Hong Kong Environmental Regulations - Essay Example

Your Hong Kong Environmental Regulations INTRODUCTION Anthropogenic climate change is the most pressing issue that we face today. It is a global concern so that leaders from around the would convene for its mitigation. The emission of chlorofluorocarbon has been pinpointed as the primary cause of climate change. These CFCs mostly come from industrialized countries such as the US, Europe and China while the developing countries such as the Philippines receive the havoc out of it. Different countries have set limits and applied ways in reducing the emission of CFCs. These ways are either in terms of direct rule or in the form of encouragement. In this paper, we particularly look at Hong Kong’s strategy of limiting emission of chlorofluorocarbons and analyze its effectiveness. As one of the most important export hubs of Asia, Hong Kong is beset with pollution problems which are regarded as the inevitable and necessary consequences of development (Ibid.). The amount of air pollution in Hong Kong, primarily come from the city’s dense population, from the factories and power stations that emit smoke, from the seemingly endless construction activities as well as the increasing number of vehicles which all have contributed to the very dangerous levels of air pollutants like particulate matter or the so-called RSP and the greenhouse gas nitrogen dioxide or NO₂ (Lou, 2007). In fact, the situation has been so bad that the visibility level in the area has been recorded at less than eighty kilometers for about thirty percent of a year (Ibid.). One of the most felt effects of Hong Kong’s high level of air pollution have been mostly on the residents’ health, which range from allergies like rhinitis, bronchial ailments, and asthma, among others. However, such are not the only effects of air pollution, as researches have reported many others as well as other causes and related issues, which will be tackled in further details in this paper. This paper intends to take a further look at Hong Kong’s pollution problem that has been very alarming even among the international institutions and companies who have stakes in the city, in relation to how the Hong Kong government responds to the situation. In the attempt to carefully analyze the government’s mechanisms and programs that have been put in place to resolve the issue at hand, as well as the milestones and failures of the government’s efforts, this paper will first take a look at the whole scenario to provide better understanding of the responses to it. MAIN BODY The Government’s Strategies. The Hong Kong government, as a mechanism to respond to the air pollution problem, has established the Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department Air Division (EPDAD) mainly to be the overall administrator of Hong Kong’s air quality management as provided for by the Air Pollution Control Ordinance (ADB). Further, the Hong Kong EPD has implemented the following procedures alongside its various policy advocacies to help solve the air pollution problem: Conduct tests on the air quality in order to determine the real contributor to the air pollution problem; Conduct information, education campaigns to inform and educate the public about the problem so that the people will also cooperate and support the government’s initiatives in solving the problem; Develop relevant policies that are based on scientific data and actual researches to provide the legal framework for the initiatives; and, Conduct continuous and honest monitoring to obtain real data that will aid in the determination of the efficiency and effectiveness of the measures and the basis for policy revisions when necessary (Ibid.). To back up the said procedures and measures, the Hong Kong EPD has also been able to gain legislative and control measures which deal with the more specific air pollution problems. For instance, the measure to control the emissions from major stationary sources, which mainly include the manufacturing processes from the power stations, the cement plants, incinerators, the petrochemical plants, etc. Under this measure are the following specific requirements: 1) all major air polluting activities must apply for license; 2) control and standards to regulate any installations or modifications of furnaces, ovens or chimneys; 3) more rigid smoke emission standards; 4) directive for the fuel users to use cleaner industrial fuel specifically those with less sulfur contents; 5) strict regulation against open burning especially of materials that emit harmful substances (e.g., construction wastes, tires, cables and wires, etc.); and, 6) strict regulation of the construction emissions. Another major measure that the EPD has implemented is the strict control on the emission from motor vehicles, for which the government adopts the integrated motor vehicle emission control strategy, which comes with five main elements: 1) the use of cleaner or alternative diesel for vehicles; 2) more serious implementation of vehicle emission and fuel standards; 3) more strict and regular emission inspection activities; 4) more stringent rules and heavier sanctions against smoke-belching vehicles; and, 5) more aggressive and intensive public education and advocacy campaigns to gain cooperation from all sectors. Although the Hong Kong government’s efforts to curb the city’s air pollution problem were already begun prior to the handover in 1997, the air pollution problem came to its peak after the handover, and which has henceforth a major concern of the Hong Kong government. Aside from the Hong Kong EPD that was established primarily as the government’s arm in managing the various programs and measures to solve the air pollution problem, the Hong Kong government has also been reaching out to its neighboring areas to find more comprehensive and long-term solution to the problem. After a few failed attempts to collaborate, Hong Kong Chief Executive Tung Chee Hwa and Guangdong Governor Lu Ruiha finally in 1999 inked