Whose Citizenship Education? Hong Kong from a spatial and cultural politics perspective

Citizenship and Education in Hong Kong: A Review of Contemporary Academic Literature

“…Even those policies which would fulfil the social rights obligations of the colonial administration, such as the introduction of the Public Housing Scheme, were presented as a means to address hygiene issues, rather than an acquiescence to call for greater social rights for Hongkongers (Tang and Yuen, 2016). Despite this change in policy, however, much of the provision of social services in Hong Kong continued to be provided by community organisations rather than by the government (Tse, 2007). From the 1960s onwards, Hong Kong's culture began to drift from that of the Mainland, creating a distinct local identity which would lead to issues of sociocultural difference and alienation following the Handover (Fairbrother, 2006a; Tse, 2007).…”

“…Despite this change in policy, however, much of the provision of social services in Hong Kong continued to be provided by community organisations rather than by the government (Tse, 2007). From the 1960s onwards, Hong Kong's culture began to drift from that of the Mainland, creating a distinct local identity which would lead to issues of sociocultural difference and alienation following the Handover (Fairbrother, 2006a; Tse, 2007).…”

“…Further, Hong Kong's status as a global city invariably has created tensions between national belonging and a globalised outlook (Alviar-Martin and Baildon, 2016). The increasing levels of interconnectivity, mobility, interaction, and migration also create a stronger sense of a “globalised” identity among many people, including Hongkongers, leading to a greater sense of global responsibility and universal values (Chee, 2020; Min, 2016; Tse, 2007). Increasingly, this has created an awareness of multiple identities, multiple loyalties, and multi-localities (Chee, 2020).…”

“…Following the handover, and in response to the perceived weakness of Hong Kong students’ sense of identity, policies were introduced to strengthen national identity through “nationalistic education” (國家民族敎育, gwok gaa man zuk gaau juk ) and “national education” (國民敎育, gwok man gaau juk ) (Tse, 2007). In the early first decade of the twenty-first century, educational guidelines were promulgated which closely linked civic values to “Chinese identity” and “Chinese attributes” (Alviar-Martin and Baildon, 2016; Lo, 2012).…”

“…The curriculum itself, however, enshrines the government's position of a morally based nationalism as an overarching value from which students may adopt other, lesser, identities (Alviar-Martin and Baildon, 2016). Tse (2007) argues that this creates a contradiction in the government's stated aims, as a top-down conceptualisation of citizenship and identity is an anathema to genuine identity creation and critical-thinking education. Alviar-Martin and Baildon (2016) argue that the highly nationalised civic education system in Hong Kong was intended to develop students’ ability to contribute to the economic interests of the government, rather than to develop students’ ability to critically analyse their own identity, while Chee (2020) argues that the intent was to focus on patriotism and national identity at the expense of democratic, civic education.…”