On a weekend morning at Victoria Park, a citizen carefully walks his beloved dog, knowing that ahead lies an area where pets are prohibited; meanwhile, not far away on the waterfront promenade, another dog owner finds himself in an awkward explanation with staff—when will this city truly embrace their companionship?

As pet ownership becomes increasingly common among families in Hong Kong, a growing contradiction confronts us: laws and public policies lag significantly behind societal developments and citizen needs. In 2020, more than 240,000 households in Hong Kong owned cats and dogs, viewing them as family members, yet they face numerous restrictions in public spaces.

From revisions to the Road Traffic Ordinance, to the stringent limitations imposed by the Food Business Regulation, to various prohibitions under park management regulations, the current framework systematically excludes companion animals from public life. This exclusion not only affects the quality of life and consumer choices for pet owners but also reflects a deeper deficiency in the inclusivity and modernity of urban governance. For Hong Kong to become a truly civilized and friendly international metropolis, a systematic policy reform is needed—from “traffic responsibility” to “spatial inclusivity.”

• Legal Barriers: The Conflict Between Outdated Regulations and Modern Needs The main laws regulating animal entry into public spaces in Hong Kong were formulated decades ago, reflecting societal views that are now vastly outdated. These old laws serve as high walls that separate animals and their families from public life in the city.
  
  At the core of these restrictions is Section 10B of the Food Business Regulation (Chapter 132X), which absolutely states: “No person shall bring a dog into or allow another person to bring a dog into a food business premises,” with very few exceptions, such as guide dogs. This regulation, created decades ago, fails to anticipate the transformation of pets’ roles as family companions, does not differentiate between types or sizes of animals, and disregards modern management techniques and changes in consumer behavior.
  
  The situation is equally severe concerning public transportation. The MTR’s Railways (Hong Kong) subsidiary regulation explicitly prohibits animals from entering, with exemptions limited to guide dogs and animals enclosed in “compliant containers”— typically interpreted as fully sealed pet carriers. The regulations for franchised buses are equally strict. This means that even if a pet is lying quietly in a closed pet stroller, it may legally be refused entry.
  
  Management of parks and public recreational spaces also presents fragmentation. While some parks under the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD) permit pets, the numbers are limited, and the specific regulations at each site vary widely, causing significant confusion and inconvenience for citizens. This inconsistency in laws and policies constitutes a systemic barrier to building an animal-friendly city.
  
• Overlooked Social Costs and Economic Potential
  
  The existing stringent restrictions impose multiple social costs, which are often underestimated by policymakers.
  
  First, there is a tangible impact on pet owners, particularly the elderly, those living alone, and individuals with special needs. For many citizens who view companion animals as vital sources of emotional support, being unable to take their pets along for social or recreational activities exacerbates their feelings of social isolation and diminishes the psychological health benefits animals can provide.
  
  Second, the policies severely suppress the development potential of the “pet economy.” In pet-friendly cities like Taipei, Tokyo, and Berlin, allowing pets into restaurants, cafes, shopping malls, and certain public transport is commonplace, fostering a complete industry chain ranging from pet-friendly dining and travel to professional services. In contrast, stringent restrictions in Hong Kong equate to actively forfeiting an important economic growth point that could create jobs and stimulate local consumption. Local economists have estimated that a systematic relaxation of these restrictions could yield substantial annual growth potential in related markets.
  
  Moreover, this blanket ban does little to foster a culture of responsible pet ownership. It places all pet owners and animals in opposition rather than encouraging positive behavior through clear guidelines and tiered management. The result may be that some pet owners resort to riskier choices when needing to travel (such as leaving animals in vehicles) or choose to hide that they are carrying animals, which can adversely affect effective public health management.
  
• International Experience: Detailed Management and Responsibility as a Precedent
  
  Building an animal-friendly city does not require unconditional and comprehensive openness. Successful international experiences indicate that the key lies in establishing a modern governance system characterized by refined management and clear responsibilities.
  