an agreement to cooperate in six environmental protection areas but which necessitated a joint study to once and for all determine the real situation in the areas and from there proceed to working on the solutions as deemed fit (HKSAR Government, 1999). Further, as a part of the government’s collaborative efforts with its neighbors, apart from the scientific cooperation on emission levels and monitoring, there have been, in 2002, serious suggestions for emissions trading which has also become a very controversial aspect of the whole gamut of measures and mechanisms proposed for regional effort of solving the environmental problems (Ibid.). This area of collaboration however is still undergoing further exploratory talks to fully understand the implications of such measure in the region, and to come up with workable mechanisms that would be beneficial for all key players (Ibid.). Aside from all the aforementioned measures, there has been a very controversial measure that the Hong Kong government implemented which really caused varied reactions from different groups in the city. The smoking ban or the anti – smoking policy that took effect since January 2007 received a wide array of reactions from various sectors, but mostly resistance from the traditional Chinese people or families especially because for centuries, Chinese have considered smoking an important part of their traditional lifestyle (Reuters, 23 October 2006). Hong Kong’s population have heavily protested against such policy, with threats of plant closures, mass protests, mass resignation and rallies, among others, so that the government had to water down the policy, putting exemptions to allow the people, particularly the working males, to still smoke in bars and other entertainment joints (Ibid.). The anti-smoking pledge particularly required that “all indoor areas in workplaces, public places, restaurants, markets, and most areas in public pleasure grounds will be designated no-smoking areas” (news.gov.hk). The authorities can ask someone to stop smoking if they do so in the demarcated areas or if they do not cooperate be asked to leave the place (news.gov.hk). Furthermore, other pollution reduction measures have been implemented all over Hong Kong, with the government taking the lead, but spread and implemented by private takers like the academe, the business sector and the civil society. One of the measures had been the reduction of the use of plastic or polyethylene bags in shopping malls and even in markets and grocery stores. Lastly, the Hong Kong government has also enacted the Product-Eco Responsibility Ordinance “which proved a legal basis for implementing in Hong Kong” (Environmental Protection Department). The first step in he implementation of this ordinance is the reduction of use of plastic bags. This is carried out by levying 50 cents for every plastic bag used. Analysis of the Tax on Tobacco. The Hong Kong government is undoubtedly very serious in its endeavor of limiting the CFC emissions. It has installed all the practically feasibly means to achieve it either through direct rules or information campaign. The question now is whether these means have been effective in achieving its goals. In this section, we particularly analyze the advantages and disadvantages of the means employed by the Hong Kong government in protecting the environment. 1. Tax on Cigarette The strongest opposition to the anti-smoking policy is tradition. It is known that residents of Hong Kong practice smoking as a hobby, both the old and the young. It is an accepted habit, and only recently, when the dire effect that it brings to the environment was discovered has it became a concern. There are also other reasons for opposing the policy. One of these is the observation from Legislator Tommy Cheung Yu-yan. He said that “Moreover, the smoking incidence in Hong Kong in the past few years has remained around 14 per cent. I can’t see the public health message given through the recent smoking ban bill will cause the incidence rate [to go] lower” (Clear The Air). Some observers believe that the country has been lax in its policy. Currently, the countries levies a flat tax of “HK$16.08 per packet of 20 cigarettes, irrespective of the brand” which can be translated to a tax of 47% for luxury brands and 73% for “Winfiled and the like” (Clear The Air). This figure is far from the recommended tax rate of World bank and WHO which should account to around 66% and 80% of the retail price of cigarette (Clear The Air). Dr Judith Mackay, “a senior policy adviser to the World Health Organization at the Chinese Academy of Preventative Medicine in Beijing” commented that Hong Kong has not been very good in preventing its children from smoking (Clear The Air). She suggested three ways of achieving this: “to put up the tax until it’s round their necks”, “to find out what kind of announcements of public interest [APIs] work that go out on TV that counter-advertise smoking” and “to help 20-year-olds and young adults quit so that younger children are not always looking up to the next generation” (Clear The Air). Indeed, in the view of Economics, tax is a very effective way of curtailing consumption of a “bad”. There are many reasons why a government should levy tax on cigarette. First is that it is a negative externality. Smoking does not only harm the smoker but the community as well, such as the second hand smoker and the greater environment. Second, the government can practice its paternal role over the citizens – thus, even if smoking is only seen to have negative effect on the smoker, the government can exercise its authority to limit its consumption. Tax distorts consumption, primarily because it increases price (Mankiw). The graph below supports the effectiveness of tax as a means of controlling smoking, thus a tax rate that is so high is an evidence of a country’s ban on smoking. In the graph above, we have Price on the Y axis and Quantity on the X axis. We have the demand curves and the supply curves, D1, D2 and