|Part of a series on|
Rent regulation is a system of laws, administered by a court or a public authority, which aims to ensure the affordability of housing and tenancies on the rental market for dwellings. Generally, a system of rent regulation involves:
- Price controls, limits on the rent that a landlord may charge, typically called rent control or rent stabilization
- Eviction controls: codified standards by which a landlord may terminate a tenancy: :
- Obligations on the landlord or tenant regarding adequate maintenance of the property
- A system of oversight and enforcement by an independent regulator and ombudsman
The loose term "rent control" covers a spectrum of regulation which can vary from setting the absolute amount of rent that can be charged, with no allowed increases, to placing different limits on the amount that rent can increase; these restrictions may continue between tenancies, or may be applied only within the duration of a tenancy. As of 2016, at least 14 of the 36 OECD countries have some form of rent control in effect, including four states in the United States.
Rent regulation is one of several classes of policies proposed to improve housing affordability, alongside subsidies (including vouchers and tax credits) and policies aimed at expanding the housing supply. There is consensus among economists that rent control reduces the quality and quantity of rental housing units.: 
Forms of rent regulation
The loose term "rent control" can apply to several types of price control:
- "strict price ceilings", also known as rent freeze systems, or absolute or first generation rent controls, in which no increases in rent are allowed at all (rent is typically frozen at the rate existing when the law was enacted)
- "vacancy control", also known as strict or strong rent control, in which the rental price can rise, but continues to be regulated in between tenancies (a new tenant pays almost the same rent as the previous tenant) and
- "vacancy decontrol", also known as tenancy or second-generation rent control, which limits price increases during a tenancy, but allows rents to rise to market rate between tenancies (new tenants pay market rate rent, but increases are limited as long as they remain).
"As soon as the land of any country has all become private property, the landlords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed, and demand a rent even for its natural produce. The wood of the forest, the grass of the field, and all the natural fruits of the earth, which, when land was in common, cost the labourer only the trouble of gathering them, come, even to him, to have an additional price fixed upon them. He must then pay for the licence to gather them; and must give up to the landlord a portion of what his labour either collects or produces. This portion, or, what comes to the same thing, the price of this portion, constitutes the rent of land ...."
Rent price controls remain the most controversial element of a system of rent regulation. Historically, economists such as Adam Smith and David Ricardo viewed landlords as producing very little that was valuable, and so regarded "rents" as an exploitative concept. Economists note that the land value tax is a way to capture this unearned value. Modern rent controls (sometimes called rent leveling or rent stabilization) are intended to protect tenants in privately owned residential properties from excessive rent increases by mandating gradual rent increases, while at the same time ensuring that landlords receive a return on their investment that is deemed fair by the controlling authority.
A number of neo-classical and Keynesian economists say that some forms of rent control regulations create shortages and exacerbate scarcity in the housing market by discouraging private investment in the rental market. In addition, there would be a dead weight loss and inefficiency since some of the loss due to price ceilings is never gained again. This analysis targeted nominal rent freezes, and the studies conducted were mainly focused on rental prices in Manhattan, or elsewhere in the United States.
Historically, there have been two types of rent control – vacancy control (where the rent level of a unit is controlled irrespective of whether the tenant remains in the unit or not) and vacancy decontrol (where the rent level is controlled only while the existing tenant remains in the unit). In California prior to 1997, both types were allowed (the Costa/Hawkins bill of that year phased out vacancy control provisions). A 1990 study of Santa Monica, CA showed that vacancy control in that city protected existing tenants (lower increases in rent and longer stability). However, the policy potentially discouraged investors from building new rental units.
A 2000 study that compared the border areas of four California cities having vacancy control provisions (Santa Monica, Berkeley, West Hollywood, East Palo Alto) with the border areas of adjoining jurisdictions (two of which allowed vacancy decontrol, including Los Angeles, and two of which had no rent control) showed that existing tenants in the vacancy control cities had lower rents and longer tenure than in the comparison areas. Thus, the ordinances helped protect the existing tenants and, therefore, increased community stability. However, there were fewer new rental units created in the border areas of the vacancy controlled cities over the 10-year period.
