Centre of Cultural Policy Research, the University of Hong Kong
Analysis on the questionnaire " On the Exhibition on Proposals for Development of West Kowloon Cultural District (at the Science Museum)"
20 January 2005

Background

People's Panel on West Kowloon (PPWK) has distributed its third questionnaire in two channels. Firstly, the questionnaire was distributed via e-mail based on PPWK's contact list on 22 DEC 2004. Targeted at 800 PPWK members, the questionnaire could be returned either by fax or e-mail. Secondly, the questionnaire was distributed at the exit area of the WKCD exhibition in the Science Museum, Tsim Sha Tsui. These questionnaires mainly target at audience who had visited the exhibition. Respondents are welcome to return the questionnaire on-site, by fax or by e-mail. To the date of 20th January 2005, PPWK has received 713 valid questionnaires.

The questionnaire is in one page with two major questions. Each question requires respondents to show their agreement to the set statements in 5 levels (from Totally Agree to Totally Disagree). The first question bears 7 statements while the second covers 5 areas. The questionnaire has Chinese and English versions.

Analysis of Question 1

The first question asks respondents if they agree the 7 statements about WKCD. Answers arrange from 'Totally Agree' to 'Totally Disagree'. Some respondents marked the box unclear or empty; and they are classified as 'unqualified' in the following analysis.

Statement a is 'The Government has released sufficient information on WKCD.' Combining figures of 'Totally Agree' and 'Agree', there are 148 people (20.7%) agreed to the statement; 314 people disagreed (44.0%) with it; 236 people said 'no comments' (33%), with 15 unqualified questionnaires.

Statement b is 'The Government should disclose financial information of the three short-listed proposals.' 550 people agreed to the statement (77.1%); 71 people disagreed (9.9%); 83 people said 'no comment' (11.6%) with 9 unqualified questionnaires.

Statement c is 'The process of "choosing one from the three proposals" should be suspended and a broad-based public consultation process should be launched.' The statement is long, and could have multiple interpretations. 437 people stood on the 'agree' side (61.3%); 147 people on the 'disagree' side (20.6%); 117 people said 'no comments' with 12 unqualified questionnaires.

Statement d is 'We should first allow the public to discuss the overall "cultural blueprint" and then decide on the planning of the WKCD.' 439 people agreed with the statement (61.6%), with 132 disagreed (18.5%). 133 said 'No comments' with 9 unqualified questionnaires.

Statement e is 'The WKCD should include the giant "Foster canopy" as Hong Kong's landmark.' An even distribution of answers is noted. Apart from 'Totally Agree', other answers recorded figures from 125-175: 77 people 'totally agreed' with the statement, 148 people 'agreed'; 164 people said 'no comments'; 173 people 'disagreed' and 128 people 'totally disagreed'. If we divided the opinions into two groups, there are 225 people agree with the statement, (31.6%); 301 people disagree (42.2%) with 23 unqualified questionnaires.

Statement f is the longest statement in question 1, which could be read in two parts. The first part described that 'WKCD land may generate revenue of more than HK$100 billion through public auction.' The second part opined that 'The Government should use part of the revenue obtained through auction to finance the building and operation (for 30 years) of art and cultural facilities in WKCD.' 344 people agreed with the opinion (48.2%), 144 people disagreed (20.2%); 190 people said 'no comments' (26.6%) with 35 unqualified questionnaires. A higher rate of 'unqualified questionnaire' is recorded in this statement.

Statement g is 'The WKCD should be implemented as one single development.' 371 people 'disagreed' with the statement (52%); 176 said 'agree' (24.7%), which is half of those who 'disagreed'. 138 people said 'no comments' (19.4%), with 28 unqualified questionnaires. The opinion which disagree the government to develop WKCD with single developer is clear.

Analysis of Question 2

Question 2 is designed for people who had visited the exhibition. However, since part of the questionnaires were distributed via e-mail, and part of the respondents returned the questionnaire without going to the exhibition; some questionnaires having question 2 left unfinished. Therefore, the rate of 'unqualified' questionnaire is higher in this question.

Question 2 asks if there is sufficient information from the exhibition in general concerning 5 areas: 'Financial arrangement'; 'Cultural vision'; 'Urban planning'; 'Governance' and 'Development of creative industry'. Respondents are required to give gradation from 'best' to 'worst'. We suppose 'best' means 'very sufficient' and 'worst' means 'very insufficient' in the following analysis.

Most people answering 'OK' to all five areas. 393 people (55.1%) think that insufficient information on 'financial arrangement' is released, 56 people hold opposite opinion (7.9%). 212 people opined insufficient information on 'cultural vision' is released (29.7%), with 193 people (27.1%) stand in the opposite position.

294 people think sufficient information on 'Urban Planning' is released (41.2%). 146 people (20.5%) people said 'insufficient' (20.5%). 278 people (39.0%) think that insufficient information on 'Governance' is given, 119 people (16.7%) said 'sufficient'. 181 people said sufficient information on 'Development of creative industry' is released, while 243 people (34.1%) said 'insufficient'. All in all, except 'Cultural Vision' and 'Urban Planning', respondents think information on other areas, i.e. 'Financial arrangement', 'Governance' and 'Development of creative industries' are insufficient.

Conclusion

Based on the figures collected from the questionnaire, some messages are clear to be delivered. However, because of some technical issues, some questions cannot reflect opinion truly from the public.

In conclusion, message that could be read in this survey are listed below.

Within a month from 22 Dec 2004 to 20 Jan 2005, in the 713 valid questionnaires collected by PPWK, we note that:

1. 77.1% of respondents think the Government should disclose financial information of the three short-listed proposals;
2. 66.1% of respondents agree that public discussion on the overall "cultural blueprint" should be first allowed before the planning of the WKCD is decided;
3. 52% of respondents disagree that the WKCD should be implemented as one single development;
4. 55.1%, 39% and 34.1% of respondents point out the overall exhibition provides insufficient information on 'Financial arrangement', 'Governance' and 'Development of creative industry' respectively.

[END]

Back