關於 economic importance of trees ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

這次的武漢肺炎，不斷地讓我想到在2017年在意大利參與EDE(生態社群設計教育課程)

「真正的生態村」＿＿我指的不是商業自然觀光園區，而是一群人為了與環境與同伴更永續的生活所建構出來的生活模式。


當中不斷提及自給自足（self-sustainability）的重要性，當時還不能理解，為什麼我們需要自給自足？這個世界這麼方便，大家分工不是很好嗎？


現在的肺炎狀況，讓我不禁反思，在即將面離極端環境時代的我們（或者說正在面臨）自給自足顯然成為了必要的生存模式。



在Helena Norberg-Hodge這位語言學與人類學研究者的電影《快樂經濟》當中，她說道，當她第一次踏入拉達克時，所有的人都在笑，他們圍在一起織布、一起種植、在過程中歌唱。所有他們生活所需要的事物他們都能夠靠自己的雙手變出來。他們是她見過最富足與快樂的人。

多年後拉達克開放了，人們知道了手機、Nike，同一位她曾遇過的年輕人坐在路邊騎討「可憐可憐我吧，我是如此的貧窮。」


在上到世界經濟的部分，我印象深刻當時在歐洲，西班牙賣的是義大利的番茄、義大利卻賣西班牙的橘子。
因為這樣才可能創造「經濟」GDP才可能提升，才可能「富有」。

食物最營養與最美味的方式當然是離產地越近越好， 你想吃一顆來自你家後院的番茄，還是橫跨大西洋、印度洋高雄港口、用貨車送到你家附近的商店包在塑膠包裝裡的那顆。但我們卻對這一切如此的習以為常。

我們需要國際的交流，我們需要，但我們真正需要的交流是什麼？



我不知道台灣能撐多久，我也不知道當我們面臨最大的疫情時我們會創造出什麼樣的生活。但我知道現在最珍貴的會是土地。接下來的時代最重要的會是農夫、還有會自己蓋房子的、可以穿梭自然與自然和平共處的人，當然還有網路，透過這個媒介去傳遞真理。



前幾天看到了我義大利前劇團的公開信
全員隔離在家，除非要去藥局與超市
一切活動通通停止。


我在思考，那人們的錢從哪來？
沒有工作那怎麼生活？
那些本來工作給錢的一方的錢又去了哪？
當經濟活動停止，錢去了哪？從哪裡來？
誰能付錢邀劇團演出
邀請單位的錢又從哪來？
政府補助？企業贊助？
政府與企業的錢從哪來？
人民？
人民又從哪？
服務業？教育？餐飲？工廠？
最後發現一切的錢從土地來

從菜、樹、礦石、沙子、水、風、泥土
土地，一直都在等著，等著我們發現繞了一圈後
我們需要的還是土地。
我們究竟要旅行多久，才能發現我們在找的一直都在這裡？



今年十月，我預計與我的夥伴 Hema Wu在優人開設全台灣第一次的EDE，內容包含生態、世界觀、社群、經濟等不同面向。為期三週，全面討論人類生存的可能。

This Covid-19 constantly reminds me of participating in EDE (Ecological Village Design Education )in Italy in 2017
“A True Eco-village" I am not referring to a commercial nature tourism park, but a living model constructed by a group of people for a more sustainable life with the environment and companions.

It kept mentioning the importance of self-sustainability, and I was not understood the importance at the time, why do we need self-sufficiency? The world is so convenient.

The current situation of pneumonia makes me can't help thinking about it. In the time of extreme environment, self-sufficiency have obviously become the necessary survival mode.

In the film Happy Economy by Helena Norberg-Hodge, a linguistic and anthropological researcher, she said that when she first stepped into Ladakh, everyone was laughing and they were weaving together , Planting together, singing together. They can make everything they need in their own hands. They are the richest and happiest people she has ever seen.
After many years Ladakh opened, people knew mobile phones, Nike, and a young man she had met sat on the side of the road and asked, "Poor me, I'm so poor."

During the world economy course, I was very impressed that, Spain was selling Italian tomatoes, while Italy was selling Spanish oranges.
Because in this way, it is possible to create an "economic" GDP that can rise and become "rich."
The most nutritious and delicious way of food is of course the closer to the place of production, Do you want to eat a tomato from your backyard or across the Atlantic Ocean, the Kaohsiung port of the Indian Ocean, and truck to a store near your home. Such a habit.
Just like the import and export of Taiwan masks.

We need international communication, we need, but what is the communication we really need?

