Hui, E C M; Liang, C; Wang, Z; Song, B T and Gu, Q (2012) Real estate bubbles in China: A tale of two cities. Construction Management and Economics, 30(11), pp. 951-961. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
As housing markets have overheated recently in urban China, housing price bears substantial risk. The issue of housing price bubbles in these markets has become a popular and significant topic among consumers, policymakers and academia alike. In particular, Guangzhou and Shenzhen, as the most important markets for revealing the condition of the housing market in the Pearl River Delta, have attracted much attention in the period of prosperity. As such, an investigation into the bubble issue in these two cities is conducted by using an improved model, the time-varying risk model. The empirical work reveals that explosive bubbles did periodically (2003 Q1 to 2006 Q2 and 2009 Q2 to 2010 Q1) have an impact on the two markets. For the rest of the period, housing markets in both Guangzhou and Shenzhen are found to be significantly influenced by macro adjustments and various economic events. The implication of the research provides a reference for policymaking in addressing the issue of softening in China's real estate market.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | housing price bubble; housing research; price to income ratio; state space model |
| Index terms: | housing, academia, income, investigation, markets, China, real estate, housing research |
| Subjects: | educational institutions, economic analysis, real estate economics, construction type, Geography, data collection methods, urban design |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Urban Studies, Research Practice, Construction Technology, Design Practice, Education, Geographical Context |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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