Survey FindingsBack


The questionnaire comprised a total of 10 opinion questions and ended by registering some basic demographics of the respondents. The key findings are highlighted in this section, please refer to the respective frequency tables for details (Appendix II). It should be noted that, figures reported hereafter have been rounded up to the nearest integer after considering the second decimal place. For the questions repeated from the 2006 Survey, t-tests were used to detect significant changes over the past five years.

The survey began by asking all respondents to assess the healthiness of Hong Kong's living environment in general. Results showed that more than half of the sample considered it unhealthy (52%), while only around one-fifth found it healthy (22%), a quarter opted for 「half-half」 (25%). As compared to the public views obtained in 2006, the proportion of local residents who considered Hong Kong's living environment unhealthy has surged by 23 percentage points (52% vs 29%) while only less than a quarter considered it healthy, representing a considerable drop of 13 percentage points (22% vs 35%). Both changes are tested to be statistically significant at 99% confidence level (i.e. p<0.01 ; Table 3).

Meanwhile, majority (69%) of the respondents believed that Hong Kong did not have sufficient open space and green parks in the urban area for its citizens to pursue a healthy living whereas less than one-fifth found it sufficient (18%), around one-tenth opted for 「half-half」 (11%). As compared to five years ago, significantly more citizens thought there was insufficient open space and green parks in urban area (69% vs 62%). The difference is tested to be statistically significant at 99% confidence level (i.e. p<0.01 ; Table 4).

As for the idea of developing Hong Kong into an environmentally friendly green city, highly similar to the results in 2006, an overwhelming majority liked the idea (88%), of which 50% had chosen 「like it very much」, as contrast to only 4% who disliked this idea while less than one-tenth opted for the middle-ground answer 「half-half」 (7%; Table 5).

When asked whether they were aware that the WKCD site was originally zoned for a green park with cultural facilities as part of the Chek Lap Kok Airport development project, more than half (54%) admitted they were not aware of it, while the remaining 46% said yes. Though the awareness level remained to be less than half, it has managed to climb up 5 percentage points over the past five years and this increase is tested to be statistically significant at 95% confidence level (p<0.05; Table 6).

With regards the land use of the WKCD site, majority of the respondents considered allocating almost 60% of its land for residential and commercial development to be 「too much」 (58%), around one-third considered it 「just right」 (34%), only a small proportion considered it 「too little」 (2%). Meanwhile, 6% of the respondents did not comment by opting for 「don't know/hard to say」 (Table 7).

As to the view that WKCD should be a project totally devoted to cultural and green park with no private residential development at all, more than half of the respondents agreed with it (55%). Around one-third (32%) disagreed while one-tenth opted for 「half-half」 (10%, Table 8).

Results of this survey also revealed that a landslide majority (84%) disagreed to auctioning off the residential land in the WKCD for developers to build luxury properties, only 7% agreed to this proposition. Meanwhile, a respective of 5% and 4% opted for 「half-half」 and 「don't know/hard to say」 (Table 9).

The survey continued to ask all respondents if they agreed or disagreed with the view that 「allowing the residential land in WKCD to be auctioned would make WKCD become another real estate development project」. Results showed that over 60% (62%) agreed, outnumbering those who disagreed (29%) by 33 percentage points. Another 5% and 4% opted for 「half-half」 and 「don't know/hard to say」 correspondingly (Table 10).

On the other hand, nearly 60% (57%) of the respondents agreed that funding of WKCD should not rely on on-site land sales as trade off, about one-quarter disagreed (23%). About one-tenth held a neutral view by opting for 「half-half」 (9%), another one-tenth or so just did not know (11%; Table 11).

As on what measures should be used to fund the development of WKCD apart from on-site land sales, among the five options provided, 「using part of Hong Kong's fiscal reserve」 topped the list, as chosen by over half of the respondents (53%), followed closely by 「forming a Board of Director for fund raising, like Po Leung Kok, Tuk Wah Group」 (49%). Meanwhile, a respective of 43% and 38% believed 「selling land from other areas, e.g. Kai Tak Old Airport site」 and 「covering the West Kowloon Tunnel Exit top to create land for property development like MTR topside properties」 should be considered as possible funding sources. Last of all, one-fifth of the respondents thought 「levying of cultural and environment tax」 should be used to fund the project, while only 6% opted for 「don't know/hard to say」 (Table 12).

Conclusion

Compared to five years ago, this survey clearly showed that more and more people considered the living environment of Hong Kong to be unhealthy, and open space and green parks in the urban area to be insufficient. This shift in opinion is alarming, be it due to actual deterioration or rising expectation. As in 2006, an overwhelming majority of people would like to see Hong Kong develop into an environmentally friendly green city.

Against this opinion backdrop, even though slightly over half of the population was not aware that the WKCD site was originally zoned for a green park with cultural facilities as part of the Chek Lap Kok Airport development project, over half agreed that WKCD should be totally devoted to cultural and green park with no private residential development at all. When prompted with the fact that almost 60% of the WKCD site will be used for residential and commercial development, almost 60% considered the allocation 「too much」, and 85% disagreed to auctioning off the residential land in the WKCD for developers to build luxury properties, mainly because they feared that such land auction would make WKCD become another real estate development project.

This echoed squarely with the finding that the majority of people agreed that funding of WKCD should not rely on on-site land sales alone, other means like using part of Hong Kong's fiscal reserve, forming a Board of Director for fund raising purpose, and selling land from other areas in Hong Kong, should also be considered.

All in all, the message is clear that the public wants more open space and green parks for healthy living. They are skeptical of any auction of WKCD land, because they do not want to see WKCD become another real estate development project.