Green infrastructure : a sustainable strategy for planning and managing villages in Hong Kong

Abstract

Green infrastructure (GI) emphasizes identifying, conserving and managing interconnected ecological networks enabling them to deliver benefits both to the ecosystem and the community. The characteristics of GI are cross land boundaries, multifunctional landscape, connectivity among habitats cores and delivering of various ecological services. GI plan outlines existing natural and cultural assets which become blue print of GI infrastructure project and guidance to future development. Village housing development and nature conservation have been under enormous tensions. Local villages embrace distinct semi-natural habitats such as Fung Shui wood, wetlands and fish ponds. However, these habitats have been under threat from soaring demand for Small Houses (SH). SH applications received by government have increased from 876 in 2005 to 1,662 in 2010 (Lao, 2013). Using conventional conservation tools such as designating sites as Country Parks and Site of Special Scientific Sites has been unsuccessful due to deprecation from villagers and complicated land uses and indistinct ownership found with local villagers. Current village development policies have not catered for any needs of conservation whereas only two successful cases under New Nature Conservation Policies were identified in the past ten years. A village planning strategy which integrates development with conservation without sacrificing the integrity of ecosystem is needed. The research methods encompass a questionnaire and overseas policies case study. The target groups were villagers, village visitors and planning and building professionals. The case studies focused on policy and financial instruments adopted by European Commission, the UK and the USA in promoting GI in their regions. Total 102 questionnaires were analysed and most respondents were supportive of adopting GI as conservation and planning tool of villages. Highest number of respondents selected nature conservation as preferable land uses in villages. Most respondents were in favour of GI that creates better connection to nature and enhance biodiversity in the village.

They mostly preferred to support GI by visiting GI demonstration projects and agreed that GI should be financially supported by Government regular spending. The case studies showed that there were various level of GI related policy instruments from transnational policies, national legislations, non-binding guidelines, and financial incentives in promoting GI across the countries. The UK example depicted that delegation of authority in town planning policy from central government to district levels would lift the progression of GI plan making at community level. It is suggested that policy actions should within the scope as defined here: 1) Exploring opportunities for integration of GI in existing policies. 2) Building social capacity and increasing public awareness of GI. 3) Improving information and promoting innovation. GI is a fresh concept to Hong Kong. Policy actions are particularly required at different levels for inspiring public participation across different sectors and stakeholders.