The whole Healthy Street Lab journey was very different from what I used to experience before. We had a group of people with a big heart, and decided to do something for the Kaifongs of Sham Shui Po in terms of streets / roads enhancement work. Despite the fact that the location was already chosen, we had much freedom to choose what changes we would want to bring to the neighbourhood.

So we went to talk with Kaifongs, both in the Lab (by inviting them over) and by talking to them on the sites (i.e. on the streets, in the shops). We gathered that they were dissatisfied of so many aspects in life. Many talked about politics, housing, education, health care problems. And of course, about transport issues as well (and yes, sometimes we had to guide them back on track). Surprisingly, even though they are dissatisfied of the current situations, very few of them had the tools / schemes / plans / knowledge to change the situations. Many would say “the Government? Useless.”, “the District Councillors? Useless.” Kaifongs seemed to be gotten used to the status quo. This is a serious problem — to be acceptance of the things as they were. So, that is when Healthy Street Lab steps in.

Conducting interviews was quite tricky. When asked how to improve the streets of Sham Shui Po, Kaifongs give answers such as illegal parking, the back alleys were filled with urine and feces. There were a million problems, but we could only pick one. Identifying the stakeholders was tricky as well. Whose voice do we include? And to what extent? And what do we do when there were conflicting comments? With this limited time, we went with one approach only. And personally I feel sorry for those voices that we had to ignore in the scope of this lab.

Not everyone uses the street equally (e.g. shop vs pedestrians use the streets for different durations; even for pedestrians, their experience of using the streets would be different depending on what they carry. Is it possible to develop an objective scale, like the Richter scale (for describing intensity of earthquakes) or the Scoville scale (for describing spiciness)? Without an agreeable scale to describe the “inconvenience” or “level of hardship on the streets”, it is so difficult to convince people that the other parties require additional care than they do. And that’s exactly where the problem was — that there were more than one (and often conflicting) imaginatives of what the public streetscapes shall be.

I’m always fascinated by the discussions with Kaifongs in the pharmacy, and the recycling stores, the hardware store, and the store that sells paints. The number one challenge they are facing right now is rising rent prices. The stores sort of blamed the high rent prices and decided to put the goods on the street. Regardless if their accusation is justified or not, many stores owners are treating shop extension as normal practice; the same way that truck drivers (or their boss) are treating illegal parking as normal practices. It makes me wonder, whether the lack of land is to be blamed as the ultimate problems that our prototype is dealing with.

I was very cautious of what the role of Healthy Street Labbers are throughout this journey. I do not see Labbers as a saint or a giver. We do not just come to the Sham Shui Po neighbourhood and go “here, take this pill (prototype), and you will be cured (your life will be improved)”. To be honest, we do not know if the livelihoods of the Kaifongs will be improved after this Lab. And to be very honest, we do not know if our prototypes are what the Kaifongs really need either, they had mixed views too. Well having that said, I am sure there are some sort of improvements to their lives, but out of all the problems (say, long working hours, crowded living spaces, high living costs, you name it), could a more civilized and loving street environment really help with their daily lives? And whether the resources used are cost-efficient?

Now that the Healthy Street Lab is finished, I don’t have patience to wait for the Government to read our reports and possibly to adopt our suggestions. People are being tripped anytime on uneven street surfaces (or even potholes); and vehicles could bump into pedestrians any time. What I could do right now (and I invite you do the same), is to 1823 through phone, or write complaint emails to government authorities (#sorrynotsorry for the possible increase of workload to authorities). Resources are limited. The Government would only take action when they receive enough noise.

And lastly, I get inspired by how far our society has come to in terms of technology and innovation. During interviews, some Kaifongs express pessimism by saying in Cantonese, “It is what it is”; “You can’t change it” “it’s too difficult to change” “the problem isn’t THAT big of a problem”. So they dismiss the opportunity to change. Can you imagine a time without a smartphone nowdays? Life must be sufferable without a smart phone. Same logic. It is our dissatisfied in our current lives that brought us here today. I feel so blessed in Hong Kong, in terms of streets conditions. While doing research, many poorer countries with potholes, or cracks, or segmented roads. Hong Kong’s road system is actually not so bad.

And Hong Kong is politically stable, (well, our lab is not controversial), but drawing from stories about organisations to our north, authorities don’t seem to be so open about social interventions. At least at this very moment I could upload this to Medium blog and not worrying about being monitored. But with the progression of recent events, I don’t think I can say the same in 29 years.