Is social enterprise an ultimate solution to poverty?

The term ‘social enterprise’ has been coined by politicians and government officials as an ultimate solution brining hope to those underprivileged, a panacea to closing the gap between rich and poor. Unfortunately, they have not explained to the public what social enterprise is and how it differs from traditional business organizations and NGOs.

In fact, social enterprise has hundred years of history in the West. The purpose of setting up social enterprise is to achieve certain social objectives in a self sustainable way. Unlike profit driven enterprise, performance of social enterprise is gauged by two indicators, one is on social aspect and the other one is on financial aspect. A successful social enterprise can generate sufficient revenue to sustain the business and at the same time fulfill the social aim.

Setting up social enterprise is never a problem free task to the government. How much should the government contribute? If the government is heavily involved, if will be blamed for infringing the ‘small government, big market’ principle. Without generous support from the government, there is slim likelihood of securing success.

A survey conducted by the West shows that most social enterprise closes down in three years. Facing intense competition, social enterprise is out run by business organizations. Owing to the lack of marketing sense and management knowledge, the management team of social enterprise, usually constituted by social workers, finds it difficult to keep the business sustainable.

Greater involvement of business sector in social enterprise can secure better chance of success. According to the Committee of Poverty Alleviation, business sector can promote social enterprise at three levels. They include (1) ‘Mentor scheme’ which helps the training of management professionals; (2) setting up ‘Philanthropy banks’ which offer low interest loans to finance the social enterprise; and (3) enacting laws favoring business organizations to finance and manage their own social enterprise.

The lack of publicity and social network facing most NGOs is the stumbling block to reaching helping hands from business sectors. The role of the government as a mediator is critically important in promoting social enterprise to business sectors.

Social enterprise may not be a quick-fit solution to poverty but if successfully run, it will make Hong Kong a more harmonious place to live.

不要輕言放棄學習

上月一位中四輟學的同學回校探訪老師，言談間得知她獲得一家私人公司聘用，工作生活愉快，因為無需要天天回校面對沉悶的學習生活。她對目前『無壓力』的工作生活侃侃而談，對於這位同學的選擇，我深感憂慮。

要知道今天的社會對低學歷、低技術的勞工需求很低。面對大量低質素內地移民的競爭，低下階層的工作機會和收入只會每況愈下，經濟困難導致更多的家庭問題，使下一代缺乏良好的家庭教育，最後只會使貧窮世襲化。

我希望這位同學不要貪圖安逸，放棄學習。可能文法中學的課程未能引起妳的興趣，但基本的語文能力、運算能力和邏輯思維都是學習能力的基石，希望在工餘時間，妳都能不忘進修。

今天妳可能滿足於一份低薪的工作，但妳甘願如此過一生嗎？更何況妳連保住這飯碗的能力都沒有。機會只會留給有準備的人，請同學好好計劃將來，定下學習路線圖，持之以恆，務求使自已在專業知識、語文能力、個人修養、國際視野和團隊合作的能力都有長足的進步。

Rocky shore inhabitants in Stanley Bay

A rock pool teemed with rock oysters (Saccostrea cucullata) and seaweeds (phylum Chlorophyta)

Can you see any zonation pattern?

Lipped top shell (Monodonta labio), a common grazer feeding on algae found in rocky shore.

A cluster of turban shells (Lunella coronata) feed on encrusted alage in a rock pool)

Kyoto Protocol – Is it just another political show?

Last month, European Commission president claimed that the EU will take a leading role on alleviating the problem of climate change. The EU has promised a further cut of CO2 emission 20% below 1990 level by 2020. Will this move bold enough to entail significant improvement in emission problem?

Well before the above announcement, the EU has already promised 8% cut by next year in the Kyoto Protocol. This new target seems to be less ambitious that it sounds. The fundamental problem of Kyoto Protocol is that reaching target is impossibly ambitious, environmentally inconsequential and inordinately expensive. The cost is enormously high and only a few countries could afford it. It is particularly true for the EU because Europe is a costly place to cut CO2, and the effect is inconsequential, because the EU will only account for about 6% of all emissions in the 21st century.

