Perspective

The social value of a place has not always been a strong basis for heritage conservation in Hong Kong but a sea of change could be on the horizon. The destruction of some of Hong Kong’s most iconic heritage in the past decade – such as the Central Star Ferry Terminal, Queen’s Pier, and Lee Tung (Wedding Card) Street – created a public uproar. It created recognition that certain places have meaning to society as a whole while Hong Kong government processes have been inadequate in engaging the public to identify the value of such heritage sites. Vocal opposition and resentment generated at the time represented a strong endorsement of social views on heritage issues.

It is now widely accepted around the world that shipping emissions need to be tightly regulated in order to protect public health. Various types of port-related equipment and activities, such as cargo handling machinery and trucking goods to and from ports, also generate pollution. Research shows that, in Hong Kong, the combined emissions from ships and port activity are a significant source of pollution that directly affects some 3.8 million people. The city’s shipping and port management stakeholders have been most active in working with local authorities to define a path towards tighter regulation, and have made progress in reducing emissions.

Cities in a number of Asian countries, including China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines, Singapore and Taiwan, are currently on the warpath against plastic shopping bags. The cities have passed local laws that ban such bags, on the basis that they clog sewers and drainage canals, cause street flooding, choke animals and are responsible for other forms of environmental damage. China and Taiwan, for example, impose heavy fines on violators. Other countries are appealing for a switch to the production and use of biodegradable bags.

The move this week by the US Consulate in Shanghai to monitor and publish the level of fine particulate matter, less than two microns in diameter (PM2.5), in the air around its office has caused a certain amount of confusion and consternation among local residents and officials. The US diplomats are in part to blame for this because, although their measurements are no doubt sound, their data presentation in somewhat misleading. Following in the footsteps of the country’s embassy in Beijing, the Shanghai consulate now publishes the concentration of PM2.5 in micrograms per cubic meter of air (µg/m3) on an hourly basis and also publishes the average over the previous 24 hours at noon and midnight each day.

In many Asian cities thriving quarters are progressively being stripped of their distinctive street life. Market pressure is forcing out older residents and local shop-owners, typically in places that have been earmarked for prime real estate development due to their central, high-traffic location. No where is this more visible and dispiriting than in Hong Kong’s older districts. The confluence of Hong Kong's high post-war population growth, limited space for development and the urban design resulted in the development of areas that are socially vibrant and commercially diverse. Today these are situated in older districts where many buildings have become dilapidated, threatening their ability to support the residents within, as well as the street activity on their doorstep.

China’s air quality is bad – everyone knows that. We should not, however, ignore the fact that China is moving ahead in air quality management very quickly, and we should not confuse achievement with what it still has to do. China is doing a lot of the right things although there is a long way to go. After all, it took the US some forty years to set standards and develop its sophisticated regulatory system. China’s 12th Five Year Plan (2011-2015) has specific air pollutant reduction targets to fulfill. Bowing to public pressure, in March 2012 the Chinese government tightened air quality standards and published a phasing-in timetable nationwide.

China's environment is sick, suffering not just a single, isolated disease but widespread epidemics. This is indisputable. And no matter how thoroughly we analyse individual causes, it is clear that without fixing its ill-fated development model, China will be forever chasing its pollution problem and will never get ahead of it. The country is once again in urgent need of an emancipated mind-set, redefining the concept of development to address today's conditions and to bring order out of chaos.

Shenzhen, which trails only Beijing within China in terms of the number of vehicles it has on its streets, recently announced plans to launch a congestion charge in 2016. Shenzhen has 2 million registered vehicles; five years ago it had one million and its maximum capacity is thought to be 2.1 million vehicles. According to Shenzhen’s traffic bureau the city’s vehicle density is the highest in China, with 300 vehicles for every kilometer of road.

People have grown accustomed to believing that the gross domestic product (GDP) is what really matters; that it could be used to demonstrate a society’s well-being. It was, however, never created with this intent. Simply, GDP measures the amount of money that changes hands, but how much we have in our pockets does not adequately tell us how well we are doing, in all the dimensions of our lives.