A study that compared the effects of local rent control measures (both vacancy control and vacancy decontrol) with other local growth management measures in 490 California cities and counties (including all the largest ones) showed that rent control was stronger than individual land use restrictions (but not the aggregate effect of all growth restrictions) in reducing the number of rental units constructed between 1980 and 1990. The measures (both rent control and growth management) helped displace new construction from the metropolitan areas to the interiors of the state with low income and minority populations being particularly impacted.
In 1994, San Francisco voters passed a ballot initiative which expanded the city's existing rent control laws to include small multi-unit apartments with four or fewer units, built prior to 1980 (about 30% of the city's rental housing stock at the time).: : : A 2019 study found that San Francisco's rent control laws reduced tenant displacement from rent controlled units in the short-term, but resulted in landlords removing 30% of the rent controlled units from the rental market (by conversion to condos or TICs) which led to a 15% citywide decrease in total rental units, and a 7% increase in citywide rents.: : 
In a 1992 stratified, random survey of 464 US economists, economics graduate students, and members of the American Economic Association, 93% "generally agreed" or "agreed with provisos" that "A ceiling on rents reduces the quantity and quality of housing available.": :
A 2009 review of the economic literature: [better source needed] by Blair Jenkins through EconLit covering theoretical and empirical research on multiple aspects of the issue, including housing availability, maintenance and housing quality, rental rates, political and administrative costs, and redistribution, for both first generation and second generation rent control systems, found that "the economics profession has reached a rare consensus: Rent control creates many more problems than it solves".: : : : [better source needed]
In a 2012 poll of 41 economists by the Initiative on Global Markets (IGM) Economic Experts Panel, which queried opinions on the statement "Local ordinances that limit rent increases for some rental housing units, such as in New York and San Francisco, have had a positive impact over the past three decades on the amount and quality of broadly affordable rental housing in cities that have used them," 13 members said they strongly disagreed, 20 disagreed, 1 agreed, and 7 either did not answer, were undecided, or had no opinion. : :
In a 2013 analysis of the body of economic research on rent control by Peter Tatian at the Urban Institute, he stated that "The conclusion seems to be that rent stabilization doesn't do a good job of protecting its intended beneficiaries—poor or vulnerable renters—because the targeting of the benefits is very haphazard.", and concluded that: "Given the current research, there seems to be little one can say in favor of rent control." : : :
Many economists suggest housing subsidies as a way to make housing more affordable to renters without distorting the housing market as much as rent control, but expanding the existing subsidy programs would require sharp increases in government spending.
Paul Krugman writes that rent control inhibits construction of new housing, creates bitter tenant–landlord relations, and in markets with not all apartments under rent control, causes an increase in rents for uncontrolled units.
This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (March 2019)
Early modern Europe
Rent control was used in Rome as early as 1470 to protect Jewish residents from price gouging. Since Jews in the Papal States were forbidden to own property, they were dependent on Christian landlords, who charged them high rents. In 1562, Pope Pius IV granted Jews the right to own property worth up to 1500 Roman scudi and enacted rent stabilization. In 1586, Pope Sixtus V issued a bull ordering landlords to rent out houses to Jewish tenants at reasonable rates.
This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (March 2019)
A survey conducted in 2018 by the Los Angeles Times and the University of Southern California found that 28% of eligible California voters believed that the lack of rent control was the main contributing factor to California's housing affordability crisis. 24% of respondents believed that the most significant cause of the housing crisis was insufficient funding of low-income housing; only 13% believed it was insufficient new housing.
In 2018, a statewide initiative (Proposition 10) attempted to repeal the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, which, if passed, would have allowed cities and municipalities to enact "vacancy control" systems, allowed rent control to be applied to buildings newer than 1995, and would have allowed rent control on single-family homes. (All currently prohibited by Costa-Hawkins.): The proposition failed, 59% to 41%. Another attempt to allow more rent control, 2020 California Proposition 21, failed by an almost identical margin.
Rent regulation by country
In Canada, there are rent regulation laws in each province. For example, in Ontario the Residential Tenancies Act 2006 requires that prices for rented properties do not rise more than 2.5 percent each year, or a lower figure fixed by a government minister.
German rent regulation is found in the "Civil Code" (the Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch) in § 535 to § 580a. As common in German law, regulations are structured into an abstract, more general part that applies to all contracts of a certain type, followed by a more specific section for individual fields of application of this type of contract. Specific regulations for rental contracts governing apartments range from §§ 549 - 577a BGB.
