網上版請按此
New smart city blueprint should bring us revolutionary change
A special feature of The Economist in December pointed out that Hong Kong and the other three Asian tigers (South Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan), which had created economic miracles from the 1960s to 1990s, are all facing development bottleneck today, and each of them has to find a way forward.
For our way forward, I think the up-and-coming Smart City Blueprint for Hong Kong 2.0, to be announced by the government, should be a good guideline. Let us review what we have done before exploring our future direction.
The first Smart City Blueprint for Hong Kong (Blueprint 1.0) was released in December 2017. It contains 70 initiatives, including smart lampposts, electronic identity (eID), the Faster Payment System and virtual banking, to promote the development of Hong Kong as a smart city. I thought at that time that the blueprint was good enough as the first work plan, though it was inadequate.
The major shortcoming of Blueprint 1.0 was its project-based approach. That is, most departments merely concentrate on their internal functions and neglect connecting their data with others. This arises from individual departments' objective of achieving earlier results from information technology, rather than allocating resources to collaborating with other departments, which may take a longer time to realize the benefits.
The development of the common spatial data infrastructure (CSDI), which is the core of a smart city and a one-stop information center, is an example. The government departments must first convert the data into a machine-readable format and connect with geographic locations. The consolidated information can then be shared with others to promote innovation, such as developing applications by startups, and for research purpose. This is called "CSDI readiness". Although government departments are active in opening data that the number of datasets opened will increase to nearly 4,000, most are machine-readable by the end of this year. However, some of them are still displayed in an old format, without "CSDI readiness". This is where we are now. So what shall we expect from the forthcoming "Blueprint 2.0"?
Again taking CSDI as an example, we should strive to take it to the next level. First of all, all datasets need to be "CSDI ready". Secondly, interdepartmental collaboration for constructing a data-driven common operational picture (COP) for better coordination among departments is also crucial. Imagine, during last year's Super Typhoon Mangkhut, as well as road blockages and MTR suspensions in recent months, if there had been a COP in place connecting departments of transport (traffic conditions), food and environmental hygiene (assuring food supplies, and public cleaning), education (school arrangements) and the Hospital Authority (updated clinic and hospital services availability), then the government could have released the latest information to the public in a one-stop platform. People would find it much easier to cope with the changing situations with accurate and updated information.
However, the relevant authority does not seem to treasure COP as reflected in the resource allocation. In a Legislative Council discussion of budget expenditures for 2020-21 in November, the iAM Smart, formerly known as eID, service involves 11 policy bureaus and departments, including the Electrical and Mechanical Services Department, the Legal Aid Department, the Leisure and Cultural Services Department, the Security Bureau, the Registration and Electoral Office, etc, with a total budget of over HK$91 million ($11.7 million). Unfortunately, the document does not have much about strengthening CSDI readiness for each department to have data of machine-readable format, connecting by geographical locations and seeking synergy with other projects and departments.
To truly promote innovation, the government should, like implementing iAM Smart service, invest sufficient resources in all major departments. In this regard, the Innovation and Technology Bureau and the Development Bureau should work together to make it happen.
Taking it one step further, it is the data sharing between public and private organizations that matters. For example, a comprehensive application for mobility should cover information from the Transport and Highways departments, as well as real-time arrival data of MTR, buses, minibuses, as well as parking data of private and public parking lots, etc, so that users can grasp the latest situation without having to find their sought-after information from different platforms.
To achieve interdepartmental and public-private collaboration, mentality and technology are both important.
The Open Data Law in New York City, which mandates all public data be made available on a single web portal, was enacted at the end of 2018. I think we should also make this our goal. For sure, extensive and in-depth discussions among citizens, scholars, pressure groups, public and private organizations, and government departments before legislating are essential. Similar to the plastic shopping bag charge, society should have a step-by-step approach to reach consensus. This kind of project brings a revolutionary change to existing culture. New York took six years from legislation to implementation, not counting the time spent in preparation, but it finally made the change.
Why do we mention change to existing culture? To become a genuine smart city, we need a development policy for the entire society and that policy should be sustainable. This should also be the aim of the blueprints. 2019 was a year of internal and external difficulties for Hong Kong.
Internally, there was social turmoil, which lasted for half a year. Externally, there was the US-China trade war. In face of difficulties, the other three Asian tigers have their own thinking. For example, Singapore has taken advantage of the booming economy of the ASEAN countries, and promoted the "smart city" as a solution. The country took the lead to set up the ASEAN Smart Cities Network (ASCN) in 2019, and selected 26 cities as pilot cities. It is a new opportunity for Singapore's service industry and talent.
In November, the Chinese mainland and ASEAN also issued the "ASEAN-China Leaders' Statement on Smart City Cooperation Initiative", and announced that eight cities, including Shenzhen, have formed an alliance with ASEAN cities to assist their smart city development.
What about Hong Kong? Rather than sit and wait, we should take action now. Externally, we should strive to partner with ASEAN cities to promote the export of smart city solutions and services. In fact, Hong Kong has always been ranked top among the global smart cities. For example, in the IMD Smart City Index 2019, published by the International Institute for Management Development in Switzerland, Hong Kong ranked 37th, ahead of all mainland cities. Internally, we must continue to strengthen ourselves, we should speed up and extend core data applications to a wider scope, including the whole society, so that we can take the lead in smart city development. By doing so, Hong Kong could soar to new heights.
Dr. Winnie Tang
Adjunct Professor, Department of Computer Science, Faculty of Engineering and Faculty of Architecture, The University of Hong Kong