In an unprotected freshwater wetland on Lantau Island, the world’s population of around 100 Luven’s tree frogs is losing its last habitat due to ongoing construction nearby. The 2025 Hong Kong Biodiversity Status Report reveals a shocking statistic: over 25% of the assessed species in Hong Kong are at risk of local extinction. Among the 886 assessed species, 232 face imminent threats.

Additionally, the report indicates that only 27 terrestrial biodiversity hotspots, which cover 6% of Hong Kong’s land area, host 95% of threatened species. However, nearly 80% of these hotspots have suffered ecological degradation, with about half overlapping with existing or planned development projects.

The Truth About Endangerment: Ecological Value and Fragility of Biodiversity Hotspots

The latest scientific assessment, the Hong Kong Biodiversity Status 2025, systematically identifies 27 terrestrial biodiversity hotspots. Although limited in area, these regions are vital reservoirs of local biodiversity.
Species reliant on lowland habitats are under the highest threat. Approximately 70% of Hong Kong’s amphibians, 65% of mammals, and 45% of bird species are currently under pressure. Alarmingly, most of these hotspots lie outside the existing protected area system. The government’s designated 24 special areas and 4 coastal protected areas fail to encompass these ecologically sensitive zones, resulting in the absurd situation of “protected areas not protecting hotspots.”

The threats these hotspots face are diverse and complex, including habitat fragmentation, environmental degradation, illegal poaching, invasive species, and the impacts of climate change. Among these, habitat loss due to urban development is the most direct and severe threat.

• Development Pressure: Potential Conflicts Between the Northern Metropolis and Biodiversity

The 2025 Chief Executive’s Policy Address proposes to expedite the development of the Northern Metropolis while streamlining related planning and development processes. This ambitious plan is adjacent to the Mai Po and Inner Deep Bay Ramsar wetlands, raising deep concerns within the ecological community.

The planning area for the Northern Metropolis includes multiple identified biodiversity hotspots. Although the government has pledged to conduct ecological assessments, the simplification of procedures may compromise the depth and breadth of assessments, making it difficult to fully identify and mitigate ecological impacts.

Historically, even large-scale development projects in Hong Kong that underwent ecological impact assessments often led to irreversible ecological losses. For instance, some roads and residential projects, while passing through statutory processes, often underestimate their long-term impacts on local species.

A discussion paper from the 2025 Environmental Advisory Committee highlights significant deficiencies in the existing environmental assessment mechanisms in dealing with cumulative ecological impacts, landscape fragmentation effects, and long-term ecological function losses. These flaws will be further magnified under large development plans.

• Regulatory Shortcomings: Why Current Protection Mechanisms Fail

Hong Kong’s existing legal framework for nature conservation focuses on the Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Chapter 170) and the Country Parks Ordinance. However, these laws mainly protect species and habitats within designated areas and lack effective protection tools for biodiversity hotspots outside these regions.

While the zoning plans under the Town Planning Ordinance provide some degree of protection, the process is slow and often influenced by development pressures. Some ecologically valuable lands are still designated as “undetermined use” or “village-type development,” facing the risk of being developed at any time.

The Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance is considered the last line of defense for protecting non-designated area ecologies, but its effectiveness is limited. Assessments primarily focus on the impacts of individual projects, making it difficult to address cumulative ecological stresses caused by multiple projects and lacking special protection provisions for biodiversity hotspots.

The AFCD, as the main conservation agency, has limited resources, making it challenging to effectively monitor and protect the dispersed biodiversity hotspots. Law enforcement actions related to ecological destruction often face difficulties in evidence gathering, and penalties lack deterrent power.

• Innovative Tools: Introducing International Experience and Localized Solutions

Facing conservation challenges, innovative tools already in use internationally can offer Hong Kong valuable insights. The concept of “Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures” (OECMs) is gaining attention, recognizing and supporting conservation actions outside protected areas, applicable to private lands or community-managed regions.

The “Ecological Protection Red Line” system implemented in mainland China is also worth studying. This system designates areas with significant ecological functions as red lines for strict protection, prohibiting or restricting developmental activities and providing clear protective boundaries for ecologically sensitive areas.

Locally, introducing an “Ecosystem Services Payment” mechanism could be considered. The government could offer economic incentives to landowners conserving biodiversity hotspots, encouraging them to maintain the ecological functions of their land rather than converting it for development.

Developing a “Biodiversity Offsetting” mechanism represents another viable path. When development inevitably impacts ecology, requiring developers to create or restore habitats with equivalent ecological value nearby can achieve a “no net loss” conservation goal.

• Forward Path: Specific Policy Recommendations to Balance Development and Conservation

In light of the current dilemmas, Hong Kong needs to establish a preventive, science-based conservation framework. The first priority is to formally recognize and designate the 27 biodiversity hotspots as sensitive areas within government development planning.

Immediate revisions to the Town Planning Ordinance are needed, requiring more stringent ecological assessments for development projects that may affect biodiversity hotspots, prioritizing alternatives that avoid impact rather than relying on post-hoc mitigation measures.

Updating the list of protected species in the Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Chapter 170) is crucial. Many endangered species within these hotspots are not legally protected, leaving them and their habitats without legal safeguards.

For large development plans like the Northern Metropolis, comprehensive strategic ecological assessments should be integrated at the early planning stages to identify and avoid ecologically sensitive areas while reserving adequate ecological corridors and compensation zones.

The government could consider establishing a “Biodiversity Conservation Fund,” specifically for the protection, restoration, and management of hotspot areas. Additionally, introducing a “Gross Ecosystem Product” (GEP) accounting framework to quantify the economic value of natural ecology can integrate ecological values into policy decision-making.

A 2025 survey by the Hong Kong Bird Watching Society shows that over 80% of the public believes the government should prioritize local natural ecology protection, even if it may slow some development projects. This public backing provides social support for policy reforms.

Researchers at City University of Hong Kong have noted that biodiversity hotspots are not only the last refuges for endangered species but also provide irreplaceable ecosystem services for citizens, including water purification, climate regulation, and cultural recreational value.
Urban development and ecological conservation do not have to be inherently opposed; smart planning can find a balance. As an international metropolis, Hong Kong has both the responsibility and the capability to create a model that achieves win-win outcomes for development and conservation, leaving future generations a thriving, vibrant home.