I don't know how long Taiwan can last, and I don't know what kind of life we will create when we face the biggest epidemic. But I know that the most precious thing now is land. The most important thing in the next era will be farmers, people who can build their own houses, who can shuttle nature and nature to live in peace, and of course, the Internet, to convey truth through this medium.

A few days ago I saw the open letter from my former theatre company in Italy
Isolate everyone at home, except at pharmacy and supermarket
All activities ceased.

I'm thinking, where do people's money come from?
How do you live without a job?
Where are the money of those who work and give money?
When economic activity stops, where does the money go? Where did it come from?
Who can pay to invite a troupe to perform
Where does the money for the invitation unit come from?
government subsidy? Corporate sponsorship?
Where does the government and business money come from?
people?
Where do the people come from?
Services? education? food? factory?
Finally found all the money came from the land
From vegetables, trees, ore, sand, water, wind, dirt
The land has been waiting, waiting for us to find a circle
What we need is still land.
How long do we have to travel to find that we have been looking here all along?

In October of this year, I expected to open the first EDE in Taiwan with my friend Hema Wu in U-theatre, covering different aspects of ecology, worldview, community, and economy. A three-week discussion of the possibilities of human survival.

See how our research demystifies the land politics of the northern New Territories

本組向HK Magazine專題提供了反對新界北淪陷的重要理據，而新界東北正正就是撐住新界融合戰的橋頭堡!
--
[cover story] What Will Happen to the New Territories?
http://hk.asia-city.com/…/…/what-will-happen-new-territories

The government’s little-publicized plans for developing the northeastern New Territories are much bigger than it would have you believe—under the current plans, huge tracts of green land will be turned to concrete. Grace Tsoi takes a closer look at the many complex issues and concerns surrounding the project.

On September 2, while secondary school students were hunger striking at Tamar, a smaller-scale but equally vociferous protest was being staged. Several hundred villagers from Kwu Tung North, Fanling North, Ping Che and Ta Kwu Ling also staked out the government offices. They chanted slogans protesting against demolition and removal—their homes are slated to be destroyed, according to the government’s plan to develop the northeastern New Territories.

The development plan is not a new one. As early as 1998, former Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa floated the idea to develop Kwu Tung North, Fanling North, Ping Che and Ta Kwu Leng into three new development areas (NDAs). However, the plan was halted due to a slower-than-expected population expansion in 2003. Then in 2007, Donald Tsang restarted the Hong Kong 2030 Planning Vision and Strategy scheme, and the Northeastern New Territories were again slated to be developed. The three NDAs will total 787 hectares, of which 533 hectares will be built upon. The consultation was done in the dark, and the majority of the public only learnt of the development plan at the last stage of the consultation. Originally the consultation was set to conclude at the end of August, but due to staunch opposition, the government has extended the deadline until the end of September. Here, we line out the many problems and shortcomings of the government’s plans.

Can It Satisfy Housing Demand?

The government backs up the development plan by stating that more homes will be built in the northeast New Territories—an appealing idea in the wake of rocketing house prices. Around 54,000 homes will be built, with 40 percent of the flats set aside for public housing. During her tenure as Secretary for Development, Carrie Lam said the ratio of public housing should be kept at less than 50 percent in order to avoid a repeat of the disastrous Tin Shui Wai new town in Yuen Long. “The problem with Tin Shui Wai is not that there is too much public housing. It is because of the monopolies [for example, the community is served only be The Link and Li Ka-shing’s shopping malls and there are very few independent vendors] and insufficient jobs for the working class. Even hawking is prohibited,” says Chan Kim-ching, a researcher from Local Research Community, a think-tank focusing on urban planning. On the other hand, the project’s 21,600 public housing flats, which will be made available by the year 2022, don’t even come close to satisfying the government’s target of building 15,000 public housing homes per year. We have to ask—is getting rid of all this precious green space worth it? On the private housing side, low-density homes will be built. However, it is questionable whether these flats will be affordable for the majority of the Hong Kong public—Chan worries that they will be snapped up by mainland buyers instead of satisfying local housing needs.

Overestimating Population Growth

In order to justify the project, the government has, once again, cited population growth in its push to build more housing. A government press release states: “According to the latest population projections, there will be an increase of about 1.4 million people in the coming 30 years. There is still a strong demand for land for housing and economic development.” However, the Census and Statistics Department has a track record of overestimating Hong Kong’s population growth. In 2002, the department predicted that Hong Kong’s population would hit 7.53 million by 2011. But today, Hong Kong’s population is 7.14 million—way off government estimates. The department itself has also lowered its population estimates. In 2004, it predicted that Hong Kong’s population would surge to 8.72 million by mid-2031. But latest predictions stand at 8.47 million by mid-2041. So if the government’s predictions are not accurate and consistent, how can it justify such a large-scale development?

