|
|
ENQUIRE PROJECT DETAILS BY GENERAL PUBLIC |
| Project Details |
| Funding Scheme : | General Research Fund | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Number : | 447713 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Title(English) : | “Community Capacities, Social Capital, Citizen Values and Impact Assessment”: Community-Based Planning as a Missing Component in the Urban Planning System in Hong Kong? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Title(Chinese) : | 香港城市規劃制度的盲點：社區能力、社會資本、公民價值觀及社會影響評估 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Principal Investigator(English) : | Prof Ng, Mee Kam | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Principal Investigator(Chinese) : | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Department : | Dept of Geography & Resource Management | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Institution : | The Chinese University of Hong Kong | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| E-mail Address : | meekng@cuhk.edu.hk | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tel : | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Co - Investigator(s) : |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Panel : | Humanities, Social Sciences | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Subject Area : | Social Sciences | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Exercise Year : | 2013 / 14 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Fund Approved : | 520,000 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Status : | Completed | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Completion Date : | 30-6-2016 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Objectives : |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Abstract as per original application (English/Chinese): |
This study will argue that the “bulldozing” approach adopted by most development projects in Hong Kong has been sustained by an ignorance of their impacts on local communities. Through detailed mapping of community capacities, social capital and values, and identification of social impacts of development projects in four communities, the research is intended to demonstrate the importance of institutionalising community-based planning to guarantee people’s right to the planning of their local communities.
Urban planning in Hong Kong is basically a top-down process. Although in recent years, the government has tried to engage communities in the planning process, the top-down nature of the system remains intact. Development projects in the city are often implemented through razing established communities to make way for “growth”. Affected community members, when eligible, will receive cash compensation but the community networks, social capital, economic ties and trust that take many years to accumulate, will “dissipate” as “development” proceeds.
To make visible these “invisible” capacities, social capital and values, four in-depth community studies in rural and urban Hong Kong will be carried out: two that have been impacted by development initiatives and two that are facing imminent changes. Through summoning a number of proven research tools on community development, the research will identify systematically individual and collective capacities and social capital within the community; carry out a “citizen value assessment” exercise to identify key concerns and values held by these communities; and based on these, undertake a social impact assessment exercise to evaluate the social impact of the imposed development projects on the studied communities against the identified capacities and values. The research team will carefully examine whether or not the existing planning and governance mechanisms could be transformed to address this social impact and how community-based planning can be instituted within or beyond the government to building, rather than destroying, local capacities.
The research will be a unique Asian contribution to the field of community development and social impact assessment that has been dominated hitherto by Western literature. It will provide evidence on the state of social capital in densely populated Hong Kong. The research findings will challenge the local development approach that is blind to the existence of valuable community assets and provide convincing evidence for the urgent institutionalisation of community-based planning. It will also contribute to the further theorisation of alternative development that advocates for the rights of local communities in shaping urban spaces. 可以說，香港「推土機」式的發展得已持續的其中一個原因是社會未能掌握這種開發模式對社區所造成的影響。這項目希望通過對四個社區的能力、社會資本、公民價值觀及發展項目的社會影響的詳細研究與評估，展示以社區為本的規劃的重要性，從而倡議市民參與規劃設計地區的權力。 香港的城市規劃基本上是一個由上而下的制度。雖然近年政府一直試圖讓市民參與規劃，但是規劃制度由上而下的本質並沒有改變。在城市開發的過程中，傾向把社區夷為平地，以現金補償那些受影響和合資格的居民。可是，那累積多年「無形」的社區網路，社會資本，經濟關係和信任等，往往在「開發」的過程中「悄然消逝」。 爲了使人們看到這些「無形」的社區能力，社會資本和公民價值觀，本研究將開展兩個位於市區和兩個位於新界等四個案例；而市區和新界均各有一個已受發展項目影響的個案和一個即將面臨發展影響的個案。通過採納各種行之有效的研究工具，本項目將搜集資料以鑑定社區内個人和集體的能力和社會資本，開展「公民價值觀評估」工作，以確定這些社區重點關注的議題，並根據這些議題，來進行社會影響評估，以評審或估計發展項目如何衝擊社區的能力和社會資產。研究小組亦會仔細研究現有的規劃和治理機制，查看是否可以轉化及解決發展項目對社會的影響，甚至把社區為本的規劃制度化，好使地區的能力和資本得以建立而不是被拆毁。 由於社區規劃和社會影響評估的文獻大都出自西方學者的手筆，這項研究將提供一個獨特的亞洲視野。它將為人口稠密的香港把脈，彙報其社會資本的狀態。研究結果亦會提供有說服力的證據，挑戰香港一直以來對寶貴的社會資產的存在視而不見的發展陋習，以證明社區規劃制度化的迫切性。研究也將有助倡議地區人士有權規劃設計城市空間等另類發展模式的理論建構。 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Realisation of objectives: | The project has four objectives and the following paragraphs summarise how and the extent these objectives have been achieved. Objective 1: “Making the invisible community capacities, social capital and citizen values visible”: through indepth case studies in the urban and rural contexts of Hong Kong, identify systematically the “hidden capacities, social capital and values”: The project has carried out research works on the Blue House in Wanchai and the Choi Yuan Village in the New Territories. To a less extent, the project has also studied Kwun Tong and the Northeast New Territories. Through archival research, questionnaire surveys and intensive interviews with different stakeholders, factors contributing to or hindering the sense of community of local residents have been identified. For urban communities, the length of residents and the existence of place-based charity organisations as well as “system-transforming” intellectuals (enlightened elites) who extend their help to the affected communities seem to be essential for explicating community capacities and their social capital and values. However, in the case of Kwun Tong when redevelopment was announced in 1998 but was not implemented until 2010, the sense of