 The four papers that we heard are not quite in line with each other, but, however, I think there's a message there. The message being that, looking at the newspaper that Ricky prepared for us with the cover that Hong Kong high-density looks like this, and I think the message is very clear. It's not by choice. It's by necessity. I think the necessity meaning that, first of all, it's a land availability, and secondly, it's the affordability of the land price and all that. I think what Winnie has just shown us is that Hong Kong has learned from the West in the 50s and 60s, and now they're coming back to learn from Hong Kong. The central of Hong Kong, you know, with the three levels, being underground is one level, the ground level is one level, and then in the central it's all connected by overpass, pedestrian overpass, the third level, which is something that in the 50s, Team 10, how we talked about, Smithson has already talked about, but it's happening, it's already happened in Hong Kong. So, Hong Kong is a fast-growing city, fast-developed city, and there's no question, high density has proven, you know, with this cultural background to be a model of success in a certain aspect. And so, what next? We have heard Professor Tanks talked about the inequality, the social injustice, the spatial injustice. So I think what Winnie finally said is that, okay, it's up to us, right, within the parameters we have, within the restrictions we have. So how do we move forward? One of the recent episodes that the post-80s, that is younger generation, are protesting, they're protesting, one of the things they protest against the developers. In a sense, the developers are riding on this highland price and then building an offering that's a sale that is beyond any young person's reach in terms of their salary and all that. Even having worked in 10 years after graduation, they can't still afford to buy a place. So I think these protests are beginning to brew. Not only the social inequality and injustice that Professor Tanks talked about, between the rich and the half-den-half-nots, but even among the so-called middle class, affordability is seemingly becoming a very, very critical boiling point. So I think the four papers that we heard this afternoon in session, starting from Renier, talked about how China is opening up, turning into cities of more or less the same phases, right? To Elizabeth Burton talked about how quality matters, is the design, is the small things, the details that matters, to Professor Tanks, the social injustice space, and to Winnie Ma said it's up to us how to design it. So I think it's all connected in that sense and in fact it's connected with the last session where Anthony talked about the way we are and the advantage and disadvantage and in fact it's talked about, like I said in the beginning, connected with what York Chow and what we discussed early in the morning, that high density and health are being all connected. So the session here, open up for discussion. Yes, Professor Ho. I have been making this point that the kind of injustice that was mentioned by Professor Tang has much to do with the fact that too little land has been developed in Hong Kong. The fact that there's too little land developed in Hong Kong means that rent has to be very high and the fact that rent is very high means that a lot of industries or sectors cannot develop because they cannot afford the high rent. So there is a lot of potential entrepreneurs that can make do with small businesses. They cannot survive because they cannot afford rent. And so they have been eliminated and so there's more and more concentration of wealth and the land rich class becomes extremely well off and those people who own nothing of land, they become marginalized and the fact that we cannot diversify our industries has very much to do also with the fact that we have developed too little land. We have only 7% of our territories land devoted to housing and about 4% of land for industrial and commercial purposes and it's really amazing. It's something that we have to address. Thank you. Right. And we have heard from Secretary York Child this morning that 40% of our land is totally a green area. And Sofia? Yes, I would like to link the last presentation to Hong Kong because actually I have a puzzle here. We hear that Hong Kong is a dense city and at the same time that it is a safe city. We hear that there is poverty in Hong Kong, that there are inequalities, that there are people who live in cubicles and so on. So you have to explain to us how does this happen? How well guarded the city is? Is it because of a very efficient police? We didn't see many police cars yesterday during the tour. CCTVs, maybe there are wonderful social control mechanisms that have not been developed here but that I would like to hear about. Or is it the stability of the population or are there agreements which is a very tense issue at the moment both in America and in Europe between architects and the police at least in France. Any new project needs to receive the agreement of the police before architects or planners can go further. So could you tell us more about that? I would have a lot to say but I'm going to stop here. Can I ask Wing-Shing to answer that? Since you talked about Hong Kong, why Hong Kong is more safe relative to other high density cities? Not this question maybe Tony is better to answer. I will take up Professor Ho's thing. I don't want to get into the debate about Hong Kong because there's an urban age conference about everywhere in the world. Nevertheless I think there's a rhetoric, there's a so-called rhetoric saying that all the problems are due to limited availability of land. And that's why in a sense the secretary for development saying that we can develop another one percent and then we have all the land available. The issue is not just land availability. The issue is I have stressed so much about injustice. Let me call you one example. In one example, in one development, it was recorded in the news that the developer can make 50 percent profit out of one particular flat in the development. And I talked to the former planning