济增长动因的思考[J].商业时代,2011(29)：4-5.
[62]张丽娟.法国中央与地方事权配置模式及其启示[J].中共中央党校学报,2010(3)：93-96.
[63]钟开斌.中国中央与地方关系基本判断：一项研究综述[J].上海行政学院学报,2009(3)：20-29.
[64]谭羚雁,娄成武.保障性住房政策过程的中央与地方政府关系——政策网络理论的分析与应用[J].公共管理学报,2012(1)：52-63.
[65]李斌.分化的住房政策：一项对住房改革的评估性研究[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,2009.
[66]任兴洲.中国住房市场发展趋势与政策研究[M].北京：中国发展出版社,2012.
[67]樊丽明.中国公共品市场与自愿供给分析[M].上海：上海人民出版社,2005.
[68]彭华民等.西方社会福利理论前沿——论国家、社会、体制与政策[M].北京：中国社会出版社,2009.
[69]王春福.公共产品多元治理模式的制度创新[J].管理世界,2007(3)：160-161.
[70]周燕,梁樑.国外公共物品多元化供给研究综述[J].经济纵横,2006(2)：74-76.
[71]余晖,秦虹.公私合作制的中国试验[M].上海：世纪出版集团,上海人民出版社,2005.
[72]郑慧.加拿大公共服务改革研究——公共服务供给机制的重构[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,2011.
[73]尹华,朱明仕.论我国公共服务供给主体多元化协调机制的构建[J].经济问题探索,2011(7)：13-17.
[74]蒋枢泓.成都市限价房的现状及问题分析[J].经营管理者,2011(3)：76-78.
[75]住房和城乡建设部政策研究中心中冶置业集团有限公司联合课题组.求索公共租赁住房之路[M].北京：中国建筑工业出版社,2011.
[76]凤凰网财经.做大做强并非国企改革唯一选项[EB/OL].
[77]李响,周楚军.“破冰”之举,还是“突围”之策?——聚焦北京上海集体建设用地建设租赁住房试点[N].中国国土资源报.
[78]广州提出集体建设用地可建设保障房[J].城市规划通讯,2009(9)：12.
[79]赵飞飞.沪公租房“试探”集体建设用地[N].21世纪经济报道.
[80]陈小君,戴威.对“集体土地上建公租房”政策的法律思考[J].法律科学(西北政法大学学报),2012(3)：154-161.
[81]迈克尔·谢若登.资产与穷人——项新的美国福利政策[M].北京：商务印书馆,2005.
[82]Washingtonpost.Share the Ownership[EB/OL].
[83]迈克尔·谢若登.美国及世界各地的资产建设[J].山东大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2005(1)：23-29.
[84]Gilbert Neil, Terrell Paul.社会福利政策导论[M].上海：华东理工大学出版社,2003.
[85]杨团,孙炳耀.资产社会政策与中国社会保障体系重构[J].江苏社会科学,2005(2)：206-211.
[86]张时飞.引入资产建设要素,破解农保工作困局——呼图壁县的经验与启示[J].江苏社会科学,2005(2)：232-236.
[87]刘振杰.资产建设：新农保的新理念和新范式[J].中共中央党校学报,2011(4)：49-52.
[88]姜丽美.资产建设——失地农民可持续发展的突破点[J].理论导刊,2010(6)：63-64.
[89]钟玉英.美国“资产建设”对消减我国城市低保“负激励效应”的启示[J].特区经济,2011(12)：122-124.
[90]迈克尔·史乐山,邹莉.个人发展账户——“美国梦”示范工程[J].江苏社会科学,2005(2)：201-205.
[91]Reid C K.Achieving the American Dream? A Longitudinal Analysis of the Homeownership Experiences of Low-Income Households[R].Center for Social Development Working Paper,2005.
[92]Carasso M.The Balance Sheets of Low-Income Households:What We Know about Their Assets and Liabilities.[R].Washington, DC:The Urban Institute. Poor Finances:Assets and Low-Income Households Report,2006.
