The land governance cost on co-ownership: A study of the cross-lease in New Zealand

Higher land-use intensity can be achieved by subdividing the land or by subdividing the structure built on it. The former avoids co-ownership but is subject to topographical constraints, whereas the latter (e.g. apartment units) uses each unit of land more efficiently but entails management of the common parts. This study examines a hybrid approach to subdivision, known as “cross-lease” in New Zealand, where land is co-owned, and each co-owner singly and separately holds his or her structure (a detached or semi-detached house) through a very long lease. The delineation of boundaries and the maintenance of communal resources relies on self-governance. From the owners’ perspective, how well does the self-governance of cross-lease work, as compared to government regulation of unit titles? Based on preferences revealed by property transactions, cross-lease is found to trade at a price discount of 0.42% per owner relative to unit titles of property of equivalent quality. Moreover, the discount increases with the number of owners sharing the land. Self-governance is, therefore, more costly than government regulation when there are multiple co-owners, making monitoring and conflict resolution difficult. •Differentiate between multiple ownership effects and regulatory effects on house price premiums.•Based on a market-generated hybrid institutional arrangement for land co-ownership in New Zealand: cross-lease titles.•Compare across freehold interests, cross-lease, and unit titles.•Single ownership is confirmed to have a premium in house price.•Self-governance is found to be more costly than government regulation when there are more co-owners.