director. I want to confirm that with him. He said no, not 50 percent, 100 percent. That issue not land availability, and the issue is they can make so much money. Who pay for that? Open up a land, making a land from a rural land to surface land. We have to, in the Chinese way, so talking about we have to level it. We have to provide the transportation and all the things. Who provided the government? The government, where did the government get the money? The taxpayers. That's one level I would call exploitation. Second level, why can a particular flat, a particular location, can command so high a rent? Because other people live there, make the place a livable place, and thereby the particular developer can command higher rent. So it is insane to double, that's what I am arguing, it's not land availability. The government has used it to get out of the problem. Right, sorry. Okay, thank you. Tomorrow, in case you don't know, Wingsheng Burnt mentioned about Carrie Lam, but Carrie is the secretary for development. She's coming to give a keynote tomorrow morning so we can follow up with that question. But to answer Sophie's question very, very quickly, before I pass on to Rainier and Antony and then also a gentleman over there, probably in the 60s and 70s, there were all kinds of psychological studies and social studies on Hong Kong, high density and overcrowding and why the crime rate is low and according to those texts in those days, it says because of the local culture, the Chinese culture, Confucianism and all that. But I don't know if it's still true 50 years later. All right, Rainier. I don't really have an answer to your question other than the fact that I think your question is partly unanswerable. Since I've been in the business of architecture, I have known studies that try to establish a relationship between crime and the built environment. To my knowledge, none of them have ever been conclusive, but I would like to point out another crime, which I think is where you're going. I think there is a clear relation between crime and real estate. There is a clear relation and in a way to talk about petty crime related to the built environment completely differs from the fact that real estate, property development, our noble profession is deeply embedded in crime. We've had a parliamentary inquiry in the Netherlands, supposedly not a very corrupt country, a respectable parliamentary democracy that exposed deep links between crime to the fact that an entire nation is paying about 50% more for their homes than they should be paying. We do work in Russia, where the entire expansion of Moscow is sued up with the construction companies well before even an announcement is made that the city will expand. If there is a topic like density and crime or architecture and crime or the built environment and crime, I think that's the topic to be addressed. Right. Anthony, you want to say a few words? Well, I just want to echo the thing that when we talk about density and also the crime and also social pathology, I think throughout the last half a century of research, I think it is not very conclusive. Right. There are a lot of factors that are affecting it. And I think in the discussions today, I think we talk about the environment, and it seems that the environment is causing a lot of problem. I think we have to think about it in the other way. It's actually, it's a so-so political process that is being exemplified or you would like being manifested in the environment. So the environment is actually one of the effects. For example, the poor living in this poor environment is because they are poor rather than the because of the poor environment that makes them poor or make them, you know, etc. It's like that. Right. And so I think we have to really be very careful when we're talking about, you know, the relationship, right, whether the inequality, basically it's a society issue. It's not the environment issue, but the environment is just the type of manifestations of this whole issue itself. Right. And I would just like to end up quoting, you know, one of the seminar I heard from David Harvey. He's saying that there are two types of crimes. One is this type of mafia, right? We all know what is the mafia. The other type of crime is the government. Thank you. All right. Thank you. All right. Question over there. Oh. Thank you. Very good presentation. When I listen presentation related to density, I ask myself probably my presentation of tomorrow was related to density and overcrowding should be here. When I listen really mass, answer one of my questions because the question is urban planning and design for high density. I found in my paper, I'm going to present tomorrow not any association net between density and overcrowding. I found cities were highly dense, but not overcrowding based on the definition of overcrowding in the house. Cities were not dense, but we are overcrowding related to urban planning and housing. Relationship between overcrowding and housing also, I found that there is not direct relationship between overcrowding and health because you have to take into consideration the living condition related to basic services, water, sanitation, and so on. Therefore, I'm very glad and I hope that many mass will help us tomorrow to answer some of the questions related to urban planning and design. Thank you. There is a question over there before I invite you, Ricky. Yes, please. Just a quick short observation because on page 20 and 21 of this urban age, this newspaper, this book that I look up, and if you just see the densities are mentioned in third column and crime rate, murder rate on the next page, and actually the correlation is the reverse of what we have been talking about. Every high density city seems to have low murder rates and low crime rates, and that is actually true for most because I know more Indian cities very well. Mumbai is safer than Delhi and Mumbai density is higher than Delhi. So I think we need to look into this aspect a little more deeper than just establishing this exactly what the previous speaker pointed out. Thank you. Sorry on that. We don't have the correlation