[93]Yadama N, Sherraden M.Effects of assets on attitudes and behaviors:Advance test of a social policy proposal[J].Social Work Research,1996,20(1):3-11.
[94]毛小平,罗建文.影响居民幸福感的社会因素研究——基于CGSS2005数据的分析[J].湖南科技大学学报(社会科学版),2012(3)：42-45.
[95]Moore M, Vonderlack.Saving, IDA Programs, and Effects of IDAs:A Survey of Participants.[R].St. Louis, MO:Washington University in St. Louis, Center for Social Development ,2001.
[96]迈克尔·史乐山,邹莉.美国的资产建设：政策创新与科学研究[Z].2005.
[97]Dietz D.The Social and Private Micro-Level Consequences of Homeownership[J] Journal of Urban Economics,2003(54):401-450.
[98]Haurin D.The Impact of Neighborhood Homeownership Rates:A Review of the Theoretical and Empirical Literature[J].Journal of Housing Research,2003,12(2):119-151.
[99]Williams R.The Impact of Household Wealth and Poverty on Child Development Outcomes: Examining Asset Effects[D]. Washington University:St. Louis.,2003.
[100]Zhan Min and Sherraden M. Assets, Expectations, and Educational Achievement[J].Social Service Review,2003,77(2):191-211.
[101]Shapiro H.Family Assets and School Access:Race and Class in the Structuring of Educational Opportunity[Z].New York:Oxford University Press,2005.112-127.
[102]李春玲.比较视野下的中产阶级形成[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,2009,430.
[103]王卉书胡安其Author.通货膨胀形成的深层次原因探究——基于我国2008-2011年的数据分析[J].商业时代,2012(07)：52-53.
[104]张晓晶,孙涛.中国房地产周期与金融稳定[J].经济研究,2006(1)：23-33.
[105]季明明.国家社会福利保障体系的成功典范——新加坡中央公积金制度研究[J].改革,2000(2)：107-117.
[106]廖俊平.面向城市低收入移民的住房股权计划[J].经济社会体制比较,2007(5)：141-143.
[107]陈淑云.共有产权住房：我国住房保障制度的创新[J].华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2012(1)：48-58.
[108]冯希莹.社会福利政策范式新走向：实施以资产为本的社会福利政策——-对谢若登的《资产与穷人：一项新的美国福利政策》的解读[J].社会学研究,2009(2)：216-227.
[109]朱晨,岳岚.基于规划调控的英国住房保障措施研究[J].城市发展研究,2007(2)：23-28.
[110]汪冬宁,汤小橹,金晓斌,等.基于土地成本和居住品质的保障住房选址研究——以江苏省南京市为例[J].城市规划,2010(3)：57-61.
[111]宋伟轩.大城市保障性住房空间布局的社会问题与治理途径[J].城市发展研究,2011(8)：103-108.
[112]赵明,弗兰克·合雷尔.法国社会住宅政策的演变及其启示[J].国际城市规划,2008(2)：62-66.
[113]孙斌栋,刘学良.美国混合居住政策及其效应的研究述评——兼论对我国经济适用房和廉租房规划建设的启示[J].城市规划学刊,2009(1)：90-97.
[114]刘志林,韩雅飞.规划政策与可支付住房建设——来自美国和英国的经验[J].国际城市规划,2010(3)：90-96.
[115]焦怡雪.促进居住融和的保障性住房混合建设方式探讨[J].城市发展研究,2007(5)：57-61.
[116]孙斌栋,刘学良.欧洲混合居住政策效应的研究述评及启示[J].国际城市规划,2010(5)：96-102.
[117]黄匡时,嘎日达.社会融合理论研究综述[J].新视野,2010(6)：86-88.
[118]卢国显.中西方社会距离的研究综述[J].学海,2005(5)：119-125.
[119]桂勇,黄荣贵.社区社会资本测量：一项基于经验数据的研究[J].社会学研究,2008(3)：122-142.
[120]李强,李洋.居住分异与社会距离[J].北京社会科学,2010(1)：4-11.