The German law differentiates between the rental price at the starting point of the contract and rent increases throughout the duration of the contract. Generally, the rental price at the starting point of the contract is determined by the contractual agreement between the parties. Only in designated regions with a strained housing market, the rental price at the beginning of the rental agreement are capped by law. Increases in the rental prices throughout the duration of a rental contract are required to follow a "rent level" (Mietspiegel), which is a database of local reference rent prices. This collects all rent prices of new rental contracts of the past four years, and landlords may only increase prices on their property in line with rents in the same locality. Usury Rents are prohibited altogether, so that any price rises above 20 per cent over three years are unlawful.
Tenants may be evicted against their will through a court procedure for a good reason, and in the normal case only with a minimum of three months' notice. Tenants receive unlimited duration of their rental agreement unless the duration is explicitly halted. In practice, landlords have little incentive to change tenants as rental price increases beyond inflation are constrained. During the period of the tenancy, a person's tenancy may only be terminated for very good reasons. A system of rights for the rental property to be maintained by the landlord is designed to ensure quality of housing. Many states, such as Berlin, have a constitutional right to adequate housing, and require buildings to make dwelling spaces of a certain size and ceiling height.
Rent regulation covered the whole of the UK private sector rental market from 1915 to 1980. However, from the Housing Act 1980, it became the Conservative Party's policy to deregulate and dismantle rent regulation. Regulation for all new tenancies was abolished by the Housing Act 1988, leaving the basic regulatory framework was "freedom of contract" by the landlord to set any price. Rent regulations survive among a small number of council houses, and often the rates set by local authorities mirror escalating prices in the non-regulated private market.
Rent regulation in the United States is an issue for each state. In 1921, the US Supreme Court case of Block v. Hirsh held by a majority that regulation of rents in the District of Columbia as a temporary emergency measure was constitutional, but shortly afterwards in 1924 in Chastleton Corp v. Sinclair the same law was unanimously struck down by the Supreme Court. After the 1930s New Deal, the Supreme Court ceased to interfere with social and economic legislation, and a number of states adopted rules. In the 1986 case of Fisher v. City of Berkeley, the US Supreme court held that there was no incompatibility between rent control and the Sherman Act.
As of 2018, four states (California, New York, New Jersey, and Maryland) and the District of Columbia have localities in which some form of residential rent control is in effect (for normal structures, excluding mobile homes). Thirty-seven states either prohibit or preempt rent control, while nine states allow their cities to enact rent control, but have no cities that have implemented it. For the localities with rent control, it often covers a large percentage of that city's stock of rental units: For example, in some of the largest markets: in New York City in 2011, 45% of rental units were either "rent stabilized" or "rent controlled", (these are different legal classifications in NYC) : in the District of Columbia in 2014, just over 50% of rental units were rent controlled, : in San Francisco, as of 2014, about 75% of all rental units were rent controlled, : and in Los Angeles in 2014, 80% of multifamily units were rent controlled. :
In 2019 Oregon's legislature passed a bill which made the state the first in the nation to adopt a state-wide rent control policy. This new law limits annual rent increases to inflation plus 7 percent, includes vacancy decontrol (market rate between tenancies), exempts new construction for 15 years, and keeps the current state ban on local rent control policies (state level preemption) intact. : :
In November 2021, voters in Saint Paul, Minnesota passed a rent control ballot initiative which capped annual rent increases at 3 percent, included vacancy control, and did not exempt new construction, nor allow inflation to be added to the allowable rate increase. This resulted in an 80% reduction in requests for new multifamily housing permits, while in neighboring Minneapolis, where voters authorized the city council to craft a rent control ordinance, yet to be enacted—which may exempt new construction from the rent control caps—permits were up 68%.
- Branco, Marc (20 February 2011). "Rent and Eviction Control Laws". marcbrancolaw.com. Archived from the original on 31 March 2012. Retrieved 19 August 2018.
- Pender, Kathleen (10 September 2016). "Rent control spreading to Bay Area suburbs, to economists' dismay". The San Francisco Chronicle. Archived from the original on 8 October 2016. Retrieved 18 August 2018.
- See the section on Rent regulation#Forms of rent regulation for more detail.
- "PH6.1 RENTAL REGULATION" (PDF). OECD.org - Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 21 December 2016. Archived (PDF) from the original on 16 February 2017. Retrieved 26 November 2018.
