The Hong Kong government is set to start a multibillion dollar effort to curb pollution. But the effects of the program could take years to become apparent as the public and private sectors learn how to clean up their act.

FOR DECADES, the Hong Kong government ignored warnings by environmentalists that unrestricted industrial growth eventually would pose serious health problems. But the government —with its back against the wall, according to many environmentalists and businessmen — appears ready to address the issue seriously.

In a recent White Paper on pollution, the government proposed a hefty HK$20 billion (US$2.56 billion) budget to be spent In the next 10 years on curtailing water, air and noise pollution; disposing wastes; environmental management and planning; enforcement of legislation; and education.

Many analysts say the government’s turnabout hasn’t come too soon. Hong Kong’s dirty water and foul air have caused fears among many residents no less potent than those about life in the territory alter 1997, when China assumes sovereignty.

The government plans to spend about HK$12 billion on a comprehensive sewage-treatment system. Most of the remaining funds will go toward a network of new transfer stations for refuse in urban areas and landfills in the New Territories to meet rising rubbish-disposal needs.

In a bid to cut the amount of sulfur dioxide discharged Into the atmosphere by as much 80 percent, the government will force Industry to convert to lighter fuels. Government officials say companies will be required to use fuels that contain less than 0.5 percent sulfur. Most companies currently use fuels that contain a 2.5 percent sulfur content.

The government is also planning stiffer pollution regulations for the thousands of small businesses that make up 80 percent of Hong Kong’s Industrial base.

"They are the ones that have chosen not to pay attention to environmental issues," says Robert Keen, a principal lecturer at Hong Kong Polytechnic’s Center of Environmental Studies. They are losing the advantage that they had in being the cornerstone of Hong Kong’s economic progress. This could then mean that they become a prime target for the government’s tougher enforcement activities."

The White Paper, which was approved in April by the Executive Council, is a radical shift away from a longstanding policy of not interfering with the way in which private industry discharges its wastes.

Though the plan s being hailed by environmentalists and even some businessmen as Hong Kong’s first serious effort to clean up the environment, some environmentalists warn of putting too much faith into it. Some critics have even dubbed It the "Great White Hope."

"The culprits are industry and government officials who have habitually shortchanged the environment in exchange for immediate returns," the Polytechnic’s Keen says.

"This is the ultimate question, Isn’t it? What will be the results?" asks Michael Sanders, chief executive of Dodwell Industrial Ltd. "I’m sure everyone is thinking the same thing about the White Paper, whether this is the one that will do it."

The business community is divided on how industry will react to the tougher environmental laws. Some executives say the White Paper will force many small companies into relocating in China’s Shenzhen special economic zone and Guangdong province, despite the recent political crackdown In the country. Others, however, don’t believe tough anti-pollution legislation will have a major Impact on industry.

SANDERS SAYS the costs for pollution-control equipment need not necessarily put it out of the reach of small manufacturers. "The Important thing is how the need for change is presented," he explains. "Industry must be educated that anti-pollution legislation is a solution and not a threat. Many companies are beginning to realize this."

Henry Chiu. divisional manager of the Hong Kong Productivity Council, agrees. He believes the territory’s small entrepreneurs, considered by many economists to be the backbone of the territory’s thriving economy, will adapt to the new regulations in the same way they have to previous changes.

Chiu notes that small companies have moved into the Tolo Harbor area despite the pollution-control ordinances in effect there. He says this shows that environmental laws aren’t a deterrent to all companies In their consideration of localities In which to build factories.

"We have already seen some small companies making enquiries and doing tests with pollution-control equipment without the government on their backs," he says. "I can’t see It being much different from adapting to other operating costs, such as air conditioning or management fees. The only question they ask is how much will it cost."

Government officials rammed the White Paper through Hong Kong’s legal process without a discussion period that could have delayed the policy implementation and allowed emasculation by opponents. But officials have said that on specific proposals, they will respect normal consultation arrangements so that industrial and public sectors can help mold the paper’s policies.

Stuart Reed, director of the Environmental Protection Department, or EPD, which develops government policies on pollution, says his department will have to battle hard to get across to industrial lobbyists the overall advantages of the White Paper.

