Conservation Roundtable Summary October 2002 This paper results from a roundtable discussion facilitated by Civic Exchange on the 27 September 2002 with participation from public and private sector stakeholders with the view to explore how to take conservation issues forward in Hong Kong. This follows on from Civic Exchange’s report Conservation in Hong Kong and Conservation of Sha Lo Tung: A Way Forward published in June 2002. Summary of Action 1. No increase in “hope” value by upzoning. The Planning Department (PD) should not submit re-zoning proposals based on the findings of the “Review of Rural Land Use in Northern New Territories” to the Town Planning Board for consideration, and should withdraw the proposal for re-zoning Tai Tong, until such time that there is a clear conservation policy and a clear direction set. PD’s rezoning was supposedly driven by perceived “pressure” for housing, to provide greater flexibility in the uses of the rural land, and allow beneficial use of the vacant land in the New Territories. This existence of housing “pressure” was disputed, as housing construction demand is at an all time low. Furthermore, the result of re-zoning would go against the government’s stated objective to improve property prices. Whilst re-zoning does not increase the leaseholder’s value in land as the leaseholder has to pay the full lease modification premium that reflects the full change in use value, it does undermine conservation opportunities because it increases the perception of the “hope” value of land. 2. Departmental policy review needed to facilitate conservation. Government departments need to undertake a policy review with the aim to facilitate conservation and to ensure joined-up policy-making. Whilst the relevant government departments understand that conservation is important, they said that they would like a clear government statement on conservation to enable officials at the working level to explore joined-up policy making effectively. Nature conservation policy is the responsibility of the Environment, Transport and Works Bureau (ETWB). However, the ETWB felt it needed to work within the confines of current policies falling under other bureaux, which may not be explicit on giving conservation greater priority, unless the subject bureaux are going to change them. An important reason for slow progress in the past to develop a permanent solution on conservation of sites under private ownership, appeared to be due to an inability on the part of government officials to see how the issue of compensation could be dealt with, especially in view of Hong Kong’s growing financial deficit. Using the right planning and land policies is critical to finding the right mechanisms for conservation. Without an adjustment of the current policies, various mechanisms that do not have to be at a great cost to the public purse could not be implemented.
1 Visit us at: www.civic-exchange.org HOSEINEE HOUSE, ROOM 601 69 WYNDHAM STREET CENTRAL, HONG KONG FAX: (852) 3105-9713 TEL: (852) 2893-0213
Relevant government departments include: PD, Lands Department (LD), Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD), Environmental Protection Department (EPD), ETWB and the Housing, Planning and Lands Bureau (HPLB), which is responsible for planning and land policies. 3. Introduce classification system for priority sites In order to protect Hong Kong’s important ecological sites, a system for identifying and classifying them should be urgently created. They could then be properly prioritized. To identify the priority sites for conservation it was suggested that species should be ranked in terms of their rarity (regionally/globally) and those sites accommodating the maximum rare species and which currently have no protection should be given top priority. Sufficient data already exists for identification/classification of sites. Most of the most valuable sites are in, or adjacent to, lowland village areas. Two levels of sites were proposed: Level 1 - A list of the most highly valuable sites that need emergency protection (possibly 10 sites), most of which are in, or adjacent to, lowland village areas. Estimates of the value of each site should be made. Level 2 - A list of a larger number of valuable sites. Level 1 sites are so valuable that they need to be protected immediately. Some of these sites are likely to be private held and may need to be acquired (see point 4 below). Level 2 sites do not need to be acquired but many need to be properly managed and a separate policy needs to be devised for this purpose. Schemes should also be developed which encourage and reward protection and preservation. While conservation zoning under the Town Planning Ordinance (TPO) can be used as an emergency measure for threatened Level 1 and 2 sites the TPO’s shortcomings include: (a) no mechanism for implementation/management; (b) only gives partial protection – it prevents development but not human activities such as recreational war games or even farming which can still be detrimental to ecological value; (c) does not prevent degradation; and (d) does not encourage protection. 4. Mechanisms should be developed on a case by case basis Mechanisms for protection of Level 1 sites should be identified on a case-by-case basis. Sites should be secured first and management plans can be dealt with later. Under the present system the Government tends to “reward” the worst offenders, who have degraded their land, by up-zoning. Although, if strict implementation of the lease modification calculation was adhered to there would be no benefit to the leaseholder from degradation. All lease modification negotiations in the New Territories should involve a senior LD official. There is a need for mechanisms that encourage preservation and ultimate surrender of land. Compensation, even if it were due, could be in terms of land or cash. Despite the large government deficit, now is the right time to acquire sites at existing use value, due to low land prices and owners/developers more likely to wish to sell their land or negotiate. 2 Visit us at: www.civic-exchange.org HOSEINEE HOUSE, ROOM 601 69 WYNDHAM STREET CENTRAL, HONG KONG FAX: (852) 3105-9713 TEL: (852) 2893-0213