- "RENT CONTROL BY STATE LAW" (PDF). National Multifamily Housing Council. 3 September 2020. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 September 2020. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
- "Residential Rent Control Law Guide By State". LandLord.com. Archived from the original on 13 June 2018. Retrieved 3 August 2018.
- Dougherty, Conor (12 October 2018). "Why Rent Control Is a Lightning Rod". The New York Times. Retrieved 26 March 2019.
- Baumol, William J; Blinder, Alan S. (1994). Economics Principles and Policy (6th ed.). Dryden Press. pp. 92–93, 379. ISBN 0-03-098927-2.
- Cooter, Robert; Ulen, Thomas (1997). Law and Economics 2nd Edition. Addison-Wesley. pp. 32–33.
- David A Besanko; Ronald R. Braeutigam (2008). "10.5". Microeconomics (3rd ed.). Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. pp. 374–377. ISBN 978-0470-04924-2.
- B. Douglas Bernheim; Michael D Whinston (2008). Microeconomics (1st ed.). McGraw-Hill Irwin. p. 565. ISBN 978-0-07-290027-9.
- See also the "Economists' views" section for more references supporting this statement.
- Mankiw, N. Gregory (2015). Principles of Economics. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning. p. 31. ISBN 978-1-305-58512-6.
- Britschgi, Christian. "The New York Times Posts Pro-Rent-Control Cringe". reason.com/. Reason. Retrieved 14 January 2022.
- Brandts, Jordi; Busom, Isabel; Lopez-Mayan, Cristina; Panadés, Judith (2022). "Pictures are worth many words: Effectiveness of visual communication in dispelling the rent-control misconception". SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/ssrn.4037381. ISSN 1556-5068.
- Cruz, Christian (19 January 2009). "The pros and cons of rent control". Global Property Guide. Archived from the original on 27 February 2010. Retrieved 5 August 2018.
- MAJASKI, CHRISTINA. "Rent Seeking". Investopedia. Investopedia. Retrieved 3 June 2021.
- "The time may be right for land-value taxes - Beloved of liberals and economists, they have so far never caught on". The Economist. 9 August 2018. Archived from the original on 27 August 2018. Retrieved 9 September 2018.
- C Rapkin,The Private Rental Housing Market in New York City (1966) and G Sternlieb, The Urban Housing Dilemma (1972)
- Jenkins, Blair (1 January 2009). "Rent Control: Do Economists Agree?" (PDF). American Institute for Economic Research. Archived (PDF) from the original on 29 September 2017. Retrieved 14 August 2018.
- Levine, Ned; Grigsby, J. Eugene; Heskin, Allan D. (1990). "Who Benefits from Rent Control? Effects on Tenants in Santa Monica, California". Journal of the American Planning Association. 56 (2): 140–152. doi:10.1080/01944369008975755.
- Heskin, Allan D.; Levine, Ned; Garrett, Mark (2000). "The Effects of Vacancy Control: A Spatial Analysis of Four California Cities". Journal of the American Planning Association. 66 (2): 162–176. doi:10.1080/01944360008976096. S2CID 153160869.
- Levine, Ned (1 November 1999). "The Effects of Local Growth Controls on Regional Housing Production and Population Redistribution in California". Urban Studies. 36 (12): 2047–2068. doi:10.1080/0042098992539. S2CID 153734844.
- Diamond, Rebecca; McQuade, Tim; Qian, Franklin (11 October 2017). "The Effects of Rent Control Expansion on Tenants, Landlords, and Inequality: Evidence from San Francisco" (PDF). National Bureau of Economic Research. Archived (PDF) from the original on 3 August 2018. Retrieved 7 August 2018.
- Murphy, Katy (2 November 2017). "Rent-control policy 'likely fueled the gentrification of San Francisco,' study finds - As California debates rent caps, economists offer a cautionary note". The San Jose Mercury News. Archived from the original on 4 January 2018. Retrieved 7 August 2018.
- Truong, Kevin (9 November 2017). "Rent control linked to gentrification in San Francisco, Stanford study says". American City Business Journals. Archived from the original on 2 December 2018. Retrieved 1 December 2018.
- Qian, Franklin; McQuade, Tim; Diamond, Rebecca (2019). "The Effects of Rent Control Expansion on Tenants, Landlords, and Inequality: Evidence from San Francisco". American Economic Review. 109 (9): 3365–3394. doi:10.1257/aer.20181289. ISSN 0002-8282.
