Concentration analysis of new private residential units market in Hong Kong

Cheung, S O; Levina, B and Niu, Y (2017) Concentration analysis of new private residential units market in Hong Kong. Construction Economics and Building, 17(2), pp. 1-23. ISSN 2204-9029

Abstract

The new residential property price in Hong Kong has rocketed in the last decade and has ranked within the top three metropolitan cities in the world. Housing is a necessity for most people, high residential property price has its social ramification. The rocketing price seems not solely the result of the market. As such, this raised the issue of competition in this market. This study employs Concentration Ratio and Hirfindahl-Hirschman index to evaluate the market concentration of the New Private Resident Units Market in Hong Kong. Using the best information available in the public domains and applying universal thresholds, the New Private Resident Units Market in Hong Kong is considered moderately concentrated. It is noted that the big five listed developers in Hong Kong are collectively holding a dominant position of the potential supply. Moreover, the top three have comparable market shares thus suggesting no monopoly exists. It is also found that the substantial land banks held by the five big listed developers, amount to 60% of that owned by the Government. These developers will therefore retain their dominant market power in the future. Further study is recommended to examine whether the big developers have abused their market power.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: market concentration; market concentration competition; barriers to entry
Index terms: housing, residential property, land, competition, Hong Kong, market share
Subjects: real estate economics, market analysis, Geography, construction type
Topics: Construction Technology, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Urban Studies
Descriptive scope: 2 PC

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here