with drugs and alcohol, which could explain a lot more. Ricky, you have a question. I had, I mean, hearing Libby Burton and Vinny Mass, you might think that we were listening to presentations which, not to mention Rainier, which didn't have to do with the same profession, sound as if you weren't involved in crafting of space. But I think in a way you are capturing something which is sort of a description of space as you know it or observe it, which is sort of vernacular. Libby in, let's say in a very Anglo-Saxon way, that's not a criticism, you were sort of searching in your looking for streets with front doors, let's say, with something which people feel comfortable with and therefore give a sense of health and safety, etc., which is interesting. Rainier showed us a world which is distant, but some people find comfortable. The Dubai image has become a vernacular and it's interesting that you stop short, maybe because of time Rainier, to show how your practice, so I may, might actually intervene there in such a way that it goes against the vernacular. And Vinny, you provoked, as you always do, by in a way acknowledging that the typology that is prevalent here, but in Asian places with all the images of things that we've been talking about, as being sort of the background vernacular of tall buildings, and you've invented a new one. Are there any common themes about the nature of the relationship between the living unit and public space? I mean, it's interesting that you take that tower block and you made 55 or 500 Lego models, right? And they're sort of twisted things, you know, which seem to have, but I don't know, I couldn't tell, some level of public space but verticalized, is that what you're doing? Is it somehow trying to reinvent density in such a way that it's more humane, let's say, in Libby's much more conventional terms, or is it just playing with space? I think that's important to us, I mean, you know what I'm saying. I think you're completely correct that somehow I was also surprised by your presentation and to see the connection with our work and try to three-dimensionalize it. So maybe this afternoon's session has given you, as organizers, maybe not a complete and deep overview of the relationship between, say, the social figure in density and the issues of safety that surrounds that subject, but it has given you that sequence from XL to XS in different words. I think that I found this four actually more consistent than I expected them to be on beforehand and that's what you're pointing at. You use an intriguing word for it, vernacular, as a definition for, to cover, say, the distance between a human being and the outside space or to make it more inhabitable. Is that, and I think it's interesting that you want to go beyond, say, for architects normally horrible, say, word, the word vernacular always kills experimentation, kills innovation, and is connected to what we already know and is therefore more based on fear than it's more based on progress. So is it true that you use that word on purpose to span the gap from, say, an Anglo-Saxon definition of inhabiting density with a certain kind of socialness up to the messiveness that's needed in order to beat the densities? I don't think this should be a, just a back once for me. No, I just, I'm trying to observe that what you're doing as architects is actually, in a way, developing a language which takes what is there but taking it forward. So absolutely I see that as a progress. I think it's sometimes difficult to understand what it is you're doing and it doesn't seem willful. I think that would be my point, which... Okay, just to end with two sentences, the Lego exercise is not finished yet. It's just under production. It is, it will never be. And the aim is indeed 10,000 towers which describe how social space and vertical senses could be made economically and technically. Good, thank you. Another time for the final evening keynote. I would like to take more, two more questions and that will be it. There is one. And one. Agua, okay. Let me start with this side first. Professor Yeung and then Becky Kwok and then Edgar. Can we, yeah, we have to stop, all right? Otherwise we go on forever, all right? So Professor Yeung, please. I am Yeung Man Yeung. I'm from the Chinese University of Hong Kong. What I've heard, well, I came late this morning because I had another meeting in another place in the morning. Now what I've heard since has been very fascinating to me because I've been sort of reliving my earlier debates on the high-rise, high-density living in the 1970s. I actually present, well, by the way, I spent 11 years of my professional life in Singapore, during which time with a lot of debate about high-rise, high-density living in Singapore and also in relation to Hong Kong. What I just want to contribute to this forum is that I presented a paper on that subject. High-rise, high-density living, myths and reality at the UN Habitat Conference in Vancouver in 1976. And the paper was published in the inaugural issue of urban habitat. So if you are interested to relive some of the arguments that we have been going back and forth, I think this is the place to go back on. Thank you. Thank you, all right. Becky, Jackie, Jackie. Sorry, I am afraid I have to disagree with Professor Antonija again. When he talks about that, I mean the issue of poverty is a social issue, but not an issue of environment. When we think about gentrification, we take, for example, the district of Wan Chai. Before gentrification, before I mean the older building were demolished, the rate to pay is about 2000 to 3000 Hong Kong dollars per square foot. But after gentrification, how much we have to pay for a flat in Wan Chai? It's more than 10,000 to 15,000 dollars per square foot. So where did all the poorer people go? They go to Tinsui Wai, just like what Professor Tang has said. So what I think is poverty is an urban poverty, not only a social issue. And I always think that social issues should always be included in the discussion in urban policy. And for environment, it always reveals some kind of injustice in the urban development. Okay, thank you.