Hong Kong men turn to plush ‘bag charms’ for self-expression, comfort

On September 8, Tung Chee-hwa, Hong Kong's inaugural chief executive, passed away. This event prompted reflection not only on the man who once dominated the city's public sphere, but also on the profound transformation that has unfolded over the past three decades since China's return to governance. History rarely hinges on a singular figure or a solitary decision.

Rather, it emerges from the interplay of individual actions, institutional shifts, societal expectations, and external forces. To grasp the true impact of Tung's tenure, one must delve into the historical backdrop. Colonial governance had endowed Hong Kong with a sophisticated administrative framework, centered on efficiency, procedure, and order.

Yet, this system operated under a political framework markedly different from contemporary constitutional systems, where notions of legitimacy, public involvement, and accountability were managed differently. Post-1997, Hong Kong embarked on a new chapter. This transition entailed more than a mere shift in political power or administrative structures.

It also entailed a profound reimagining of public power and governance. Citizens began to prioritize not just the effectiveness of policies, but also the underlying rationale behind decisions, how diverse perspectives were considered, and who should bear responsibility for their outcomes. The challenges faced by Tung's administration mirrored a wider conflict as Hong Kong transitioned from a well-established administrative model towards a more intricate form of governance.

Striking a balance between administrative efficiency, social legitimacy, expert decision-making, public engagement, and short-term expectations became a perennial issue that continues to shape Hong Kong's civic landscape. It is easy to underestimate the uncertainty of that era. Hong Kong was entering a new phase without a pre-existing blueprint.

How to craft a governance system under the principle of "one country, two systems" and the Basic Law; how to assimilate institutions into a novel constitutional framework; and how an international city should redefine its relationship with national development – these were complex puzzles that needed to be pieced together through practice.

The intricate developments of the ensuing decades cannot be distilled to a handful of individuals, policy decisions, or isolated incidents. Nor can the difficulties encountered be automatically dismissed as evidence that Hong Kong's governance has "failed" or that the "one country, two systems" model is fundamentally flawed. A nuanced historical perspective does not preclude acknowledging achievements and shortcomings.

Rather, it discourages the tendency to condense history into a simplistic label. A political leader may undoubtedly be molded by the era in which he operates, and every administration will leave enduring lessons that merit reflection. However, these truths do not prevent us from recognizing the significance of a particular period within the larger historical continuum.

The Hong Kong of 1997 initially grappled with the challenges of identity and institutional transition. The 2003 Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement with the mainland represented a deeper integration. Subsequently, cross-border infrastructure projects and the development of the Greater Bay Area reshaped Hong Kong's interplay with neighboring regions.

Today, innovation, technology, the emergence of the Northern Metropolis, novel industrial strategies, and housing improvements have emerged as the focal points of governance. Each era presents its own set of challenges, and each administration bears its own responsibilities. The significance of Tung's era lies in its role as the starting point of Hong Kong's post-1997 development.

Some initiatives were expanded, some institutions evolved further, and some ideas were carried forward by subsequent administrations. The narrative of Hong Kong over the past three decades has never been the chronicle of a single leader. It has been a multifaceted process shaped by governments, businesses, citizens, and society at large.

Reflecting on the past does not necessitate a renewed debate on merits and faults, nor the reopening of longstanding controversies in a manner that exacerbates social divisions. Individuals may eventually step away from the historical stage, but cities continue to move forward. Hong Kong's journey remains a narrative of continuous adaptation, balancing constraints, opportunities, and evolving expectations.

To truly comprehend Tung's role is to grasp the historical moment in which he stood. To understand where Hong Kong is heading, one must first comprehend where it has been.