Non-indigenous Villagers Lose Out

It is estimated that more than 10,000 villagers will be affected by the plan, and that more than 10 villages will be demolished. Almost all of the villages that are under threat are largely inhabited by non-indigenous villagers. Non-indigenous villagers migrated to Hong Kong after World War II. They farmed in the New Territories and built their homes near their fields. However, they are not landowners because land in the New Territories belongs to indigenous villagers. So even though the non-indigenous villagers have lived in the area for decades, according to authorities, they have no rights to the land. “The most ridiculous thing is, even though non-indigenous villagers have been living there for 50 or 60 years, their houses are still classified as squatter huts, a temporary form of housing. The authorities don’t recognize their housing rights… Non-indigenous villagers are easy targets of bullying because their rights are not protected by law,” says Chan.

Although it is the non-indigenous villagers who will be most affected by the development plans, no one sought to gain their input. In fact, the first and second phases of the consultation, which were conducted in 2009 and 2010, did not actively engage them at all. “The villagers of Ping Che did not know about the plan before—they only learned of the plan when they were invited to a poon choi banquet hosted by gleeful indigenous villagers. Some of the elderly villagers attended, and they were only told at the feast that the celebration was because the government would claim the land for development. They only learned that they would have to move at the banquet,” Chan says.

Unlike urban renewal projects, the government has not conducted any studies to investigate how many villagers are going to be affected; neither has it come up with any compensation or resettlement plans for the affected villagers. The only thing the government has done is to carve out a 3.2 hectare parcel of land in Kwu Tung North, where a public housing project will accommodate the non-indigenous villagers.

Meanwhile, indigenous villagers are set to reap huge profits. All the land in the new Territories land is either owned by indigenous villagers or property developers. As the government has allocated $40 billion to buy land, it is certain that indigenous villagers will pocket part of the money. To add insult to injury, while their non-indigenous counterparts face the demolition of homes, the indigenous villages will be kept largely intact. Also, the government has saved land for the future expansion of indigenous villages. Within the three NDAs, around six hectares of land has been set aside for this purpose.

Loss of Farmland

Another inevitable consequence of developing the New Territories is the loss of farmland. A spokesperson of the Planning Department tells HK Magazine that 22 hectares of land under active cultivation will be affected by the development. That figure is significantly lower than estimates by environmental groups, which have come up with the figure of 98 hectares. “The government data refers to the land being farmed currently, but we focus on arable land. When we talk about arable land, it also includes abandoned land which has the potential to be rehabilitated. It is for sure that the government has not included such land in its figure of 22 hectares. From the perspective of agricultural development, abandoned land can be rehabilitated. So why don’t we protect and rehabilitate this land?” says Roy Ng, the Conservancy Association’s senior campaign officer.

Displaced Farmers

The government has pledged to maintain a total of 54 hectares as agricultural zones. However, 37 of these so-called “protected” hectares are found in Long Valley, a well-established and very active farming area. The government plans to relocate many of the farmers who have been displaced by the project to Long Valley, a move that’s bound to cause friction between agriculturalists. “If we move all the affected farmers to Long Valley, it means that some of the farmers [who are already] in Long Valley have to move away,” Ng says. “The agricultural practices of the farmers are very different. In Long Valley, most of the farmers are growing wetland crops. But most farmland in Ping Che and Ta Kwu Ling is not wetland… If we move all these farmers to wetland areas, it may have an adverse impact on the conservation of Long Valley.”





Word on the Street

Villagers are fighting for the right to remain in th eir homes, undisturbed by government intervention. Here’s what they have to say.

