Real-World Asset (RWA) Tokenisation in Asia: Emerging Use Cases and Regulatory Pathways

The tokenisation of real-world assets (RWAs) involves transforming conventional assets, such as artwork, bonds, buildings, and farmlands, into digital, blockchain-based tokens. This innovation represents a major change in asset management and exchange, creating new possibilities for blockchain finance and various non-financial applications secured by cryptography. In the Web3 ecosystem, the idea of ‘putting assets on-chain’ is no longer novel. As of September 2025, the total global market capitalisation for RWA stood at $30.91 billion, which indicates strong momentum toward becoming a trillion-dollar market within the next decade.

Asia has been central to this progress. In 2025, the region’s major financial hubs made decisive regulatory moves that shaped the direction of tokenisation practice. Singapore and Hong Kong, in particular, have built more structured regulatory environments than other international financial centres, and offer clarity that encourages institutional participation. The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) strengthened its position as a regulator capable of balancing innovation with investor protection. For corporates and institutions, a key milestone was the further development of MAS’s Project Guardian, which is an industry collaboration designed to test asset tokenisation models under regulatory supervision. Hong Kong also accelerated its digital-asset strategy in 2025. The city advanced its licensing regimes, expanded live settlement infrastructure, and launched the HKMA’s Project Ensemble sandbox to test tokenisation use cases locally and across the region. With the Stablecoins Ordinance coming into force in August 2025 and the Virtual Asset Service Provider (VASP) licensing regime fully implemented, both Hong Kong and mainland Chinese retail investors increased their participation in tokenised funds and authorised digital-asset products.

As these developments gather pace, a broader question naturally arises: is Asia laying the groundwork for the next phase of blockchain-enabled finance, one built on real utility rather than speculation? Our paper, ‘Tokenisation of Real-World Assets (RWA): Emerging Practices, Case Studies, and Regulatory Trends in Asia’, examines three RWA implementation cases in the region: Longshine’s tokenisation of EV charging revenue rights, the tokenisation of a commercial tower in Causeway Bay, and the ChinaAMC RMB tokenised money fund. Drawing on lessons from these cases, we outline key RWA models in three main sectors (renewable energy, real estate, and financial markets) and provide legal and regulatory insights for asset owners and investors engaging with the Asian capital markets, particularly through Hong Kong. Here are our key findings:

Legal Structures Must Be ‘Asset-Specific’, Not ‘One-Size-Fits-All’

The legal structure of the token depends heavily on the characteristics of the underlying asset. A universal model for RWA does not exist, and any structure must align with the asset’s cash-flow profile and ownership framework. In the renewable-energy sector, Longshine’s model tokenises revenue rights generated from EV charging services rather than ownership of the charging infrastructure, resulting in a hybrid structure that combines yield-generating features with consumption rights. The Causeway Bay commercial tower demonstrates a different approach. By using the ERC-3525 standard, the project tokenises actual equity interests in the building through an SPV arrangement, allowing property claims to remain enforceable under existing legal frameworks. Rental income from the property was distributed daily via smart contracts to ensure transparency and automation in profit allocation. Internet of Things (IoT) sensors were deployed throughout the building to monitor real-time occupancy and vacancy rates, which provides continuous data verification to support asset valuation and performance tracking. The ChinaAMC RMB tokenised money fund adopts another model, which operates as a hybrid between a stablecoin-like instrument and a sovereign bond fund, by offering T+0 settlement and 1:1 redemption through a licensed exchange that acts as custodian. The mechanism exemplifies the broader concept of RWA tokenisation by including both physical and financial assets. Through RWAs, investors can use stablecoins to gain exposure to almost any asset that could traditionally be purchased with fiat currency.

The Strategic Role of Hong Kong: Balancing Legal Certainty and Operational Efficiency

For Mainland Chinese assets undergoing tokenisation via Hong Kong, the most common way is to restructure cross-border rights through a Hong Kong-based Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV). After incorporation, the SPV becomes the holder of the rights to be tokenised, which may be transferred through equity transfer, asset transfer, or assignment of income rights depending on the asset and commercial objective. Hong Kong’s appeal as an SPV jurisdiction lies in its mature common-law system, predictable legal environment, and highly developed financial infrastructure supporting settlement, custody, compliance, and institutional access. Its geographic proximity and cultural alignment with Mainland China reduce coordination costs, simplify communication, and lower execution risk for cross-border deals between the two regions. As regulatory technology advances and cooperation deepen, Hong Kong is positioned to offer a stable and innovation-friendly environment for the long-term development of RWA tokenisation.

RWA as the New Mechanism for ‘Asset Export’ and ‘Going Global’

China maintains a cautious approach toward cryptocurrency trading, but Hong Kong has become a strategic connector for digital-asset initiatives with global reach. RWA tokenisation therefore represents a new form of ‘Going Global’ for Chinese enterprise, shifting from exporting products to exporting on-chain asset claims. Tokenising receivables, inventory, or infrastructure enables Mainland companies to unlock liquidity, shorten payment cycles, and access overseas capital markets more effectively. However, these advantages come with complex legal considerations. Issuers must comply with China’s Data Security Law (DSL) and Personal Information Protection Law (PIPL) before transferring industrial data to public blockchains. Cross-border capital flows must be routed through authorised mechanisms, such as Circular 37 filings, to avoid breaching China’s strict capital-control framework.

As tokenisation moves from proof-of-concept to real economic deployment, the key questions will shift from ‘Can we tokenise this asset?’ to ‘How should it be structured, and under which jurisdiction?’ Driven by Hong Kong and Singapore, Asia has already begun to shape the answers. The next stage will test how these early frameworks scale, how they interact with cross-border rules, and how effectively they support the broader ambition of tokenising modern asset markets. The momentum is clear, and the implications for the region’s financial architecture are only beginning to unfold.

The full paper can be accessed here.

Ci Ren is a Lecturer in Business Law at the School of Law, University of Leeds

Lerong Lu is a Reader in Law at the Dickson Poon School of Law, King’s College London

Ningyao Ye is an Assistant Professor at the School of Juridical Science, China University of Political Science and Law

Yuxiang Zhou is a Senior Counsel at Beijing S&P Law Firm