The other day I was invited to attend an interesting forum on “Greening the Belt and Road: Risk Mitigation, Dispute Prevention and Resolution”. Excellent speakers included Dr Ma Jun, an eminent mainland authority on green finance with impeccable credentials, who presented a visionary picture of the ways forward to enhance, upscale and protect green finance initiatives for the Belt and Road Initiative. The BRI, I think, is now transforming into an even more-important and ambitious Chinese-led “global development initiative”, or GDI. It was a privilege to listen to him.
Other speakers then covered the sociopolitical aspects of the same in terms of risk management and also the excellent regulatory and legal infrastructure that Hong Kong enjoys. This could allow us to play an increasingly major role in resolving and avoiding multijurisdictional project disputes around global green investment projects that are funded with Chinese and other major-power funding, through high-level arbitration and more-effective risk management strategies (more on this later).
There were about 50 attendees, with 35 of these “Zooming in” remotely. I believe I was the only scientist present. As I listened to the fascinating insights and commentary from the learned panel, I was nevertheless struck by an important factor: There was no science voice expressed anywhere.
Much was said about the legal (well, it was a Faculty of Law event, after all), political, cultural, sociological and even spiritual (I would add the word “philosophical” here too) aspects of this area. However, and somewhat to my disappointment and surprise, there was nothing said about the necessary technology and underpinning science that all the greening and environmental protection processes will undoubtedly employ if they are to be successful.
Science is at the heart of all of this surrounding activity, but you would not know it.
READ MORE: GBA offers sustainable finance tremendous opportunities
As hopefully robust regulatory and protective mechanisms are in play to try to ensure strong and green environmental, social and governance (ESG) goals are met across massive investment cycles for the GDI, it will be the science and technology that will ultimately count. It’s only through the utilization of the best such cutting-edge science and technology tools in our armory that we can hope to make these important green aims become reality and not just play lip service to a laudable goal. This is in the context of a world that seems to be accelerating to climate breakdown — just recently was the hottest September day ever recorded in Hong Kong. There is more to come.
The science and technology at our disposal includes environmental monitoring through the latest “hyper-spectral” remote sensing satellites in space; in-situ smart artificial-intelligence-enabled, internet-of-things big-data sensors that simultaneously measure multiple relevant variables like local pollution, ozone levels, particulates, traffic, flora and fauna impacts, water salinity, etc; power supplies that are sustainable, renewable and green; and transport systems that have the lowest carbon footprint possible. Of course, transport across the BRI is all about the moving of goods and commodities for commerce and wealth development both local and more broadly. This should be efficient and green — not reliant on diesel trucks and trains, but on clean, renewable energy as far as possible. As much as possible, it should also be done locally like pearls on a necklace representing local hives of green economic development touching each other but not necessarily having to always go from one end to the other.
We then heard about one large investment plan for wind power in West Africa. I am personally very supportive of all and any initiatives to roll out renewable energy programs wherever they may be, but provided they are sensible, appropriate, relevant and affordable locally. Investment dollars are vital to make these a reality. Green finance is key here, and Hong Kong, as a global investment hub, has the expertise, capacity, regulatory and fintech infrastructure to play a major role in such ESG endeavors. We must grasp such opportunities. And then a strange thing happened.
ALSO READ: HK strives to become a full-fledged global finance center
This story then became about dispute prevention and resolution around this West African wind-power project. The speaker made an extremely compelling case about why Hong Kong has the capacity and legal expertise to excel in managing such processes for jurisdictions around the world. There has been much talk of the new National Security Law for Hong Kong pulling the rug out from such opportunities, but it is clear this is not the truth, and that the legal framework in Hong Kong is independent and robust. Indeed, Hong Kong is still trusted to be an honest broker and has once again been voted as one of the freest economies in the world. I was not absolutely clear about what the dispute around this West African wind power project was about, but I was concerned about the business model.
Apparently, the major profits from this “green” initiative were to be used to fund luxury shopping malls in Macao, Hong Kong and the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area more generally and also to establish organic vegetable farming in and around the GBA to cater to the local high-end supermarket trade. There was nothing about return of any profits to put into building more wind turbines or helping establish local enterprises to build wealth in the West African country hosting these wind turbines. I confess I was not enamored by this approach, even if it is completely legal and even, dare I say, normal.
READ MORE: Hong Kong to issue retail green bonds worth $769m in March
Never mind; the key point about the positive role Hong Kong can play is clear. However, I came away with remaining concerns about how key decisions are made about risk and investment when we are talking about greening the BRI and the massive sums of money involved. I hope, but do not know, if at the executive boards and panels that make decisions about such investments, especially when they are dependent on solutions that rely on the validity, cost-effectiveness and green credentials of technology and science, that there is real and effective due diligence technically and scientifically and that it is not “salted” by invested interests. There must and should be at least one really independent science expert and voice that can validate all the technological and scientific-based elements of the project on which decisions are ultimately made. This is whether it is the actual “green” level of sustainability, affordability, environmental protection or the minimized carbon footprint of a purported green project. Is it green or does it merely have a green tinge?
The author is a professor in the Faculty of Science at the University of Hong Kong, the director of its Laboratory for Space Research, and vice-chairman of the Orion Astropreneur Space Academy.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.