Macau is a city applauded for its success in historic preservation. While keeping its urban developing in action, it also places much emphasis on preserving its historic sites. On the contrary, Hong Kong, as one of the most prosperous cities in the world, has attached great importance to urban development while doing very little to preserve the historic sites in exchange for skyscrapers. In fact, preservation of the past does bring some benefits.
To begin with, historic sites help boost tourism. Hong Kong has once been colonized by the British. Buildings built in that period of time are filled with the mixed cultural characteristics of the East and the West, which are special and attractive to the tourists. Besides, some old buildings are full of the style of old Hong Kong, which is also unique in the world. Therefore, these historic buildings can be developed into tourist attractions. Tourists attracted to Hong Kong by these historic sites will also presumably spend money on the retail and service sectors, and hence benefit our whole economy.
Historic buildings are not only attractive to foreigners, but also local people. They contain the collective memories of the older generation born and bred in Hong Kong. Preserving Hong Kong’s past serves to protect their collective memories is a way to pay homage to the elderly. It also allows the younger generation to learn more about the life and culture of the past, not letting these disappear when the older generation is completely replaced.
Although preserving historic sites brings some benefits, the unpalatable truth is that nothing can be gained without sacrificing anything. Preservation of the past also has its drawbacks.
Macau and Hong Kong are both tiny cities. But despite the slightly larger area of Hong Kong, Hong Kong’s population size is 10 times more than that of Macau. The demand for land is much greater in Hong Kong. Unlike Macau, Hong Kong has no spare land for historic sites to stand. If land is reserved for the sites, infrastructure and other urban development will inevitably be affected. There may not be enough land for residential use to cope with the fast growing population, let alone land for commercial buildings to keep pace with the thriving financial activities. Therefore, even though the preservation in Macau is successful, it is not equally possible in Hong Kong.
Besides, preservation and restoration of historic sites requires a great deal of money. Apart from the cost of the initial restoration, there is also the cost of regular maintenance. These costs may not be covered by the tourism revenue the historic sites bring. If so, it will become a negative investment to preserve the sites. If the opportunity cost of preserving the sites, which includes the potential income from turning the land into residential or commercial uses, is taken into account, the preservation will in all likelihood incur a loss to society.
Since the preservation of historic sites involves both benefits and drawbacks, the government must be very careful when making decisions between urban development and the preservation. It should put effort into striking a balance between them and avoid being in either extreme.