Discriminatory zoning in colonial Hong Kong: A review of the post‐war literature and some further evidence for an economic theory of discrimination

Abstract

Purpose

This paper seeks to argue that racially discriminatory zoning in Colonial Hong Kong could have been a form of protectionism driven by economic considerations.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper was based on a review of the relevant ordinances, literature, and public information, notably data obtained from the Land Registry and telephone directories.

Findings

This paper reveals that many writings on racial matters in Hong Kong were not a correct interpretation or presentation of facts. It shows that after the repeal of the discriminatory laws in 1946, an increasing number of people, both Chinese and European, were living in the Peak district. Besides, Chinese were found to be acquiring land even under the discriminatory law for Barker Road during the mid‐1920s and became, after 1946, the majority landlords by the mid‐1970s. This testifies to the argument that the Chinese could compete economically with Europeans for prime residential premises in Hong Kong.

Research limitations/implications

This paper lends further support to the Lawrence‐Marco proposition raised in Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design by Lai and Yu, which regards segregation zoning as a means to reduce the effective demand of an economically resourceful social group.

Practical implications

This paper shows how title documents for land and telephone directories can be used to measure the degree of racial segregation.

Originality/value

This paper is the first attempt to systematically re‐interpret English literature on racially discriminatory zoning in Hong Kong's Peak area using reliable public information from Crown Leases and telephone directories.

Citation

Lai, L.W.C. (2011), "Discriminatory zoning in colonial Hong Kong: A review of the post‐war literature and some further evidence for an economic theory of discrimination", Property Management, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 50-86. https://doi.org/10.1108/02637471111102932