1978年中國大陸改革開放，吹皺經濟市場一池春水。住房公有制、住房福利制觀念相繼被打破，揭開房產制度改革曙光。鄧小平在1992年南巡講話後，定調「有中國特色社會主義市場經濟」的基本路線，從根本上解決市場經濟意識形態問題，自此中國大陸房地產市場活水澈底被激發。近十餘年來，中國大陸全國商品房平均價格從2000年2,112元人民幣，攀升至2010年5,032元人民幣，部分重點城市如北京、上海、廣州..等更早已突破萬元人民幣大關。 房產市場不對稱發展加深中國大陸社會結構性矛盾與衝突對立，高房價顯然無益其國內經濟健全發展，這也讓大陸中央不得不正視此一嚴肅問題積極採取宏觀調控手段，企圖壓制漲勢不斷的房價期能消彌廣大民怨。而與之同時因為覬覦中國大陸經濟高速發展背後廣大利益而競相投入中國市場的外資也就格外引起大陸政府的關注，因為「外資炒房」的傳言與疑慮一直困擾著中共當局，在高房價、高民怨的氛圍壟罩下，產官學界檢討外資聲浪甚囂塵上；然而，高房價的背後是否一定有外資刻意炒作？值得探究與思考。 本研究嘗試以中國大陸天津做為觀察標的，運用共整合ARDL模型探討外商直接投資（FDI）對房地產價格波動的影響，釐清外資在房地產價格所扮演的角色。實證模型並納入物價指數（CPI）、人均收入（INC）、貸款利率（INT）、匯率（EXC）與股價（STOCK）為解釋變數，以做為觀察總體經濟因素對大陸房地產市場的影響。實證結果表明，在短期關係上外資的確有拉抬房價效果，不過長期關係影響並不顯著，顯示外資不是實際推升房地產價格的主因，角色定位應為「從犯」而非「主嫌」。研究結果並發現，匯率變動對房地產價格有著顯著實質影響，這意味如果大陸政府要運用匯率這項工具來抑制漲勢不斷的房價，就必須讓人民幣適時升值。不過目前中國大陸仍屬以出口導向為大宗的國家，長期而言，人民幣升值將對其出口造成某種程度衝擊，是以在匯率政策的操作上恐陷入兩難（升值或貶值)的困境。 / The reform and opening in mainland China in 1978 had fretted the surface of the water of the economic market. The concepts of public housing and housing welfare system had been broken, leading to a line of hope in the reform of the house property system. After Xiaoping Deng's speech during his south tour, he set up the basic route of the "socialism market economy with Chinese features", resolving the market economy ideology issue from the root. Since then, the house property market in Chine has been activated. In the recent decade, the average price of commercial residential buildings had increased from YMB$2,112 in 2000 to YMB$5,032 in 2010. In major cities such as Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou, the prices had already went over YMB$10,000. The asymmetric development of the house property market has further caused structural conflicts and confrontations in Mainland China. Apparently, high housing prices were not beneficial to the sound development of the domestic economy. And thus the central government in Mainland China had to face up to this serious problem and aggressively took the microscope controlling measure in the attempt to suppress the increasing housing prices to resolve people's complaints. In the mean time, under the desire for the great profits behind the rapid development of the economy in Mainland China, foreign funds had entered the Chinese market one by one, getting some extra attention of the Chinese government. Because the rumor of "foreign funds in real estate speculation" and some doubles had continuously bothered the Chinese government, under the atmosphere with high housing prices and high social grievance, requests for reviewing foreign funds in the industrial, governmental, academic, and research circles were very broad. However, whether there was real estate speculation with foreign funds behind high housing prices is worth thinking and studying. Using Tianjin City in Mainland China as a target for observation, this study attempted to apply the autoregressive ARDL model to explore the influences of foreign direct investment (FDI) on price changes in housing property, in order to clarify the role foreign funds play in real estate prices. The independent variables included in the model were consumer price index (CPI), per capita income (INC), loan interest (INT), exchange rate (EXC), and stock price (STOCK), in order to observe the influences of the macro economical factors on the Chinese real estate market. According to the empirical results, in the short run, foreign funds could indeed drive up housing prices. However, in the long run, the influence was not significant. This means foreign funds are not the main cause driving up real estate prices. The role they played was a "partner in crime" instead of a "main suspect". The study found that there was indeed a significant and substantial influence of exchange rate changes on real estate prices, meaning that if the Chinese government would like to surprise increasing housing prices using exchange rates as a tool, it is necessary to allow YMB appreciation. However, currently, Mainland China is still a country with mainly exports. In the long run, YMB appreciation may lead to certain impact on China's exportation. Therefore, operating exchange rate related policies may lead to a dilemma (to appreciate or depreciate).