Updated on Jun 12, 2008 – SCMP
Extraordinarily, Hong Kong has yet to make an explicit policy link between air quality and public health. We all know that air pollution affects our health yet, in public policy terms, the weighting towards our well-being is missing. This must change, otherwise the government will never quite get its priorities right about environmental protection and its duty to improve air quality, so that it no longer poses a daily threat to people. The same can be said of Guangdong, one of the wealthiest parts of the country; health gains from social and economic development will otherwise be compromised.
Research released yesterday using data from 2006 shows that air pollution levels were attributable to 10,000 deaths in Hong Kong, Macau and the Pearl River Delta, with 94 per cent of these occurring across the border. Moreover, air pollution is responsible for some 440,000 annual hospital bed-days and 11 million outpatient visits annually throughout the whole region. Industrialised areas such as Guangzhou and Foshan suffer from very high levels of sulfur dioxide, which is associated with cardiovascular and respiratory disease, and death. These figures could be lowered with improved air quality; these premature deaths and illnesses are avoidable.
The cost of these hospital bed-days, lost productivity and doctor visits associated with the impact on people’s health amounts to 1.8 billion yuan (HK$2.03 billion) a year in the delta, HK$1.1 billion in Hong Kong and HK$18 million in Macau. Adjusted for differences in gross domestic product, the health-related monetary costs of air pollution in the delta are seven times higher than those in Hong Kong. These represent only the economic losses, and do not take into account pain and suffering, or put a value on life. Research also shows the lack of local studies in the delta, Hong Kong and Macau on air pollution and health. The public and government policymakers will still not fully understand the impact of poor air quality on health without long-term studies that measure the total years of life lost to air pollution. Conducting studies that provide feedback essential to evaluate the effectiveness of air pollution control measures will help governments shape policy. If public health was a policy priority, we would invest more in health-related research.
It is now indisputable that smoggy days have increased dramatically over the past two decades. Although some pollutant types and sources have decreased, others have remained steady or increased. This is particularly true in the delta’s industrial areas. Only with frequent reviews of air pollution data and an evaluation of policy measures will it be possible to devise appropriate strategies. The authorities need to review regional emissions data for last year, as satellite information indicates that conditions have worsened since 2003.
Authorities in the delta, Hong Kong and Macau can exercise leadership by tightening air quality standards. Replacing the existing piecemeal approach with a total air quality management framework focused on public health is the first step. It has proved successful in controlling emissions elsewhere in the world.
Taking collaborative action before Hong Kong and Guangzhou host the East Asian and Asian Games in 2009 and 2010, respectively, will allow the region to take advantage of lessons learned from Beijing’s attempts to improve air quality for the Olympics, and for the region to position itself as a leader in fighting air pollution. A powerful short-term measure would be to use cleaner fuels not only in vehicles and ships but also in factories using power generators. This won’t be easy at a time when energy prices are high, but policymakers must spell out the damage to people’s health if they are to rally support for change.
This is the right time for such a change. National policy is shifting towards environmental protection; Hong Kong and Guangdong, as the wealthiest parts of the country, should be the first to make an explicit health link.
Christine Loh Kung-wai is chief executive of the think-tank Civic Exchange. cloh@civic-exchange.org