Real estate market transparency in Fiji: structural insights from a JLL framework analysis

Purpose Assesses real estate market transparency in Fiji using the JLL Global Real Estate Transparency Index framework. Fiji has the most developed property market among Pacific Small Island Developing States, yet remains absent from international transparency assessments that affect investment and risk management decisions. Design/methodology/approach Applies JLL’s six-dimensional transparency framework to Fiji’s property market. Both authors are practitioner-academics holding RICS Chartered Valuation Surveyor designations, are the only such internationally qualified valuers registered in Fiji and bring over 50 years of combined valuation practice across Pacific SIDS, USA, Australia and New Zealand markets. Scoring follows JLL methodology, with assessment by both authors providing inter-rater validation. Findings Fiji scores 3.94 (1.0 = highly transparent; 5.0 = opaque), placing it indicatively in the “Low Transparency” tier. Sub-index analysis reveals structural constraints distinct from implementation failures: absent property performance indices (4.58), near-complete market data gaps (4.84) and governance weaknesses (3.33) driven by ownership concentration. Regulatory frameworks, unchanged since 1986, constrain professional oversight and enforcement capacity. The diagnostic value lies in the sub-index pattern rather than the composite score, reflecting methodological adaptations necessary for small-market applications. Research limitations/implications Two-expert evaluation reflects the limited practitioner base in Pacific SIDS. Visibility of first-rater scores by the second rater may have introduced anchoring effects, though the 14% disagreement rate suggests independent judgment was not eliminated. The study establishes a baseline measurement enabling longitudinal tracking and demonstrates the framework’s adaptation to small markets where multi-respondent approaches face feasibility constraints. Practical implications Identifies institutional gaps requiring attention: performance measurement systems, market data infrastructure, regulatory modernisation, and governance improvements. Provides evidence base for capacity-building priorities affecting investment analysis, mortgage lending, taxation and disaster risk management. Social implications Transparency deficits affect property taxation equity, mortgage lending risk and disaster compensation frameworks. Improved transparency reduces information asymmetries affecting investment and valuation quality. Originality/value First systematic transparency assessment of any Pacific SIDS property market. Identifies structural constraints that distinguish small-market transparency challenges from implementation failures, and demonstrates how global frameworks can be adapted to markets operating below the scale assumptions embedded in commercial transparency indices.