| Popis: |
Public–private dichotomy predominates in Hong Kong housing arena. Housing can take the form of housing philanthropy, in addition to being a form of consumption and investment, as represented by the offer of Light Homes (光房) in Hong Kong, with the benevolent landlords renting out properties at below-market rent to low-income single-parent families, managed and operated by a third sector housing organization. This third sector housing endeavour represents philanthropic acts towards disadvantaged groups in relative poverty in an affluent society, rather than towards those in more desperate situations of absolute poverty in the global context. Will philanthropic acts towards the relative poor in our home city be comparatively more morally justified than such acts towards the absolute poor in faraway developing countries, or vice versa? Charity may lead to dependence and undermine self-reliance. Light Homes and Light Housing provision, as a third sector poverty relief approach, aims at using housing as a means to self-reliance. How far should self-reliance be a justified end of anti-poverty efforts in terms of sustainability and efficacy? The success of third sector housing, very often, depends on policy facilitation, both in financial and non-financial terms. For example, Light Housing (光屋) relies on ceremonial lease of former factory quarters and administrative facilitation, on the part of the government. If public resources are involved, the question of justice sets in. How far is it just to devote public resources to support the third sector in their housing provision for the disadvantaged? How far is this justified by “right to housing” and “equal right to housing”? |
