Social Quality in Hong Kong: Who cares? Which quality?

Raymond K H CHANCity University of Hong Kong

Social Quality ‘the extent to which people are able to participate in the social and

economic life and development of their communities under conditions which enhance their wellbeing and individual potential’ (van der Maesen & Walker, 2005:11-12)

Domains and Sub-domains of Social Quality

Socio-economic Security Financial resources Housing and the environment Health and care Work and education

Social cohesion Trust Other integrative norms and values Social networks Identity

Social inclusion Citizenship rights Labour market Services (public and private) Social networks

Social empowerment Knowledge base Labour market Openness & supportiveness of institutions Personal relations

Hong Kong Context• Centralized administrative state with limited democratic

participation but supplemented with many consultative committees

• Faith in free market and liberalism• High level of economic and ‘social’ development• Service economy • Ethnic Chinese dominated society though claimed to be an

international city • Conservative Confucian cultures on family and individual

roles

Socio-economic Security• Satisfactory performance • Relatively low unemployment rate and reasonable income to the majority• Situation for the vulnerable labor groups – low skill, low education, low

income, middle-aged • Elementary worker: 496,800 (1995) 627,100 (2005), i.e. 18% of the

workforce • Low income workers: increased by 48.7% from 1995 to 2005• Casual worker: 2.4% / Part time worker: 5.3% of the total workforce • Flexible labor market emphasized with lesser employment protection

• Their livelihood protected by the heavily subsidized public housing (half of the population living in subsidized housing), health and education services through taxation, at a living standard comparable to lower class

Social Inclusion• Access to housing basically maintained, though family applicants have to

wait for 2 years on average for PRH• Caring and housing for elderly is a problem (limited caring institution,

lack of retirement protection, no public health insurance scheme)• Majority of Hong Kong people have citizenship and therefore access to

public services • Majority of them have the right to vote, but only 60% register and among

them less than 60% did vote which reflects a lack of interest / trust on the political system

• Ethnic minority (esp. South / Southeast Asians) living condition received more attention in recent years

• Lacking concept of social citizenship (responsibilities > rights) though more services are enjoyed on the basis of citizenship

Social Empowerment• Access to education is satisfactory except higher education• Access to information is satisfactory but problem of digital

divide is there• No excessive control on rally, demonstration, public

meetings• Low participation in trade union and social organizations• Political system still highly centralized with limited democracy• No effective mediating organizations that helps to integrate

different parts together vertically

Social Cohesion• A growing sense of attachment and local identity

since mid-1980s• Social tension and political crisis since 1997• Low level of generalized trust and low level of social

participation• More contend with their family and peer networks• Might sponsor the idea of collectivism and social

responsibility but do not have proportional actions

Performances of Social CohesionSubjective component(attitudes)

Objective component(behavioral manifestation)

Horizontal dimension(cohesion in civil society)

Rather strong sense of cohesion but general trust not pervasive

Reciprocal index – 5.89Commitment index – 6.68

Respondent did not act as cohesively, and help seeking behaviour and participation in social organizations is not common. Helping behavior index – 3.54Social involvement index – 2.00

Vertical dimension(society-state cohesion – how people feel about government)

Confidence – lost trusts in political institutions in general and the executive branch in particular:Confidence in political institution index – 4.96Confidence in the administration of justice index – 7.33

Respondents were concerned about politics but with fair level of participation in action.Political concern index – 6.60Political participation index – 6.02

Source: Chan & Chan, 2006: 640Note: score above 5.5 represents a satisfactory level

Who care? Which quality?

• More concern on socio-economic security than the others, though more sensitive to the issues -- social cohesion, inclusion and participation

• A highly divided and stratified society• Neo-liberalism reform the policy from mere

protection to productivist

Social Risk Management Strategy• Lacking a collective orientation and preference to

individual / family > collective / public sector• Support a traditional / residual welfare orientation as

risk management strategies• Support for private account > social account• Welfare system sustainable as long as individual

can sustain• No strong sense of ‘social’