S1. A tax on cigarette will cause a decline in the demand for cigarette as this will be translated as an increase in price. The price increase will cause a decline in the quantity demanded, as supported by the law of demand. This is shown by the shift of the demand curve to the left, from D1 to D2. The magnitude of the effect of tax on demand or the distance of the shift from D1 to D2 is explained by another economic concept: the elasticity. However, we do not wish to discuss that in this paper. What we want to establish is that the tax decreases the demand for cigarette. The effect of the shift of the demand curve to the left is the decline in the equilibrium price and the equilibrium quantity. The latter can be practically interpreted as the reduction in the consumption of cigarette in the market. Using this analysis, the tax on cigarette is proved to be effective in curtailing the cigarette consumption. It can be safely assumed that the higher the tax on cigarette, the greater is the reduction in total cigarette consumption. This is the big advantage of the anti-smoking ban, it has an backed up by an economic theory which strongly supports its effectiveness. On the other hand, the disadvantages are the things mentioned earlier: that it opposes the long-standing tradition of Hong Kong citizens, which can be seen as a violation of its culture and the observation that the figures of cigarette consumption has not been seen to reduce even after levying tax. However, it can be argued that figures has not moved since the current tax rates appear to be so low compared to he suggestions of WHO. 2. Prohibit Smoking in Designated Areas The Hong Kong government has also enacted an ordinance which prohibits anyone from smoking in designated areas namely “all indoor areas in workplaces, public places, restaurants, markets, and most areas in public pleasure grounds” (news.gov.hk). The obvious benefits or advantage of this program is it will lessen the effect on second-hand smokers. Those who smoke are protected from people who do. Second advantage is that it will limits the number of smokers. It can be practically deduced that if one is asked to leave a place because he smokes, the initial reaction would be to throw the stick and not really leave the place. This action is a direct way of curtailing smoking, therefore it can be effective. The disadvantage of these is against the health of the smoker’s very own family. Since cigarette smoking is prohibited in public areas, the homes will be the most convenient place to smoke. We do not expect smokers to just easily quit their smoking, rather they are expected to find a place where they can continue with their vice. This place will be their very own homes, thus endangering the health of their very own families, especially the kids. Aside from the negative health effect of this practice, it will also increase the likelihood that the children and the youth will smoke since they will personally witness the practice in their own homes. The Hong Kong government’s goal is to stop the tradition of smoking by stopping the influence on the youth. But this will likely be exacerbated by the ban on smoking in public areas. 3. Environmental Taxes on the Use of Plastic Bags Shoppers have probably the highest consumption of plastic bags. In a highly commercialized city such as Hong Kong, the use of plastic bags is widespread. Since plastic is non-biodegradable and can harm the ozone layer when burned, the reduction in the average use of plastic can do well to lessen the emission of CFCs and at the same save space on the city’s landfills. The effect of payment of cents 50 for every se of plastic bags in shopping works like a tax (Environment Bureau). It simply increases the price of using plastic bags, therefore the expected result is reduction in its use as supported by the law of demand. The effect will work like the graph that we have shown above. The demand will decline which will be shown by the shift of the demand curve to the left, therefore creating a new equilibrium quantity and equilibrium price. The new equilibrium quantity or the total consumption per unit of plastic bags will decline. The advantage of this program is that it is obviously effective in curtailing the use of plastic bags. Although, we are not sure how effective it is in limiting emission of toxic gases. The obvious disadvantage of the program to the consumers is the inconvenience of having to bring their own shopping bags everytime they shop. In a busy city such as Hong Kong, this can be tasking for some so that some might be willing to just pay the tax rather than be inconvenienced. CONCLUSION All these steps are seen to have advantages and benefits. The two however, tax on cigarette and tax on the use of plastic bags can be more effective than the smoking ban on certain areas. The additional price that consumers will carry for every use of this materials will make it less attractive to consumers. However, the limitation of these strategies is that rich residents might take and absorb the increase in price rather than quit smoking and avoid the use of plastic. A very promising policy combination then is to appeal to the residents through ads and make the taxes so high. Works Cited Works Cited ADB. Urban Air Quality Management and Practice in Asian Cities. 1 January 2010 . Cheung, R., 2002, Cold water poured on emissions trading, South China Morning Post, p. 13 Lou, Y., 2007, Blue skies may cost dolphins dear, The Standard, 02 April 2007. Clear The Air. 16 March 2007. 31 December 2009 . Environment Bureau. 5 July 2009. 1 January 2010 . Environmental Protection Department. 13 August 2009. 31 December 2009 . Hong Kong SAR Government, 1999, Statement on cross-boundary environmental issues, [Online], Available at: HYPERLINK "http://www.info.gov.hk/dsd/new/19991006.htm" http://www.info.gov.hk/dsd/new/19991006.htm , accessed December 16, 2009. news.gov.hk. 27 December 2006. 31 December 2009 . Pomfret, James. Reuters. 23 October 2006. 1 January 2010 . Read More