- Robertson, Michelle (3 November 2017). "Rent-control policies likely 'fueled' SF gentrification, Stanford economists say". San Francisco Chronicle. Archived from the original on 3 December 2017. Retrieved 7 August 2018.
- Delgadillo, Natalie (14 February 2018). "Does Rent Control Do More Harm Than Good? - A new study suggests that policies meant to keep rents down actually jack them up overall, reduce the rental stock and fuel gentrification". Governing. Archived from the original on 22 February 2018. Retrieved 7 August 2018.
- Misra, Tanvi (29 January 2018). "Rent Control: a Reckoning". CityLab. Archived from the original on 1 February 2018. Retrieved 30 November 2018.
- Andrews, Edmund (2 February 2018). "Rent Control's Winners and Losers - With rents going through the roof in hot cities, the hunt is on for a better way to protect tenants from being priced out of their homes". Stanford Graduate School of Business. Archived from the original on 9 March 2018. Retrieved 11 December 2018.
- Alston, Richard M.; Kearl, J. R.; Vaughan, Michael B. (1 May 1992). "Is There a Consensus Among Economists in the 1990s?" (PDF). The American Economic Review. 82 (2): 203–209. JSTOR 2117401. Archived (PDF) from the original on 1 September 2006.
- Krugman, Paul (7 June 2000). "Reckonings; A Rent Affair". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 6 April 2009. Retrieved 10 August 2018.
- Tatian, Peter (2 January 2013). "Is Rent Control Good Policy?". Urban Institute. Archived from the original on 3 July 2015. Retrieved 19 August 2018.
- Beyer, Scott (24 April 2015). "How Ironic: America's Rent-Controlled Cities Are Its Least Affordable". Forbes. Archived from the original on 19 July 2015. Retrieved 11 September 2018.
- Valdez, Roger (18 December 2017). "Rent Control Doesn't Help Renters: Some In Washington State Want To Try It Anyway". Forbes. Archived from the original on 23 December 2017. Retrieved 13 September 2018.
- "Rent Control". Initiative on Global Markets. 7 February 2012. Archived from the original on 11 December 2016. Retrieved 14 August 2018.
- Matthews, Dylan (20 August 2013). "Which economist do you agree with most? Take this quiz to find out!". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on 16 August 2018. Retrieved 15 August 2018.
- Jaffe, Eric (9 April 2013). "Some People Will Do Crazy Things for a Rent-Controlled Apartment in NYC". CityLab - The Atlantic. Archived from the original on 12 September 2018. Retrieved 11 September 2018.
- Sowell, Thomas. 2008. Economic Facts and Fallacies. Basic Books, ISBN 0-465-00349-4.
- Sawhill, Ray (10 November 1999). "Black and right - Thomas Sowell talks about the arrogance of liberal elites and the loneliness of the black conservative". Salon. Archived from the original on 7 December 2011. Retrieved 22 September 2018.
- Fraser Nelson (2 May 2014). "Low-rent Labour is positioning itself as the Ukip of the Left". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 29 October 2016.
- Rosalsky, Greg (5 March 2019). "The Return of Rent Control". NPR.
- Willis, John W. (1950). "Short History of Rent Control Laws". Cornell Law Review. 36 (1): 54–94. Retrieved 7 March 2019 – via Cornell University Law Library.
- Dillon, Liam (21 October 2018). "Experts say California needs to build a lot more housing. But the public disagrees". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 25 March 2019.
- Murphy, Katy (6 November 2018). "California's rent-control measure defeated". San Jose Mercury News. Archived from the original on 17 November 2018. Retrieved 25 November 2018.
- "State Ballot Measures" (PDF). Secretary of State of California. Archived (PDF) from the original on 8 January 2019. Retrieved 3 March 2019.
State Totals 4,949,543 7,251,443 Percent 40.6% 59.4%
- "California Proposition 10, Local Rent Control Initiative (2018)".
- English translation available: §§ 535 ff. BGB
- M Haffner, M Elsinga and J Hoekstra (2008). "Rent Regulation: The Balance between Private Landlords and Tenants in Six European Countries". International Journal of Housing Policy. 8 (2): 217–233. doi:10.1080/14616710802037466. S2CID 154288124.
