Wednesday, January 30, 2013

What poverty line for Hong Kong?


  A task force under the government-appointed Commission on Poverty met on Monday to draw up the first official poverty line for Hong Kong. According to recent media reports, the group is favour of a definition of poverty as measured with the common method used by the OECD and the EU and the Hong Kong government was also inclined to adopting this model.

  While local pressure groups and some respectable academics have long been clamouring for the establishment of an official poverty line for the city, there seems to be some popular illusion that such a threshold can reflect how many people in our society are poor and how many are not or whether the livelihood of residents has improved or worsened over time.  This is perhaps because the phrase “poverty line” itself is a misleading term. Even some members of the Commission reportedly expressed surprise when they heard that the benchmark under discussion would not measure people’s material wealth and urged the government to “clarify” what it meant. (Note 1)

  If people under the poverty line are poor and those above it are not, then the poverty rate should be higher in poor societies and vice versa, shouldn’t it? Perfectly logical in common sense. But this is not the case. In 2010, the poverty rate of Germany, which was envied by its European neighbours for its relative economic strength in the aftermath of the global financial crisis, was higher than that of the struggling Hungary by two percentage points, despite the per capita GDP of the former outstripped the latter by more than 80%, for example. (Notes  2 and 3)

  Why does the poverty rate not tell how rich or how poor a society is? Take a quick look at how the OECD/EU poverty rate is calculated and one can immediately realise where the problem lies.  The mathematical formula is simple – the population under the poverty line is those whose household incomes fall below a certain percentage, usually 40%, 50% or 60%, of the median of the society.
  Instead of indicating the income levels of the general population or of the economically worse off group, this measurement of relative poverty (as opposed to absolute poverty) is rather an outcome of the distribution of income.

  Suppose 100 households lived in Town X with an income distribution like this in a given year:
Income ($)
Number of households
20
4
30
6
40
10
50
22
60
20
70
12
80
10
90
8
100
6
110
2
Total
100

  The median household income is $60. If the poverty line is drawn at 50% of that, then 10% of all households will fall below the threshold. (For the sake of simplicity the difference in the numbers of people in households is ignored here.)

  Now in the following year, 20 households immigrated to Town X, most of them with incomes above the median level. Some high earners who had been living here also saw their incomes increase. On the other hand, those living on the lowest end of the breadline made even less money this year, with some even losing their jobs and left with no income.
 
Income ($)
Number of households
0
2
10
2
20
2
30
4
40
10
50
26
60
22
70
14
80
12
90
12
100
8
110
4
120
2
Total
120

   The median household income remained at $60. However, the official poverty rate with the above definition would drop to 8.3%. This is despite the fact that the poor in Town X have actually become poorer. (An interactive graphical illustration of how changes in people’s incomes move the poverty rate can be found at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8177864.stm.)

  Another reason why this way to define poverty is misleading is, as researchers in the academia have pointed out and at least one member of the Commission has raised in the media, that income is the sole measurement while assets are not taken into account. Some retirees may have no income at all yet enjoy a well-off material life on their accumulated wealth while some young people may earn wages which do not look but cannot afford to live on their own. As the population of Hong Kong is ageing, the age structure is expected to have an effect on the movement of such an official poverty line.

  The OECD/EU model of poverty measurement has also been criticised for setting an arbitrary standard. Why should the percentage be set at 40% but not 50%, or 50% but not 60%? However an advocate explains the percentage he or she goes for, it is after all a subjective line. Indeed where the line should be drawn has become a centre of debate in the current discussion in Hong Kong, whereas the basic concept of drawing a line in this way seems to have become the general consensus between Commission and the administration. There have been voices raising concern that the government may adopt a lower threshold to make the population under the poverty line look smaller. These are merely manipulation of numbers and I am not going into this argument of what percentage is the best for I reckon that it is unrealistic to look for a benchmark free of subjectivity and biases. In fact the OECD website presents poverty data measured with three commonly used percentages. (Note 4) It appears that Commission members and many vocal advocates for this official poverty line in Hong Kong prefer the use of one single line to avoid complexity.

  What I would like to caution against is the type of arguments like “The line should be set at 40% because Hong Kong is an affluent society” or “The line should be set at 60% because the cost of living in Hong Kong is so high”. If these logics applied, then the official poverty line could be moved as our GDP or inflation rate moved every year, which would effectively make the line meaningless. Although the setting of the line is inevitably a political process, the exercise to measure poverty statistically should not be used as a political tool to reaffirm existing views on poverty. Instead, it should be a tool with a purpose to help make policies on poverty alleviation.