I have been living in Ping Che for almost five decades, and all my children were born there. Ping Che is a large village, where thousands of people reside. We only knew that our village would be demolished a few months ago, and we only caught wind of some rumors before. Ping Che is spacious, and we grow produce for ourselves. When we first came to Ping Che, it was a primitive place. We have been renting land from the villagers since then. And Ping Che has become a beautiful village due to our efforts. I don’t want to see our village be destroyed. My children have grown up, and they don’t want to move out either.
Amy, 50s, Ping Che resident



Our family has been living in Kwu Tong for three generations. Two years ago, we found out that our land had to be claimed back [by the government]. The development plan had been formulated for a long time, but the officials never told us about it. We were shocked to learn of the plan, and we think the government has kept the plan in the dark. There are a few hundred villagers, and we all know each other. Even though I am young, I love the rural life a lot. I lived in private buildings in Fanling for more than two years as it was closer to my school. The feeling was very different. In our village, everyone says hi to each other; we even know the name of each dog! [In Fanling], I didn’t know my neighbors, and I didn’t even notice when they moved away. I hope our village will not be demolished because we want to keep our lifestyle. We will continue to fight for our rights.
Hiu Ching, 18, Kwu Tung North resident



I have never joined any protest. This is my first time because the government wants to take away the land from our village. The officials never consulted us, and it seems that we have to comply with every order of the government. There are fruit trees in front of our house, and the trees are 20 to 30 years old. We get all kinds of fruits to eat. Lychee, longan, jackfruit, aloe and melons…you name it. It’s no different from an orchard. When we were kids, we didn’t need to close our doors because we would just go next door to play with other children. A lot of structures are very old, and they are our heritage. We have gotten used to the rural way of living, and it’s difficult for us to adapt to a city life. We don’t want any compensation. There are many elderly people in our village, and they have been living here for decades. For those skeptics who think that we are only demanding more compensation, try to think from our perspectives. We have been living here for decades, and our home will be lost!
Mr. Lee, 30, Kwu Tung North resident


Development By Numbers

An outline of the redevelopment plans by region.

1. Kwu Tong, Fanling North, Ping Che/Tai Koo Leng New Development Areas (NDAs)
Size: 533 hectares.
Progress: Stage 3 of public engagement.

2. Hung Sui Kiu NDA
No outline development plan has been released, but it will be turned into an NDA that caters a population of 160,000. The government will also save land for the development of “Six Industries”—testing and certification, medical services, innovation and technology, cultural and creative industries, environmental industries and education services.
Size: 790 hectares.
Progress: Stage 2 of public engagement to be commenced; in operation by 2024.

3. Lok Ma Chau Loop
Once the property of Shenzhen, the Loop was allocated to Hong Kong after realignment of the Shenzhen river in 1997. The area will be turned into a higher education zone.
Size: About 87 hectares.
Progress: Stage 2 of public engagement completed; in operation by 2020.

4. Liangtang/Heung Yuen Wai Boundary Control Point
Progress: construction will start in 2013; in operation by 2018.

5. Frontier Closed Area (FCA)
Established by the British for strategic reasons, the FCA will be downsized and land will be released for development. Due to the area’s history, it hasn’t been touched by any development.
Use: A country park will be designated near Robin’s Nest. Other areas are zoned as green belt and for agricultural uses. But a comprehensive development zone and residential areas are designated for Hung Lung Hang. Hoo Hok Wai, another ecologically sensitive area that occupies 240 hectares, is zoned under “other specific uses,” which also means that further development is possible.
Size: 2,400 hectares.
Progress: 740 hectares of FCA has already been opened up in the first phase.

6. Southern Yuen Long
The government is planning to build housing—both private and public—in the area.
Size: About 200 hectares.
Progress: The Development Bureau will conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), planning and engineering study at the same time. In operation by 2015.

7. Sha Lo Tung
It has been earmarked as one of the 12 sites of ecological importance. The site is an important habitat for butterflies and fireflies. Under the government’s Public-Private Partnership scheme, the developer wants to build a columbarium with 60,000 niches, while establishing an ecological reserve.
Size: The columbarium is set to be four hectares in size.
Progress: The EIA has already been completed, but the Advisory Council on the Environment halted the decision.

8. Nam Shen Wai
Another spot for the Public-Private Partnership scheme. The developer is planning to build 1,600 housing units, including 600 Home Ownership Scheme flats, in the southern part. It also wants to build elderly care homes to increase the social care elements. The Northern part of Nam Shen Wai and Lut Chau will be designated as a conservation area. Green groups oppose the plan because parts of the wetland will be lost.
Size: 121 hectares.
Progress: The EIA has been completed. The application will be submitted to the Town Planning Board in September.

9. Fung Lok Wai
The area is also classified as one of 12 areas with significant ecological value. Five percent of the land will accommodate luxury homes, while 95 percent of land will be turned into a conservation area. Fung Lok Wai is very close to Mai Po.
Size: 4.1 hectares (development area).
Progress: Awaiting a decision from the Town Planning Board.

--
請加入反對新界東北融合計劃專頁：
http://www.facebook.com/defendntnorth