Search results

This paper aims to challenge the longstanding cosmopolitan interpretation of Hong Kong, particularly why this global city fails to absorb China equally through its great inclusiveness and flexibility as before. On the contrary, rising tensions, conflicts and resistance could be founded between Hong Kong and China these days.

By using Hong Kong cinema as an analytical lens, this paper seeks to throw light on the cinematic landscape of post-1997 Hong Kong and, by implications, the overall destiny of postcolonial Hong Kong under Chinese rule.

The postcolonial Hong Kong, although lacking a symmetric status and equal weight, remains an active player with Chinese hegemony that appeals to the newfound market power to consolidate their systemic control on the city. By acting upon itself with the subjectivity and reflexivity from itself, postcolonial Hong Kong takes many actions to do justice that criticizes the political and ideological correctness and challenges the contemporary national authority from one-party rule.

This paper demonstrates a new in-betweenness in the relation to the making of postcolonial Hong Kong. This paper advances insights into a postcolonial reinvention of the politics of disappearance that remains underexplored.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

The purpose of this paper is to examine British policy towards Hong Kong from the protests of 2019 through political controversies in 2020.

The paper offers a foreign policy analysis based on a chronological account of the public interventions made by London from April 2019 to the passage of the national security law in the middle of 2020. It discusses the factors which contributed to the UK's positions and looks in more detail at an issue which relates to the British colonial legacy: the status of British National (Overseas) passport holders.

The paper argues that the UK's policy was influenced by a combination of factors: developments in Hong Kong, the implications of and perceptions about its historical position as the former colonial power, the growing influence of lobby groups in the UK and Hong Kong (especially in agenda setting), and (to a lesser extent) the UK's wider relations with China. In trying to balance these, British policy tended to be reactive rather than strategic. London generally took positions sympathetic to the protest movement and political opposition, characterised in the paper as “soft partisanship”, shifting to clear opposition to Beijing's approach when the National Security Law was announced.

The paper helps to understand international policy towards Hong Kong.

The paper offers the first account of British policy towards Hong Kong during this period and adds to the limited existing literature on the UK's Hong Kong policy over recent years. This case study sheds light on wider questions of international perceptions of developments in Hong Kong during a tumultuous period in the city's history and informs broader studies of foreign policymaking.

This chapter aims to explore the novelty and utility of political economy discourse, termed “neo-statism,” as an analytical lens for comparative research in higher education. Analysis is framed within the context of Hong Kong’s transition from a British colony to a Special Administrative Region under China’s sovereignty, and its shifting academic paradigms from a more or less spontaneous philosophy rooted in liberal capitalist economy to embracing neo-statism, which involves market-conforming and state-sponsored approaches to economic and social restructuring whereby the state regulates higher education in support of national integration and global power projection. The statist regulation depends heavily on its deployment of discursive legitimacy, strategic distribution of resources, organizational synergy, and elite cohesion articulated through higher education policy, research projects, and cross-border academic exchange and cooperation. The Hong Kong case suggests that comparative research in higher education should advance from the methodological aspects of the comparative approach to exploring wider theoretical spectrum, for understanding emerging politico-economic factors shaping academic paradigm in comparative contexts. Moreover, scholars who engage in the trendy internationalization in higher education should move beyond the logics of neo-liberalism, and pay closer attention to the new geopolitical realities that are changing the normative and interactive dimensions of international higher education at large.

This paper is an in‐depth analysis of community policing in Hong Kong. It includes an outline of the evolution of community policing in Hong Kong, identifies the structural arrangements for the practice of community policing, examines major community‐based programs that have been launched, evaluates the performance of this strategy, and considers constraints on these policy initiatives. It shows that this community effort has already gone beyond the confines of promoting community relations in Hong Kong. The results have been encouraging. They include a significant improvement in the quality of police‐public interactions, the engagement of the public and their increased support in crime control and prevention, and the beginning of the conversion of traditional police enforcement to that of police services. However, the Force's use of community policing schemes predominantly for the pragmatic purpose of crime control has accounted for the lack of breakthroughs in forging a strategic partnership with the public to promote a secure and harmonious environment.

Despite the preservation of “One Country, Two Systems” for 50 years under the Sino-British Joint Declaration and Basic Law, changes are palpable due to the emergence of a real contest between liberal and pro-China actors in the legal profession and the legal environment in Hong Kong. After celebrating the twentieth anniversary of Hong Kong’s sovereignty transfer from Britain to China, it is valuable to study how the sovereign power influence the rule of law in its semiautonomous city by non-legal measures. This paper aims to offer a preliminary research on China’s political economic strategy, which is regarded as the “China factor”, in the legal system of Hong Kong, and its political, economic and legal-cultural impacts on the rule of law.

This paper argues that China exerts its influence over the legal system of Hong Kong in four domains, including ideology, political elections, legal organization and cross-border political economy. Based on media research and content analysis over published materials of various legal associations and institutions, it is found that China attempts to consolidate its control in Hong Kong by producing alternative legal ideology and discourse of the rule of law and by co-opting the legal profession under China’s united front strategy.

While there are liberal lawyers and legal scholars vocally engaging in defense of human rights and the rule of law in Hong Kong, a network of legal profession promoting socialist and authoritarian legal values has become prominent. Hong Kong’s legal culture will continue to be shaped in accordance with authoritarian characteristics and will adversely affect developing the rule of law in this international city.

This paper contributes to the study of China’s influence over the legal profession of Hong Kong and in general Hong Kong’s jurisdiction by offering an example to the international community that contributes towards understanding how China adopts different strategies to expand political significance beyond its border.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the two decades since Hong Kong’s return to Chinese sovereignty, assessing developments against the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration, the international agreement under which Hong Kong was transferred from British to Chinese sovereignty on July 1, 1997, and which first set out China’s “basic policies” toward Hong Kong.

The paper’s analysis of developments focuses particularly on areas of controversy, from the extent to which Hong Kong has enjoyed a “high degree of autonomy” to basic rights and freedoms and the legal and judicial systems.

It argues that on the whole, the policies set out in the Joint Declaration have been well implemented: Hong Kong has retained its separate systems since 1997, including rule of law and an independent judiciary, basic rights and freedoms, and separate government and social systems. However, especially since the “occupy” movement of 2014, questions about the sustainability of the “one country, two systems” arrangement have come to the surface.

The paper is distinctive in its assessment of developments against the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration.