The World Bank's governance indicators over the past decade have consistently rated Hong Kong higher than the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's average in political stability, government effectiveness, regulatory quality, rule of law and control of corruption.
However, the city did poorly in 'voice and accountability', though its score jumped significantly from 52.2 (out of 100), in 2005, to 64.9 last year.
This shortfall is probably due to the slow progress in democratisation and the perceived gap between the government and the people, as old-style consultative politics outlives its usefulness.
Hong Kong has inherited an extensive system of advisory committees and public consultation from the former British administration. District councils serve as community-level sounding boards. Legislative Council panels are active in probing the government on policy details and demanding accountability.
Outside official channels, the public can resort to the mass media, NGO activities, protests and campaigns to voice their demands. As the 2003 severe acute respiratory syndrome saga revealed, the impact of the media, especially radio phone-ins, is significant in spurring the government into action and responding to grievances.
Governance reform goes beyond elections and participatory hardware. It ultimately hinges on changing attitudes and values. This is not easy, judging from experience.
