The Changing Patterns of Civic Engagement and Governance in Hong Kong

Abstract

New practices and mechanisms in civic engagement (CE) were introduced in Hong Kong after civil society organizations (CSOs) rose to challenge the HKSAR government over a variety of policy issues since 2003. Under China’s “One Country, Two System” policy, the HKSAR can be considered a hybrid regime without full competitive elections under universal suffrage in choosing its government, so channels for public engagement are crucial in enhancing the legitimizing the government and its policies. Although the government attempted more participatory CE mechanisms in various policy arenas, especially in planning and heritage conservation since 2005-06, such mechanisms still could not meet the growing demands of the civil society activists and critics. The newly introduced CE mechanisms were effective in accommodating and channeling societal demands only to a certain extent and in specific cases. However, many CSOs and critics were not just demanding more participatory CE processes; rather, they were challenging the governing values of the government and the inadequacies of the political system in post-1997 Hong Kong. With the growing socio-economic- interactions between Hong Kong and Mainland China, new controversies and problems have erupted. These challenges further complicate the CE mechanisms adopted for planning because they could hardly cope with the challenges from CSOs who aimed to slow, if not completely, stall the increasing integration between the two territories. This paper examines key cases in the area of urban planning and heritage conservation, such as (a) the Urban Renewal Strategy review, (b) the conservation of the Government Hill site, and (c) two planning cases with a cross-boundary dimension, namely the Study on Action Plan for the Bay Area of the Pearl River Estuary (2011-2013) and planning of the Northeast New Territories New Development Areas. This paper argues that despite the expansion of participatory venues in planning, these new mechanisms were still adopted on an ad hoc basis and were unable to perform effectively in channeling the growing political demands and pressures aiming at broader changes of the policy process.