The SAR government last week released its consultation document on population policy. It states that Hong Kong should not attempt to cap its population, which is contradictory to the position of some commentators who argue that, given its limited land supply, Hong Kong should limit its population growth. An excessively large population would lead to excessively large pressures on housing, healthcare, education, and even on our country parks.

Like Chief Secretary Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor, I would not artificially attempt to cap the population at any particular level.

The population projection is the result of the birthrate, the mortality rate, migration, as well as the historically given population now. Just as there is little we can do to manage the birthrate, there is very little we can do - and it is also inappropriate - to manage the mortality rate. Doctors and scientists are working hard to give us better healthcare which will reduce the mortality rate. It seems clear that the only direct control we have is over immigration.

A global population in excess of 7 billion is already excessively taxing on the environment and the world's resources. If it does not make sense to promote child bearing from a global perspective, why should it make sense in Hong Kong? The main justification, if any, is so Hong Kong will not be constrained by a shrinking labor force, which is expected to start declining by 2018 when retirees will outnumber those entering the workforce.

In view of the importance of staying competitive, keeping the door open for talent is wise. Indeed, the government should enhance Hong Kong's attractiveness by keeping Hong Kong's pollution level low, maintaining law and order, and enhancing the quality of the city's education system. To stay competitive is not blindly pursuing economic growth. To stay competitive is how we may survive! Hong Kong cannot possibly provide a livelihood for its huge population without being competitive! Hong Kong also needs to import workers to provide badly needed services such as elderly care.

Therefore putting an artificial cap on Hong Kong's population is unrealistic. But just as we should not cap at any predetermined level, there is also no need to try to boost Hong Kong's population to any "desirable level." Talents should be welcomed as long as they are needed, and the hiring of talents from around the world should be market-driven.

Hong Kong currently has taken a liberal approach toward foreign students, who, upon graduation, can stay in Hong Kong if they can find employment. This has caused some concern among local students over increasing competition. However, it should be remembered that many Hong Kong students are also studying on the mainland and are also seeking work there. The two-way flow of students and workers is good for both Hong Kong and the mainland. There is no need to take a mercantilist view on the "balance of trade" in talents. But there is much need to develop an open mind among all parties concerned.

Globally there is a shortage of working opportunities rather than a shortage of labor. Importing labor will alleviate the global glut of labor supply without the side-effect on ecology that may be brought about as the world's population increases. We can also always set the criteria for admitting immigrants. Importing labor therefore makes greater sense than trying to boost Hong Kong's birthrate.

In any case, any attempt to promote child bearing in Hong Kong is unlikely to be successful. As was pointed out in the consultation document, the experience of other jurisdictions with a pro-child-bearing policy has been disappointing. Indeed, the reasons many couples choose not to have children are overwhelming. Lifestyle preferences and the stress associated with bringing up children for many would-be parents are just too great to be offset by monetary incentives. In particular, as would-be-parents become better educated, the perceived opportunity cost of having children becomes much higher. For them, having children becomes a distraction from other pursuits that may be highly valued. Moreover, having children can be a highly stressful and risky venture. In a highly competitive environment many children are unhappy. Would-be parents will ask: why should I bring someone into this world if what awaits is a stressful, unhappy life?

For this reason, policies aimed at helping our children grow up happily, and offering support and education to parents and would-be parents by equipping them with the skills and knowledge to deal with problems that arise as children grow up, may be far more important than monetary incentives in motivating would-be parents to become parents. Even if such support still may not be very effective in promoting fertility, the quality of the children will be much higher. Improved parent-child relationships will help avert many tragedies.

The author is director of the Center for Public Policy Studies at Lingnan University.

(HK Edition 10/30/2013 page9)