- BGB §573c
- Marc González (10 September 2020). "Catalonia now has a rent control law, via the votes of JxCat, ERC, CUP and Comuns". ElNacional.cat. Retrieved 27 October 2020.
- 256 U.S. 135 (1921)
- 264 U.S. 543 (1924)
- 475 U.S. 260 (1986)
- Pereira, Ivan (11 January 2015). "Battle looms over NYC rent stabilization law". Newsday. Archived from the original on 21 February 2015. Retrieved 4 December 2018.
- Weiner, Aaron (12 December 2014). "Losing Control - D.C.'s rent control laws are supposed to keep housing affordable. So how do landlords keep getting around them?". Washington City Paper. Archived from the original on 26 May 2016. Retrieved 4 December 2018.
- Cutler, Kim-Mai (14 April 2014). "How Burrowing Owls Lead To Vomiting Anarchists (Or SF's Housing Crisis Explained)". TechCrunch. Archived from the original on 30 April 2014. Retrieved 4 December 2018.
- Bergman, Ben (12 September 2014). "LA Rent: Has rent control been successful in Los Angeles?". Southern California Public Radio. Archived from the original on 13 September 2014. Retrieved 4 December 2018.
- Ingber, Sasha (27 February 2019). "Oregon Set To Pass The First Statewide Rent Control Bill". NPR.org. Archived from the original on 6 March 2019. Retrieved 6 March 2019.
- Njus, Elliot (28 February 2019). "Oregon Gov. Kate Brown signs nation's first statewide rent control law". OregonLive. Archived from the original on 5 March 2019. Retrieved 6 March 2019.
- Britschgi, Christian (22 March 2022). "America's Most Controversial Rent Control Law Is Getting a Hasty Makeover - A collapse in new development activity followed St. Paul voters' approval of a strict, vaguely written rent control ordinance. City and state officials are scrambling over how best to fix the new law". Reason.
Tomorrow the St. Paul City Council will discuss the details of implementing Question 1, a brief, voter-passed ordinance that caps annual rent increases at 3 percent and which includes none of the typical exemptions or allowances for new construction, vacant units, or inflation. ... California and Oregon policies also include a number of other exemptions to their state-level rent control laws. They allow property owners, up to a point, to add inflation to allowable rent increases. They both allow landlords to raise rents as high as they want between tenants and have higher caps on rent increases: 5 percent in California and 7 percent in Oregon.
- Galioto, Katie (20 November 2021). "Fearing a spike, tenant advocates keep a close eye on St. Paul rents". Star Tribune.
More than 30,000 St. Paul residents — about 53% of voters — approved an ordinance by referendum earlier this month that will cap annual rent increases at 3%. The city has yet to hammer out the finer points of its new policy, which has been pegged as one of the most stringent rent control measures in the nation because it does not allow landlords to raise rents once a tenant moves out, does not exempt new construction and is not tied to inflation.
- Callaghan, Peter (16 March 2022). "Minnesota Senate committee moves bill to retroactively cancel rent control measures passed by voters in Minneapolis, St. Paul". MinnPost.
Draheim also cited Census Bureau statistics that show requests for housing permits has fallen 80 percent in St. Paul since the passage of the referendum. In Minneapolis, which hasn't drafted an ordinance yet and where new buildings could be exempt from caps, permits are up 68 percent.
- R Arnott, 'Time for Revisionism on Rent Control?' (1995) 9(1) Journal of Economic Perspectives 99
- A Anas, 'Rent Control with Matching Economies: A Model of European Housing Market Regulation' (1997) 15(1) Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics 111–37
- T Ellingsen and P Englund, 'Rent regulation: An introduction' (2003) 10 Swedish Economic Policy Review 3
- H Lind, 'Rent Regulation: A Conceptual and Comparative Analysis' (2001) 1(1) International Journal of Housing Policy 41
- C Rapkin, The Private Rental Housing Market in New York City (1966)
- G Sternlieb, The Urban Housing Dilemma (1972)
- P Weitzman, 'Economics and Rent Regulation: A Call for a New Perspective' (1984–1985) 13 NYU Review of Legal and Social Change 975–988
- M Haffner, M Elsinga and J Hoekstra, 'Rent Regulation: The Balance between Private Landlords and Tenants in Six European Countries' (2008) 8(2) International Journal of Housing Policy 217