This issue of the Journal of Property Finance is devoted to Pacific-Rim property. One of the most significant developements in international property over the last 10 years has been the dynamic changes in Pacific-Rim property.

In particular, the last ten years for Pacific-Rim property have seen:

1. the emergence of significant property markets in socialist countries (e.g. China, Vietnam).

2. the emergence of some of the world's most expensive property markets (e.g. Tokyo, Hong Kong, Beijing)

   .

3. the significant economic development of most Asian countries, reflected in the dynamics of the respective property markets. In the case of Singapore, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia and China, average annual growth in GDP over 1995-97 is projected to be in excess on 8% p.a., compared to only 2% p.a. in Australia and Japan.

4. the rapidly changing impact of demographic factors, with 13 of the 30 largest cities in the world being in Asia by 2000.

5. the significant role of property companies in the economies of most Asian countries, far in excess of that traditionally seen in the USA or UK. For example, Hong Kong property companies account for over 35% of the stock market capitalisation, compared to only 1% in USA and UK and 7% in Australia.

6. the evolution and maturing of Asian property markets (eg: Singapore, Hong Kong).

7. the significant role of Pacific Rim investors in international property markets (e.g. Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore).

All of the above factors have contributed to Pacific-Rim property being amongst the dynamic, volatile and least understood property markets in the world. The critical examination of these dynamic markets has presented major challenges and exciting opportunities to property researchers in recent years.

This special issue of JPF presents the result of this research. All of the papers examine key issues in the Pacific-Rim property markets of Hong Kong, China, Singapore and Australia.

For Hong Kong, Newell and Chau examine the relationship between property company and property market performance over 1984-94. The paper by Brown develops a methodology to identify buy-sell strategies for commercial property, while Tse examines the relationship between mortgage flows and house prices. In each of these papers, the unique structural features of the Hong Kong property market are important considerations in the research findings.

For China, Li examines problems associated with property developments analysis for joint venture projects. This study highlights the need to develop appropriate methodologies in socialist countries, such as China, where property markets have only emerged in the last few years.

For Singapore, Liow analyses share price discounts of property companies over 1980-94 and their relationship to property market performance.

For Australia, Wilson and Okunev examine for evidence of segmentation in the domestic property and equity markets, as well as assissing whether securitised property markets are segmented internationally. The results provide important insights concerning risk reduction and portfolio diversification benefits for Australian property. In the last paper, Rowland examines the effects of borrowing on property returns for Perth residential property over 1982-94.

The focus of six of these seven research papers in this special issue on the three property markets of Hong Kong, Singapore and Australia is hardly surprising, due to the lack of significant and reliable property performance series in most other Pacific-Rim countries.

The development of such property performance series must be a top priority in future years to ensure effective property investment decision-making in these dynamic property markets. Such property information can only add ot our body of knowledge for some of the most exciting, dynamic and least understood property markets in the world.

Associate Professor Graeme Nevell
University of Western Sydney