"The danger is that any debate on specific proposals would focus on the narrow issue of industrial costs and ignore the implication of not taking strong action: a downward slide in the quality of life in Hong Kong," Reed says.

Environmentalists also fear that the plan’s value eventually could be diluted through the years by the Office of Members of the Executive and Legislative Councils, or Omelco, which has been criticized for being overzealous in its concern for industrial growth rather than long-term environmental stability.

"So many (Omelco members) believe that Hong Kong is simply a borrowed place living on borrowed time and that environmental responsibility is not their concern," one environmentalist says.

The Productivity Council’s Chiu argues that shortcuts on pollution control by government and industry represent a serious lack of foresight. He says investors are becoming increasingly conscious of the necessity of having in place an efficient infrastructure to eliminate waste.

Jim Stone, a reader at the Center of Environmental Studies, says a deteriorating environment weakens the infrastructure and needs increasing amounts of energy from outside to keep It running.

He says the HK$20 billion allocated by the White Paper for cleaning up Hong Kong probably will amount to only two percent or three percent of annual government spending. "I think the government will contain the pollution problems," he says, "but it won’t improve the situation dramatically. That will cost more money."

Environmentalists also question the plan’s 10-year time frame with the advent of 1997 and a new government that faces numerous political problems.

"Hong Kong’s problems are here now," says Linda Siddall, director of environmental group Friends of the

Earth and preliminary adviser to the White Paper with the Environmental Pollution Advisory Committee. "Taking 10 years to implement all the policies isn’t wise."

Another environmentalist adds: "Hong Kong’s environment is in such bad shape that the government believes any effort to clean it up will be heralded as a major breakthrough. It is far too late for them to use the half measures of the past. Wait and see if this paper tiger has any teeth." Government officials, however, say much of the concern about the White Paper as well as criticism about the government’s position on pollution isn’t warranted.

"I would be the first to admit that we haven’t done enough," the EPD’s Reed says, "but to be fair, the government has taken a lead in the face of years of general apathy on environmental issues."

Reed says the White Paper reflects a tremendous change in the past two or three years in public attitudes and government priorities.

Regardless of the effect the White Paper will have on Hong Kong’s environment, all analysts agree the plan will be at least a partial success only if awareness is heightened. They note that the promotion of industrial efficiency is more beneficial than pollution laws that are often ignored.

"It is easy to buy a great deal of public relations for HK$20 billion," the Polytechnic’s Keen says, "but effects must be long-term, and that means teaching people."

The Productivity Council, in cooperation with the Hongkong Bank Foundation and City Polytechnic,

has established the Center for Environmental Technology, a nonprofit institute that provides Industry with information and examples of prototype pollution-control equipment.

Companies are beginning to realize that they should provide adequate waste-treatment systems, the Productivity Council’s Chiu says, and seeing this equipment on display at the center can help them understand the facffities needed when they are required to control pollution.

Other large concerns, such as the Royal Hong Kong Jockey Club, are providing funds for the development of EPD educational programs.

"~The White Paper] has the potential to go in the right direction, but it is far from an end," the Polytechnic’s Keen says. "Clearly, there is still a long way to go."

One way to speed up the Job of cleaning up Hong Kong is privatization. Businessmen point out that if companies are forced to buy equipment needed to cut pollution, they will take the task more seriously.

"If the government pays for pollution control, companies might not look at minimizing costs and maximizing anti-pollution measures," the Productivity Council’s Chin says. "If companies pay at least part of the costs, they will be more conscious of the amount of pollution they produce and work harder at minimizing wastes."

Privatization of pollution control may be the wave of the future. Dodwell Industrial’s Sanders says the government, by turning over part of its pollution-control program to the private sector, could free resources for use in areas better addressed by government, such as education.

Dodwell Industrial plans to submit a proposal to the government on a multimillion-dollar-a-year cleanup program for Hong Kong’s rubbish-filled waters. As Sanders puts It: "It doesn’t really matter who cleans up. The Important thing is that It gets done." .

-Mike Levin

Source : Far East Business, July, 1989

Back to Archive Page

Recycling Point Dot Com

(C) 2000 All Rights Reserved