Some countries like the United States and Australia chose to opt out of its stringent demands; other countries like Canada and Japan pay lip service and will essentially miss the target. Some scientists predict that even if everyone had participated and continued to stick to the emission target, it would have no significant environmental effect. The treaty’s effect on temperature would be immeasurable by mid century and it would only postpone warming by 5 years in 2100.

International agreement on CO2 emission is nothing new. We saw the failure of the West to keep their promise in the past. In Rio de Janeiro in 1992, the West promised to stabilize emissions, but overshot by 12%. In Kyoto, they promised a 7% reduction in world emissions, but will achieve only 0.4%. All these promises were made by politicians who will most likely on longer be in office when the time comes to fulfill them.

We have wasted a lot of time on the debate topic -‘Is CO2 the culprit of global climate change?’ Oil companies and governments putting development first as a doctrine see ‘scientific uncertainty’ of global warming as a sound reason of delaying any moves of curbing CO2 emission. Kyoto Protocol will not lead us to a ‘Green new world’. It will only postpone global warming in the next half or full century. We need to find a viable, long-term strategy that doesn’t require inordinate sacrifice for trivial benefits. Fortunately, investing in R&D of non-carbon emission technologies would leave our future generations some feasible and cost effective cuts. A new global warming treaty should mandate spending of 0.05% of GDP on R&D in the future.

The EU’s new global warming agreement may help leaders secure their votes from voters scared by the doomsday of climate change. But it will do virtually no good, at high cost, and – as with many other lofty promises from the EU – it will only be a born failure. Let’s hope that technologies and political determination of leaders from all over the world will bring us a cost effective way of cutting down emission.

Reference:
Project syndicate

回歸十周年，你快樂嗎？

本周《明報》專輯是關於回歸十周年的人和事，其中一篇有關中產階層生活上的巨變實在使人感慨萬千。

故事中的主角和大部分在九十年代初畢業的大學生一樣，很容易就找對一份收入不錯的工作，而大學畢業證書就仿似一紙通往中產階層的入場卷。正當故事中的主角努力實踐『四仔』夢想 (屋仔、車仔、老婆仔、仔仔)，金融風暴的降臨，對這位中產人仕可謂致命的打擊，除了高價購入的房子變成負資產外，更要命的是他失去工作，家庭的經濟困境成為離婚的導火線。 往後幾年，經濟持續不景氣，加上『911』和沙士疫症，令不景氣雪上加霜。故事中的主角無論如何努力，胼手胝足，收入都不能回復到好景時的一半。

上述故事相信是一般中產階層的寫照，過去十年，全球化的影響和中印的急速發展使我們意識到固有的觀念已不管用，買樓致富的時代已一去不返，大學畢業只是職場的入場卷，它並不是收入和職業保障的護身符，中產的優皮生活已被持續進修像魔咒一樣壓搾得體無完膚。如果你的心態未能適應這種轉變，你會十分痛苦，因為你只能活在美好的回憶中。身邊有些朋友敖過這困境，生活態度都有很大轉變，而他們的生活方式和大前研一所提出的M型社會生存策略有雷同地方，首先是不停裝備自已，減低自己被淘汰的機會；其次就是不要負債，儘可能節儉，以中產的收入過低下層的生活，省下來的可應付失業時的生活所需；最後，就是不可胡亂和過度投資，過往大部分的中產就是因為樓市的狂潮和科網熱輸了身家，永不翻身。

要實踐以上的生活，絕不容易，除了要降低生活質素外，更要面對時刻被裁的危機，為保飯碗而持續進修和加『辛』，使家庭生活變成奢侈品，你認為這樣的生活快樂嗎？