The marketisation of non-local higher education provision as part of the response to the massification of higher education in Hong Kong has given rise to unintended problems around issues of educational quality, which are addressed through a specific regulatory framework. The central argument of this study is that the nature of this 'mandatory registration versus incentive accreditation' regulatory framework is not adequate for ensuring the quality and responsiveness of cross-border education provision in Hong Kong. This decentralisation of the quality assurance function, which leaves the provider country responsible for programme quality, may potentially jeopardise students' chances of success in their career development. This research uses survey and focus group methods to examine students' views on the relative importance of quality indicators as they pursue their cross-border educational studies in Hong Kong. This is the first time this issue has been examined from the students' perspective, thus allowing their problems to emerge and their voices to be heard. The research findings reveal that students on these courses are least satisfied with a number of quality issues, particularly the time and attention they receive from teaching staff, and the lack of effective feedback channels for programme improvement. The most important finding is that students have been confused about the status of local accreditation of non-local programmes in relation to the perception of employer recognition. The dissertation ends with a series of recommendations about how these issues may be ameliorated.