  Central to this is tiered management and clear accountability: many advanced cities do not impose total bans but instead use clear guidelines to delineate spaces, times, and methods. For instance, restaurants can independently apply for a “pet-friendly” license but must meet specific health conditions (such as establishing separate areas and enhancing ventilation and cleanliness standards). Public transport allows pets to travel during non-peak hours in appropriate containers, sometimes requiring the purchase of a pet ticket. Parks clearly designate “pet activity areas” from regular zones.
  
  The foundation of all these open policies is strict regulation of pet owner behavior. General rules often include: pets must remain in carriers or on leashes in indoor public spaces; owners must immediately clean up pet waste; if pets disturb others, the owner is responsible for promptly removing them from the vicinity. Violation of these responsibilities incurs clear penalties. This approach shifts management focus from “controlling animals” to “controlling owners,” yielding significant results.
  
  Pragmatic transport solutions are also worth emulating: in cities like Berlin and Paris, the subway allows small pets to travel free or with tickets; many private railways in Japan permit pets in specified size containers. Common amongst them is having clear rules (container specifications, travel times) combined with strict accountability requirements that enable blending public transport with pet ownership.
  
• Policy Recommendations: A Four-Step Roadmap to Build an Animal-Friendly City in Hong Kong
  
  Facing the conflict between outdated laws and social needs, Hong Kong requires a systematic shift in policy thinking. We suggest the following gradual and pragmatic reform pathways:
  
  • Step One: Activate a Comprehensive Social Impact Assessment and Public Opinion Survey
    The government should immediately commission an independent organization to conduct a thorough and objective study on relaxing animal entry into public spaces. This should not only gather data but also serve as a foundational basis for rational policy discussions. The research must quantitatively evaluate:
    
    • Actual public health and safety risks (based on scientific and comparative city data).
    • Potential economic benefits for industries like tourism, dining, and retail.
    • Acceptance levels among citizens (both pet owners and non-pet owners), their major concerns, and support levels for different proposals.
      
      This report should serve as the objective foundation for all subsequent policy discussions.
      
  • Step Two: Amend the Food Business Regulation to Introduce a Voluntary “Pet- Friendly Premises” Licensing System
    This is a core legal reform initiative. It is suggested to amend Section 10B of the Food Business Regulation, changing the current absolute prohibition into provisions for establishing a voluntary “Pet-Friendly Food Premises” licensing condition. Eateries willing and able to meet additional conditions (such as having designated ventilated areas, cleaning protocols, and staff training) can apply for this supplementary license, legally allowing pets in designated areas. This grants the industry choice and flexibility while providing clear consumer options.
    
  • Step Three: Collaborate with Public Transport Operators to Develop Clear and Consistent Trial Plans for Pet Inclusion
    The government should proactively coordinate with MTR, franchised bus companies, etc., referencing international experiences to jointly design a phased, assessable trial program. For instance, initial testing could occur on select non-peak ferry routes or specific light rail lines during weekends and public holidays. The trial plans must include:
    
    • Specific container specifications (size, secure requirements).
    • Clearly defined allowed travel times and carriages.
    • Requirements for pets to be under control at all times and not occupy seats.
    • Establishing a pilot pet ticket or surcharge system.
      
      By collecting data, evaluating impacts, and soliciting public feedback during the trials, decisions can be made on whether and how to promote the initiative further.
      

The ongoing discussions around amending the Road Traffic Ordinance to protect cats and dogs provide an important insight: the advancement of law can elevate the care for life from moral initiatives to social responsibilities. However, existing regulations address remedies after harm has occurred, while a truly friendly city should aim to create an environment and culture that prevents harm from occurring in the first place.

In 2020, Hong Kong stands at a new crossroads for animal welfare policy. We call on the government, the Legislative Council, public service operators, and all citizens to acknowledge this increasingly prominent social issue collectively. Through rational discussion, scientific assessment, and step-by-step reforms, we have the capability to gradually dismantle those outdated invisible barriers while safeguarding public health and respecting diverse needs.

Building an animal-friendly city aims not just to allow pets into public spaces but to cultivate a more inclusive, empathetic, and intelligently governed urban civilization. This path requires patience, creativity, and collaboration, but each step forward will make our city warmer, more livable, and truly belong to all life that calls this place home. Now is the best time to initiate this necessary change.