  Because it is convenient, such a definition of poverty has been commonly used in many countries despite its questionability as a poverty indicator. In recent decades the study of inequality in developed countries has been moving toward a more comprehensive view, such as developing more encompassing concepts like deprivation social exclusion, standard of living and quality of life, rather than drawing a simple line on the income curve. The Hong Kong government is aware of these new options but has chosen to go for the old, established, convenient, one-dimensional measurement and NGOs speaking on the issue appear to be happy about that.

  In spite of these limitations of the OECD/EU model of the poverty line, I would not say it is totally useless for Hong Kong. As Commission member and Oxfam Hong Kong director-general Mr. Stephen Fisher has pointed out, one major function of an official poverty line is to assess the effectiveness of public policies on poverty alleviation. (Note 5) Professor CK Law wrote a newspaper article last year which gave a clear elaboration on how it could be done and readers who are interested can refer it. (Note 6)  However, for the sake of comprehensiveness and to point out some confusion in recent media reports please bear with me for being a bit repetitive here.

  Take a glance at the OECD poverty statistical table and one can spot there are two sets of poverty rates, “poverty rates before taxes and transfers” and “poverty rates after taxes and transfers”. (Note 4) By comparing the two sets of data, we can find out to what extent an economy’s taxation and welfare policies have changed income distribution.  Certainly a general subtraction does not tell us which policy is working for the poor and which is not and why, but nonetheless it serves as a reference of how effective government intervention is. More detailed analyses of sub-groups can be conducted with demographic data.

  An understanding of this use of the official poverty line (despite one does not have to agree with it) is significant in the whole discussion of how the line(s) should be drawn and, in my humble opinion, why we hold such a discussion at all. After all, why does a poverty line has to be “official”? The Oxfam can draw its own line and so can the Hong Kong Council of Social Service. The local academia is not short of studies in poverty and there is a variety of measurements available to choose from in literature. (Note 7) If the only reasons for setting a poverty line are to keep records and conduct analyses, which carry importance in their own rights, then we can be happy without an official definition, which can be authoritarian. The most important point of making an official line is to for policymaking purposes.

  Recognising this reason for making an official poverty line and the rationale behind having a “poverty rate before taxes and transfers” and a “poverty rate after taxes and transfers” should be able to alert us not to confuse the two rates. I found some recent news reports intriguing and I do not know if it were the Commission members and pressure group representatives being interviewed or the journalists who had mixed up the concepts (Hopefully not the Commission members because they are the ones responsible for the task). Some recent reports warned against “the inclusion of welfare in the calculation of the poverty line” by the government (e.g. Notes 5 and 8). I myself was stunned when I first came across the headlines and I am afraid most readers might be misled that welfare would be included in the calculation of the commonly understood single poverty line unless they take the time and effort to read some original documents. If it were the case that government welfare was included in THE poverty line which people talk about, then it would depict an extremely unrealistic picture of poverty in Hong Kong.  I appreciate the fact that there are still a wide range of possibilities of how to measure the “poverty rate after taxes and transfers” and I agree that some of the concerns raised such as the inclusion of universal services like nine-year free education might come up with the false picture of “zero poverty” is valid in this sense. However, distinguishing the two lines and conveying the real purpose of setting an official poverty line to the public is still important.


Notes
  1. 1.       The Hong Kong Economic Journal, Jan 29, 2013, ‘貧窮線不代表窮 議員促釐清作用
  2. 2.       http://www.indexmundi.com/map/?v=69&r=eu&l=en
  3. 3.       http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-11-064/EN/KS-SF-11-064-EN.PDF
  4. 4.       (http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DatasetCode=POVERTY)
  5. 5.       The Hong Kong Economic Journal, Jan 28, 2013, ‘余志穩:訂貧窮線毋須一年 倡入息中位一半劃線 憂政府降指標當滅貧
  6. 6.       Mingpao, Sept 30, ‘貧窮線用來做甚麼?
  7. 7.       See for example a brief review by Professor Chou Kee-lee in Mingpao,  Dec 17, 2012, ‘如何訂定本港的貧窮線? ‘
  8. 8.       The Apple Daily, Jan 29, 2013, ‘福利當收入  貧窮線恐變粉飾數字