continuous uncertainties made it almost impossible to sustain a cohesive community. The situation in the new territories is even more complicated. While the government has a policy to maintain the integrity of indigenous villages in the planning process, it does not recognise the rights of non-indigenous villagers in rebuilding their lived space when affected by urban expansion. Hence, non-indigenous villages are usually bull-dozed to make way for “development”. The irony from our site investigation is that few indigenous villagers actually live in the “indigenous villages” while non-indigenous villagers usually live and practise farming in their place for generations. Our questionnaire survey and interviews prove that community members have great capacities and knowledge that, however, have not been accounted for or visible in the planning process. It is because urban planning in Hong Kong does not start with understanding the capabilities and needs of existing communities. These untapped resources have been instrumental to the “success” of saving the Blue House for continuing its time-honoured function to serve the community as well as the eventful reconstruction of the New Choi Yuan Village in face of displacement. To a large extent, the existence of enlightened elites helped boost the bonding, bridging and linking social capital of the two communities to address their key concern—the right to live and use the place to build a community. However, for those affected by the Kwun Tong Town Centre Redevelopment and the indigenous villages in the Northeast New Territories, they seem to concern more about monetary compensation that they can receive—the exchange value of a place. Objective 2: “Explicating social impacts”: to undertake ex-ante or ex-post social impact assessments of the (proposed) development initiatives on the identified community capacities and values. The results are very obvious. For the Blue House and the New Choi Yuan Village, the fight to retain a right to use their lived spaces and the challenges involved have continuously boosted their capabilities and reconfirm the importance of exerting their right to use a place for their community building and human flourishing. However, for Kwun Tong, the community has disintegrated in face of redevelopment uncertainties. In the New Development Areas in the Northeast New Territories, it is very difficult to identify the indigenous villagers as many who are living within the indigenous villages are from other urban areas. On the contrary, the non-indigenous population who have fought for their rights to continue farming have received little empathy as the institutional and legal set up in the city does not recognise their assets and their right to a different style of living. Objective 3: To carry out a systematic audit of local “planning” and administration and to examine how community capacities, social capital and values, as well as concerns can be nurtured and acknowledged either by the existing administration or by the setting up of innovative institutions within or beyond the government. Through the in-depth case studies, the PI has tried to advocate three ways to nurture and boost community capacities, social capital and use value of a place: • The government of Hong Kong should develop community planning, either within the Planning Department or through the appointment of community planners in each District Council or local charity or social work organisations. • There should be local market places in each district of Hong Kong. Local economic development is the most effective means to nourish entrepreneurship, mutual support, social capital and community building. • In any planning exercise, the starting point should be a thorough understanding of the existing communities, their capacities, social capital and assets. Unless these are probably considered, acknowledged and further enhanced in the new plan, nothing should be done to destroy an existing community with strong social networks. Objective 4: To interrogate the research findings and address the people’s right to city planning in a non-democratic polity without community planning, nor proper means of identifying and assessing local capacities, social capital, values and social impacts. To guarantee people’s right to the city and to urban planning, it is very important for Hong Kong to reconsider its planning system, especially the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines and the various administrative policies that determine who gets what, where, when and how. Not only should the relevant ordinances and regulations be carefully reviewed to ensure people having equitable rights to the city, it is also important to design a procedure for different stakeholders to come together and deliberate on people’s rights/duties, privilege/no right, power/liabilities and immunities/disability. These continue to be heavily under-researched areas in Hong Kong. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Summary of objectives addressed: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Research Outcome | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Major findings and research outcome: | The project helps identify macro-socio-economic and structural factors including a top-down urban planning system for the absence of community-based planning in Hong Kong (papers 1, 3-4, 7-10). The detailed case studies confirm the theoretical relationships between the right to place-making and individual as well as community well-being (papers 2 and 7). The project points to the need of local public spaces for community members to interact, utilize their capacity and assets to foster positive human relationships and actualise themselves through working together (papers 2-4, 7). However, with a growth at all cost development ideology, planning exercises seldom afford to have a thorough understanding of how communities use local spaces for their life and livelihood (papers 3-10). The case studies of the Blue House and Choi Yuan Village reveal the important roles of “enlightened elites” or “system-transforming” intellectuals in articulating the assets and accumulated social capital in the local communities (papers 5-10). They are also instrumental in exposing the social impacts of a “community-blind” development process, empowering local communities to mobilise and fight for the use values of their lived environment (papers 5, 6, 8-10). They help organise the affected communities through intensive knowledge exchange (translation) processes among different stakeholders. Communities aided by “enlightened