Kapok: Echo logic

Coincidences are always troubling; on the same weekend that the Macao International Environmental Cooperation Forum & Exhibition (MIECF) was coming to an end a group of concerned citizens rallying via Facebook marched to safeguard “green Coloane.” On the one hand were a yearly jamboree of grand plans, grandiose declarations of intent and a quantitative expression of self-satisfaction for the big “n” numbers of agreements signed: each aimed to arouse awareness of environmental protection, and this year in particular to advance the cause of “green tourism” - a form of tourism involving environmentally positive activities from choosing to have hotels wash towels less often to developing full-scale eco-friendly architecture. On the other hand, a small, but highly motivated group of residents, accompanied by rather low-key activists and legislators, demonstrated their unease at the unrestrained greed that, they claim, is being exhibited by some real-estate developers. These activists argued that these developers are desecrating what was once considered the “green lung” of Macao with towering and uninventive concrete blocks.
The inadequacy of current public policies and regulations must share some of the blame, especially because environmental impact studies are undertaken post licensing and are merely considered as flexible technicalities. This should not be so as there is indeed a somehow “binding” document issued by the government aptly entitled “Environmental Protection Planning of Macao (2010-2020)” that clearly states one of the strategic orientations is “to make holistic investigation into local ecosystems, to implement district-based protection by dividing them into different environmental functional districts according to their nature and the protected [zones], and to apply protective measures for the sensitive ecosystem, together with continual monitoring.” The Urban Planning Law is currently under discussion in the legislature and the legal aspects of the discussion have stalled on the extent of the discretionary power the government should have in evading the law on the grounds of “higher public interests” (yet to be defined). The irony of the situation is that principled legislators and more business-oriented ones are on the same side albeit for different reasons: the former because of their desire for cleaner and more sustainable development and the latter because of the lack of predictability these changes bring to their profit-seeking endeavors.
Meanwhile ecological awareness is growing amongst the general population. Last time we viewed the official gazette online there were no less than 61 associations dealing with such issues in Macao under the “environment protection” section of “associations” registered with the government. Yet, as only one hundred people showed up on a Sunday to protect what is left of Macao’s hilly green horizon, one could still ask the question “where are (the activists) to be seen?” It seems that just increasing awareness is not enough and time is not on our side.
The Macao government has taken a few steps in the right direction, although a good ten years later than Hong Kong. The most significant example of positive action is the document pertaining to environmental protection planning. But the implementation is too timid, too gradual and always emphasizing continuity over a clean break. The issues currently being faced are increasing as the city develops faster, higher and with an unprecedented urban density. In March, the Hong Kong government released its guidelines regarding “A Clean Air Plan for Hong Kong” urging for emergency measures and precise commitments—in budgeting and targeting—towards a reduction in and the exposure of the public to harmful emissions. The protection of the environment and a cleaner atmosphere are not only ideological in nature, they are also a matter of public health, especially when cardiovascular and respiratory disorders are concerned which will thus impact public spending. A poor environment will soon weigh on government coffers, and be more keenly felt as the population ages. So let’s learn from Hong Kong and not make the same mistakes when it comes to limiting the exposure to lethal fumes and tunneling effects that are amplified by high-rise structures.

Published in Macau Daily Times, April 12th 2013.