Friday, January 25, 2013

重返校園


「你還讀書?」
「你已工作七年還辭職來讀書?那要很大勇氣吧?」
這些是我自從來到英國唸書後,每當提起工作經驗時聽到的典型反應,尤其不少來自亞洲的同學都把放下工作全職讀書看作一種犧牲。
其實我並不是特別有勇氣,離開工作也不是一個甚麼艱難的決定。這並不是說我不喜歡我的工作,相反,我很享受當記者。我喜歡走出辦公室到不同的地方,接觸不同的人和事,喜歡不時有意料之外的挑戰。
重返校園正好給我空間探索我生活圈子以外的世界,給我空間思索和尋找自己。
留學英倫是香港學生往外跑的一個傳統選擇。坦白說,在香港人之中,曾在英國讀書已不算很特別的經驗。儘管英國政府近年財政緊縮、連年加學費、教育經費削減、大學排名榜漸被亞洲學府追上,這裏仍然是香港人熱門的留學地點。
若我來英國讀書是為了去一個先進國家享用豐富的硬件教育資源,那很可能會換來失望。來到這裏最讓我開眼界的是反而認識到來自不同的發展中國家的同學們,正因為這兒有世界各地的學子匯集。
十月開學不久,在報章上閱到巴基斯坦爭取女童教育權利的14歲少女馬拉拉被塔利班槍擊的新聞。我想到班上那位來自巴基斯坦的同學為甚麼在課堂上總是那麼積極講述她祖國的管治狀況,感慨當大多數同學都會熱情邀請大家將來探訪他們家鄉時,她總是勸喻同學們不宜到她的國家旅遊。
馬里北部由極端伊斯蘭組織掌控的地區衝突持續,那天我們校園裏的模擬聯合國會議討論是否要軍事介入,坐在我旁邊的模擬代表竟正是來自馬里的學生,揚揚道來為何希望外國介入平定她的國家,但又不想前宗主國法國出兵的心結。會後她說慶幸家人目前都在英國,但還是很擔心國內局勢。
十一月,哈馬斯向以色列發射火箭炮後,以色列以連日轟炸加沙地帶還擊。班上來自巴勒斯坦的一位同學十分氣憤,發動大家參加遊行。
這些種種,原本只透過國際新聞聽到、離我很遠的世界,忽然都就在我身邊。
這裏的最大海外學生來源地還是中國。雖然出發前已有心理準備英國的大學有很多中國留學生,但坦白說,起初對於千里迢迢出國留學卻跑到了小型唐人街,心裏還是有點納悶,但漸漸適應了,其實這也反映了國際發展的一種趨勢。這裏的教授和不少同學都顯得對中國的發展很有興趣,會問大陸同學們和我關於中國的事情。
內地同學們對社會的認知差距很大,跟他們討論時事甚是有趣的體會,有些同學在國內活躍翻牆,對國內外事情都很關注,有些則對官方媒體不提的新聞便完全沒聽過。跟我這個香港人相處,他們由把我當作完全沒有分別到問我懂不懂中文的都有。看着這一群未來海歸派,有的看見亞洲臉孔劈頭便跟人家講普通話,也有的樂於跟來自不同國家的同學們交朋友,似乎看到中國社會一個未來縮影。
這些都是書本上沒有的、但正是重返校園讓我有機會體會到的。

(本文於1月23日在http://hk.promotion.yahoo.net/education/201301237085/發表。)


Some old and new habits of mine


New:  Warm hats are so much needed under this cold weather. Indeed I haven’t been able to go out without a hat since November. Hats used to be just a practical thing for me, an item which I would use when occasionally needed. But they have now become part of my daily dress just like my T-shirts and trousers. Although two hats in the wardrobe are practically sufficient as you still get one to wear when another is hung up for drying after washing, I started to want to change hats more often just like I don’t wear only two T-shirts on alternative days. Sorry for my purse that I have bought my second winter hat here on top of the two I brought from home. The good news is that I have a small head so that money is saved by getting kid’s size ones.

Old: Another piece of good news for my purse is that I have absolutely stopped buying earrings. Why wear earrings when my ears badly need to be covered by a hat?

***

New: Lots of tea drinking. English breakfast is still my favourite, as always. A mint tea or an Earl Grey would wake me up when I feel gloomy and sleeping in the afternoon. A fruit tea is a good reward for myself after several hours of class or essay writing. A flower tea is randomly picked but the fragrance makes me smile every time when I open the box.

Old: I still keep a teapot and some Chinese jasmine tea but they’ve eventually become a showcase and it’s mainly served when I have visitors. Interestingly the pattern of choices made my friends has been very consistent so far. Whenever I offered them some tea and asked what tea they would like, all my Chinese friends would go for English tea and all my non-Chinese friends would go for Chinese tea.

And of course, no more bubble tea for me now.

***

New: Lots of walking. I actually enjoy walking as a way of commuting. You get to see the real city instead of having everything flashing in front of eyes for a second through a bus window. Oh I almost forgot how to ride on a bus… In the past four months since my arrival I have only ridden on a city bus three times (inter-city bus exclusive), including one ride from the airport on my first day here and another ride to the airport for a vacation.