A system of financial rewards (in the form of per annum grants) could be introduced for the management of sites where there is community benefit (such as public access, recreational benefits etc). A tailor-made agreement could be developed for each site and the owner paid to use the land in a sensitive manner. One further alternative is for new legislation, similar to Grade 1 listing in the United Kingdom, to freeze development and all activities on valuable conservation sites/properties. Whatever the mechanism, the Government needs to recognize that for all of the land held on agricultural leases in the New Territories, there are no development rights or development values accruing to the leaseholder, and negotiate accordingly. Under the existing TPO the Government does not compensate for adverse planning decisions. While the 1993 Special Committee on Compensation and Betterment advocated a system of compensation and the introduction of a betterment levy on those who benefit from planning decisions, the recommendations have never been implemented. However, it should be noted that in a closed lease system the lease modification payment would negate any uplift in value resulting from up-zoning. Thus any compensation would only be applicable to cases where open leases are up-zoned. The expectations of landowners, such as the Heung Yee Kuk (HYK), need to be managed. Through past policy and government weakness, the HYK has seen hope value translated into what they now perceive as a legitimate expectation. The HYK wants to free up land and do not accept that land has no development potential. While these expectations have no basis in law, they still need to be dealt with. The Government has been reluctant to confront landowners and the HYK and has delayed any review of the Small House Policy (SHP), which has been ongoing since 1997. For conservation to be most effective, a combination of initiatives needs to be proposed including a repeal of the SHP and the charging of full lease modification sums on future land conversion. 5. Resumption for conservation limited to priority sites Resumption of land for conservation as a public purpose should be tied to Level 1 sites to ensure there isn’t an open-ended drain on the Treasury. While the Government is concerned about precedent setting and the impact of any action on one site on others, it should be viable to limit compensation to say, Hong Kong’s 10 most valuable sites. Rather than encouraging landowners to degrade their sites, this move might even give landowners an incentive to protect their land in case they can be compensated in future. Amending the Land Resumption Ordinance to allow land to be resumed for conservation is a technical matter and can be done easily provided that there is sufficient funding to acquire the sites. As per point 3 above, estimates of the value of Level 1 sites need to be done to see what the potential cost might be for the public purse. 6. Interdepartmental taskforce to manage acquisition An interdepartmental taskforce should be set up initially to manage the acquisition of the Level 1 sites and then to facilitate overall conservation policy implementation. 7. Cost of acquisition and management of sites needs to be estimated The cost of acquiring and managing the top 10 priority sites needs to be estimated. The Government must recognize that there needs to be some financial outlay for conservation. However there may also be some tangible benefits – at the moment the Government and community gains nothing from inaction. 3 Visit us at: www.civic-exchange.org HOSEINEE HOUSE, ROOM 601 69 WYNDHAM STREET CENTRAL, HONG KONG FAX: (852) 3105-9713 TEL: (852) 2893-0213
8. Capacity building for resource management There needs to be capacity building for nature resource management as there is insufficient expertise in Hong Kong at present. 9. Ecological corridors to connect sites A strategic conservation plan connecting conservation areas through natural corridors needs to be devised. 10. System of subsidized Environmentally Sensitive Areas introduced A system of Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs), which could include scenic or fung shui areas, needs to be introduced with a system of subsidies for management. The subsidies would be based on a set of public interest criteria (e.g. public access) and there would be a quota based on first come first serve. ESA’s must never allowed to be up-zoned. 11. Establish a private conservation trust If the Government could not offer compensation to landowners directly then a private trust could be the answer. This could be supported and partly financed by the Government to acquire conservation sites. A private trust could be ideal in cases where the ownership of land is unknown as the trust could accumulate this land bit by bit. Many villagers would well feel more comfortable surrendering land to a private trust.
4 Visit us at: www.civic-exchange.org HOSEINEE HOUSE, ROOM 601 69 WYNDHAM STREET CENTRAL, HONG KONG FAX: (852) 3105-9713 TEL: (852) 2893-0213