[121]吴莉萍,黄茜,周尚意.北京中心城区不同社会阶层混合居住利弊评价——对北太平庄和北新桥两个街道辖区的调查[J].北京社会科学,2011(3)：73-78.
[122]边燕杰.城市居民社会资本的来源及作用：网络观点与调查发现[J].中国社会科学,2004(3)：136-146.
[123]田野,栗德祥,毕向阳.不同阶层居民混合居住及其可行性分析[J].建筑学报,2006(4)：36-39.
[124]钟涨宝,陶琴.外来务工人员子女和本地学生的社会距离研究——基于双向度社会距离测量[J].南京社会科学,2010(8)：76-84.
[125]边燕杰,王文彬,张磊,等.跨体制社会资本及其收入回报[J].中国社会科学,2012(2)：110-126.
[126]高春凤.标签理论视角下流动人口融入城市问题研究[J].农业考古,2011(6)：234-237.
[127]苏振民,林炳耀.城市居住空间分异控制：居住模式与公共政策[J].城市规划,2007(2)：45-49.
[128]洪波.租售并举、以租为主——经济适用房政策“变脸”进入倒计时[J].中国经济周刊,2006(42)：26-27.
[129]贾海峰.地方住房保障重心下移[N].21世纪经济报道,2008-12-10.
[130]赵沛楠.加快建设保障性安居工程多渠道解决住房困难家庭的住房问题专访住房和城乡建设部住房保障司司长侯淅珉[J]中国投资,2009(12)：50-53.
[131]沈卫平.我国住房保障制度建设：经验、问题与发展[J].现代经济探讨,2009(10)：43-47.
[132]曹建海,林延.构建住房的“大保障”体系研究[J].现代城市研究,2009(12)：12-16.
[133]张齐武,徐燕雯.经济适用房还是公共租赁房?——对住房保障政策改革的反思[J].公共管理学报,2010(4)：86-92.
[134]任俊生,程秀梅.“有尊严”的城镇居民住房及其实现途径[J].福建论坛(人文社会科学版),2011(3)：9-12.
[135]鲍家伟.廉租住房与经济适用住房衔接问题研究[J].湖北社会科学,2008(7)：91-93.
[136]汪利娜.住房保障需要新思路新举措[J].中国建设信息,2011(5)：18-21.
[137]廖阳,李陈广,庞欣.我国保障性住房融合问题初探[J].商业时代,2011(20)：109-110.
[138]曾国安,张倩.论发展公共租赁住房的必要性、当前定位及未来方向[J].山东社会科学,2011(2)：79-85.
[139]宋伟轩.大城市保障性住房空间布局的社会问题与治理途径[J].城市发展研究,2011(8)：103-108.
[140]陈淮.建立符合中国国情的住房保障体系[J].宏观经济管理,2010(11)：11.
[141]朱莉萍.城镇住房保障水平研究[D]同济大学,2008.
[142]李娜.中国城镇适度住房保障水平研究[D].中国人民大学,2006.
[143]郭晓宇.基于住房服务和类别选择的住房需求研究——理论和来自杭州的实证[M].经济科学出版社,2010.
[144]许云华,张显武,刘冬华.城市化进程中住房需求影响因素的实证分析——以合肥市为例[J].特区经济,2011(11)：202-205.
[145]徐虹.住房保障水平发展趋势分析[J].兰州学刊,2011(5)：58-63.
[146]杨霞,徐邓耀.城市发展中人口结构变化与住房需求的研究[J].开发研究,2011(2)：84-87.
[147]刘贵文,李婧.我国家庭住房适宜居住面积研究[J].住宅科技,2007(2)：5-9.
[148]李娟.基于政府财政能力的住房保障适度水平研究——以南京市为例[J].中国房地产金融,2008(1)：41-44.
[149]杨阳,谢京华.我国城镇住房保障的财力保障机制研究[J].前沿,2009(6)：67-71.
[150]莫雪娟.我国城镇居民住房保障适度规模研究[D].暨南大学,2008.
[151]贾春梅,葛扬.对地方政府保障房支出缺口的估计——来自江苏省的证据[J].经济评论,2012(1)：67-75.