elites” are much more resilient than those communities that face redevelopment uncertainties for a long time or with internal conflicts and little outside assistance (papers 5, 6, 9, 10). It is only through the detailed investigation of people’s lived experiences in space over time can we generate a plan that nurtures a sustainable community where people’s capacities and assets can be respected and utilized. The research findings show that instead of imposing territory-wide needs onto local communities, planning should start with acknowledging people’s time-honoured place-making efforts and results. Otherwise planning would bring a lot of harm and suffering to closely knit communities (papers 5-10). The research project also highlights a blind spot in Hong Kong: the importance of local economic development. Community planning is not just for providing housing and related community infrastructure. More importantly, it is about developing local economic activities that can utilise local talents and nurture social networks. It is about re-embedding economic transactions in social relations (papers 8 and 10). This is probably the best way to guarantee people’s right to use the city (papers 2 and 7). | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Potential for further development of the research and the proposed course of action: |
While these case studies are extremely important to guide transformative planning practices in the local context, it is equally important to set the discussions in theoretical frameworks that connect to contemporary academic discourses in other contexts. To integrate community planning with “re-commoning” practices that focus on the development of local or moral economy, stressing the need for economic transactions to serve people’s well-being and a sustainable environment could be one research direction that can be further explored. The “community-blind” planning culture in Hong Kong has led to many social and spatial justice issues especially in the New Territories where two “classes” of citizens exist—the indigenous and non-indigenous villagers. The situation should be further investigated regarding the protection of the indigenous villages which actually are housing a very small indigenous population—most of the residents are from outside the villages. Further research in these areas will not only enrich our theoretical understanding of socio-spatial justice, the research findings will also provide be very important pointers for transforming the institutional, legal and administrative set up of planning and development-related regimes in Hong Kong. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Layman's Summary of Completion Report: | With the absence of community planning in Hong Kong, the “growth-at-all-cost” development ideology has blinded us to recognise the capacities and assets accumulated in the city’s many neighbourhoods. However, “enlightened elites” have aided residents in the Blue House and the new Choi Yuan Village to mobilise their social capital to emphasise the use values of their lived experiences and fight for their right to plan and develop their community. A thorough understanding of people’s relationships to one another and to their surrounding environment, therefore, should be seen as the very first step of an urban planning process. Indeed, community planning should be in place to help develop community members’ capabilities, fostering their social networks and social capital as well as utilising their talents and creativity to meet one another’s socio-economic needs. Depriving people’s right to use local space will adversely affect their well-being. The research findings also underscore the importance of community spaces such as local markets in nourishing bonding, bridging and even linking social capital for community building. These findings demand a review of the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines, the statutory planning process and urban management policies and protocols adopted in the city. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Research Output | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Peer-reviewed journal publication(s) arising directly from this research project : (* denotes the corresponding author) |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Recognized international conference(s) in which paper(s) related to this research project was/were delivered : |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other impact (e.g. award of patents or prizes, collaboration with other research institutions, technology transfer, etc.): |
One of the research findings in the project is the essential need of physical space for community use, satisfying their socio-economic needs, fostering stronger social network development and nurturing entrepreneurship and creativity. Hence, the PI has been working with the Hong Kong Council of Social Service and Community Development Alliance to advocate for the provision of local market places. The PI was invited to give her expert views in the Government’s interdepartmental meetings on hawker policies as well as the Subcommittee on Hawker Policy in the last Legislative Council and the Subcommittee on Issues Related to Bazaars in the current Legislative Council. The PI has also formed a research team and carried out a collaborative project with the University of Manchester on 'Planning for Sustainable Urban Neighbourhood Change' from 1 June 2016 to 31 May 2017. Through various media interviews and providing expert advice in the Legislative Council, the PI has shared her views on the importance of community planning and development to minimize the conflicts between the government and the civil society: 社工建網絡讓基層發聲互助: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exZubXO6Exk 亞洲政策組 - 香港有問題？ 第152集「香港係點規劃？」: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgiVmJMchj4 亞洲政策組 - 香港有問題？ 第153集「硬指標不變規劃難改善？」: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6rBGWJ5TFc 亞洲政策組 - 香港有問題？ 第154集「規劃師到底搞邊科?」: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtXc7Wbbv4A 中大教授伍美琴︰香港需要墟市小販 https://www.etnet.com.hk/mobile/tc/lifestyle/article.php?id=42586&catalias=executive&secalias=management&part=3 生活達人伍美琴：建城見人 規劃不止數字，還有人 https://news.mingpao.com/pns/dailynews/web_tc/article/20161204/s00005/1480787713828 【香港家書】中大地理及資源管理學系教授 伍美琴 http://app3.rthk.hk/special/pau/article.php?aid=2092 立法會墟市事宜小組委員會 http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr16-17/chinese/hc/sub_com/hs02/papers/hs0220170110cb1-413-3-c.pdf | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| SCREEN ID: SCRRM00542 |