Old: Commuting for one hour used to be nothing harsh to me. I routinely commuted for almost an hour to work and a whole hour back home after work, not to mention travel between places at work. I didn’t see why one would “wow” after hearing the distance between my home in HK and my office required one hour of travelling.  Now anywhere that I can’t reach within half an hour means a remote place to me.

***

New: Dress in layers, or in a more vivid description I like, in an “onion style”. I really appreciate the idea of having cloakrooms in European museums. They are just desperately needed. This way of dressing also makes me move slower – You don’t realise it takes so much time just to take on and off clothing every time you go indoors and outdoors until you really have to do it many times a day, particularly when you have several classes at different locations on the same day.

And by the way, I have started to wear two layers of gloves since the beginning of 2013.

Old: I think I missed my dresses and skirts in my first two months here.

***

New: I have come to understand why baking is such a popular home activity in Europe. It feels so good to be in front of a hot oven smelling fresh food when it’s freaking cold outside!

Old: Being in the kitchen was simply no fun – it made you sweat.

***

New: Sunshine is a rare gift. When it was still not this cold by December, I would want to go out even just for a little walk to the nearby supermarket when I saw sunshine through the narrow window in my dim bedroom.

Old habit: There was almost always sufficient ambient light cheering up my flat through our large window and I could literally stay at home for days without feeling any depression.

***

New: All DIY meals! Bye to polystyrene food boxes! Yeah!

Old: Restaurant meals for lunch and supper boxes in the newsroom. Weekend meals by mom were big rewards after a whole week of work.

***


Friday, January 11, 2013

Volver


突然間,好想再去西班牙。

坦白說,我不特別鍾情這個國家。我不喜歡西班牙人談話時總時不斷互相插嘴,一點耐性都沒有,又總的非要把你說服不可。我不喜歡西班牙男人,覺得他們很大男人主義。

我不喜歡siesta,伊伯利亞半島下午的陽光多好,躲在屋裏睡午覺多浪費!(現在在英國生活,每逢見到陽光更是謝天謝地。)我又不喜歡鬥牛,覺得很血腥。

但是,現在的我竟然有回到西班牙的衝動。

當年跑到那兒,只是一時想走,買張機票,然後辭職,一個人,無端跑到一個陌生的地方。

可能當年的衝動只是為了補償自己。畢業時原本就有機會申請獎學金去,但只因為一個很傻的原因而放棄了。

現在再去,已經有朋友可探望,已有快樂的回憶可追尋。

放下好幾年的西班牙語,原本都已不懂說了,在瑞典的旅途上它竟又回到我的舌頭。

我並不特別擅於旅遊,也一點都不浪漫,只是凡想傻一番的時候便會想跑到另一個國家。

或許只是想尋回那種年少輕狂、想去哪裏就去哪裏的感覺。


Monday, January 07, 2013

Away for two weeks


  Two weeks away from England and everything including my dormitory looks so new! I took a nap on the bus from the Stansted Airport to London city centre and when I opened my eyes I wondered if I was in Wan Chai or Central of Hong Kong. I never knew driving on the left and all these familiar designs of highways and traffic lights would make me feel so much like at home. But I miss the Swedish krona because its rate makes much more sense than the British pound to me.

  It was -2 degrees in Stockholm when I left there. Both sides along the road to the Skavsta Airport were beautifully covered with snow. So when I reached London, which was then 9 degrees – an 11-degree surge from my previous location, I literally sweated despite it was a temperature at which someone from a subtropical region like me should be shivering. Just yesterday I was wearing two hats and two pairs of gloves!

  The journey back to Bristol was a long one. I set off from my hostel at 8am Swedish time, took a bus to the Skavasta Airport and caught the midday flight, flew to the Stansted Airport, waited in line for more than an hour at the customs, had a quick lunch, commuted to the London city centre, waited for another hour for the intercity bus and rode for almost 3 hours and finally arrived at 9pm British time. (It’s really no fun commuting via London. Anyone thinking about visiting me because you happen to be travelling somewhere in Britain or in Europe should seriously consider such exhaustion. Of course I’ll deeply appreciate our friendship if you go through all these to see me.) When I entered the lobby of my dormitory building it looked unusually bright. Have they put up new lights or was it just because I stayed in the dark for too long in Scandinavia? Then when I entered my bedroom it looked so unfamiliar… It was so empty that it didn’t look like my bedroom at all! But even emptier was my fridge. I was starving but didn’t want to cook after 14 hours of commuting… At this point of time my sweet flatmate came into the kitchen and cooked noodles for me. I felt so beloved!