Hong Kong lacks a climate narrative to unify its efforts

Hong Kong deserves credit for its first five-year plan, accompanied by a detailed policy address. The plan establishes a useful framework beyond the annual policy cycle. Precisely because this is an important first effort, it is worth asking what could make the framework even stronger. One striking omission is that the five-year plan never explicitly mentions climate change. This does not mean Hong Kong is failing to act. On the contrary, the plan and policy address contain many measures dealing with decarbonisation, adaptation, resilience and nature. But because climate change is not highlighted as a unifying focus, these measures appear fragmented. Consider the binding indicators. They include the long-standing reduction in carbon emissions per unit of gross domestic product and increasing the proportion of zero-carbon energy in electricity generation. The plan also addresses cleaner power, electric vehicles, green maritime fuels, sustainable aviation fuel, energy efficiency, hydrogen, waste reduction and carbon trading. The policy address adds detail. It commits Hong Kong to increasing zero-carbon electricity, developing hydrogen, expanding electric vehicle infrastructure, and building sustainable aviation and maritime fuel value chains. It proposes the interesting idea of carbon emissions accounting for green maritime fuels, cross-boundary carbon trading and green hydrogen certification. Climate adaptation is also taken seriously. The policy address refers to global warming and extreme weather, improved infrastructure design standards, studies of risks from extreme rainfall, storm surges, waves and sea-level rise, and continuing drainage and coastal protection projects. It connects adaptation with better weather forecasting, climate insurance, and transition and adaptation finance. Nature is part of the picture too. The five-year plan includes ecological protection, wetlands, marine and terrestrial protected areas, ecological corridors, biodiversity and blue carbon restoration. The policy address reiterated the commitment to the Hong Kong Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan 2035. Hong Kong has many ingredients of climate leadership. What it surprisingly lacks is a clear narrative that these activities form part of one strategic transformation. This becomes apparent in the chapters on innovation and talent. The plan promotes new energy, energy storage, advanced materials, and artificial intelligence (AI). It proposes an industry-academia-research collaborative system and an international hub for science, technology and talent. Yet it does not identify climate change as a major challenge towards which these formidable capabilities should be directed. The omission is especially noticeable in the Northern Metropolis sections. University towns are at the heart of the development. This is an opportunity to create a living laboratory for green buildings, clean mobility, smart energy, urban cooling, nature-based designs and climate-resilient infrastructure. Yet climate change adaptation is not articulated as a key driver. Similar fragmentation appears in finance. “Finance + Green Development” is included, but the missing narrative is the need to transition from the brown to the green economy globally. Carbon markets require far more than a trading platform. They need credible data, methodologies, verification, legal rules, risk management and investible projects – these are not explained adequately. Building retrofits likewise require aggregation, performance standards, predictable cash flows and financing structures. A climate lens would connect environmental objectives with the financial and market infrastructure needed to deliver them. Public health provides another example. The healthcare chapter covers primary care, chronic disease, ageing, surveillance and system resilience, but not the effects of extreme heat, air pollution or climate-sensitive diseases. Yet extreme heat affects elderly people, outdoor workers, poorly ventilated homes, electricity affordability, urban planning and emergency healthcare. It is a cross-departmental challenge. This brings us to governance. The plan calls for a holistic approach to development and security, prevention-based governance, risk warning, interdepartmental collaboration, infrastructure resilience and clearer accountability. Climate change is an ideal test of this approach. It crosses the boundaries between environment, development, transport, housing, health, labour, welfare, finance, education and security. The contrast with the national 15th five-year plan is instructive. That explicitly calls for climate mitigation and adaptation, control of carbon and other climate warming emissions, assessment of risks to vulnerable sectors and regions, stronger responses to extreme weather and active participation in global climate governance. Climate action is connected with carbon peaking, energy transformation, technological innovation, industrial development and international cooperation. Hong Kong need not rewrite the plan – the next administration can use climate change as a unifying focus for its policy address next year. It could apply a climate-and-nature lens across implementation, budgeting and annual reporting. This could identify shared missions, assign cross-bureau responsibility, connect research with public needs, develop investible project pipelines and measure combined economic, social and environmental outcomes. Such a lens could also strengthen Hong Kong’s international role. The city can connect mainland green technologies with international capital, science, insurance, professional services, standards and markets. Its work on hydrogen certification, sustainable fuels, carbon trading and green Belt and Road Initiative cooperation already points in this direction. Hong Kong does not lack climate action. It lacks a sufficiently visible climate narrative to pull its many efforts together. Bringing the existing pieces together would help the administration deliver the integrated governance promised by its first five-year plan and show Hong Kong intends not merely to respond to climate change, but to help lead the solutions.

Hong Kong lacks a climate narrative to unify its efforts

.css-1c6uqr6{color:inherit;font-weight:inherit;font-size:inherit;font-family:inherit;line-height:inherit;overflow-wrap:break-word;}Hong Kong does not mention ‘climate change’ in its five-year plan, yet it already has many ingredients of climate leadership

Hong Kong does not mention ‘climate change’ in its five-year plan, yet it already has many ingredients of climate leadership