34% of women sexually harassed at work in Hong Kong but few take action: survey
One-third of women in Hong Kong have been sexually harassed in the workplace over the past three years but most of them do nothing about it fearing it will affect their job or because they have accepted it as the norm, a survey has found.
Advertisement
Lawmaker Elizabeth Quat Pei-fan, whose party jointly carried out the survey, said on Sunday that the issue of workplace harassment in Hong Kong appeared not to have improved in decades.
'We've been discussing this issue of workplace sexual harassment for more than … 20 years already, and the media has been reporting on such matters constantly over the years,' she said.
'But not many companies, not enough of them, actually take action to protect women.'
She said organisations that committed themselves to ESG, or 'environmental, social and governance', responsibilities often overlooked the aspect of workplace sexual harassment.
Advertisement
ESG is a set of operational standards for companies that investors use to screen potential investments.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Asia Times
22-05-2025
- Asia Times
When capital is an engine of humanity's collapse
On paper, the global financial system was built to allocate capital toward the most productive uses. But in practice, it has often become a force that funds collapse, with growing speed and sophistication. We now live in an era where capital has lost its moral compass, accelerating the very crises it claims to mitigate and solve. Finance, instead of being a servant of life, has become its master — setting the rules for who gets to dream, who gets to survive and whose futures are deemed 'bankable.' In 2022, global fossil fuel subsidies reached US$7 trillion, about 7.1% of global GDP, according to the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Meanwhile, total global climate finance remains around $1.3 trillion per year, falling short by more than $2.4 trillion annually to meet the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C target of limiting global warming. That means we are financing destruction five times more than we are funding preservation. We are not merely failing to solve the crisis — we are actively underwriting it. Inequality tells the same story. Since the Covid-19 pandemic, the richest 1% of humanity captured nearly two-thirds of all new wealth — $42 trillion out of $67 trillion — while over 3 billion people remain excluded from formal financial services, ranging from productive credit to basic insurance. The world speaks the language of financial inclusion yet silently maintains walls of exclusion — not through accident, but architecture. The United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) — the world's shared commitment to dignity, equity and sustainability — face a deepening financing gap. Developing countries need over $4.2 trillion annually to meet them, but only a third is being mobilized. And among all the capital flowing through Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) funds, only about 10% reaches initiatives that meaningfully impact the SDGs. The rest is theater – a repackaging of comfort, not a redirection of conscience. A study by Scientific Beta in 2021 found no meaningful correlation between ESG scores and actual carbon emissions, reminding us that what looks sustainable on paper often remains extractive in practice. But perhaps the most dangerous thing about finance's current trajectory is not just that it funds the wrong things — it's that it numbs us into thinking this is normal. That forests must be priced to be protected. That lives must be profitable to be worth saving. That the future must yield returns to deserve attention. But what if we remembered — quietly, honestly — that not everything valuable can be owned, and not everything that sustains us was ever meant to be monetized? Finance, in its purest form, is not the measure of life. It is meant to serve life, not master it. And perhaps the real wealth of our time is not what we accumulate, but what we choose to protect before it's too late. Look closely at where capital flows today. It funds the consolidation of wealth, not the redistribution of justice. It powers emissions markets, not a just energy transition. It fuels asset speculation, not soil regeneration. It prioritizes consumer apps over community resilience. We are building economies that expand on spreadsheets but collapse in spirit — growing outward, but hollowing inward. We often hear the call to 'mobilize more finance for good.' But what we need is deeper: not just more money moving, but money moving with meaning. Not just a redirection of capital, but a redefinition of value. It's time to shift our metrics from return on investment to return on humanity. From minimizing portfolio risk to preserving the planet's ability to breathe. From performance incentives that reward short-term extraction to systems that restore balance between people, nature and capital. As economist Kate Raworth wisely said, 'Finance should be in service to life, not the other way around.' Today, that's not just a principle — it's a warning. Because when finance becomes untethered from life, every dollar we mobilize becomes a settlement with the past, not a seed for the future. We tell ourselves that finance will solve our problems, but in its current form, it is one of the problems — elegantly engineered, legally sanctioned and systemically blind. Until capital finds its compass again, one that points not toward economic and profit growth alone, but toward grounded, generative life, we will remain adrift. In a world where finance claims to fund the future, perhaps the bravest act is to ask what kind of future we are funding — and at what cost to what makes us human. Setyo Budiantoro is Sustainable Development Strategist at The Prakarsa, an MIT Sloan IDEAS Fellow, Advisory Committee Member of Fair Finance Asia and SDGs–ESG Expert at Indonesian ESG Professional Association (IEPA) .
Asia Times
07-05-2025
- Asia Times
Asia needs a sustainability paradigm authored by Asians
The global order that once defined prosperity and progress, anchored in Western institutions and values largely shaped by the United States, is unravelling. That is, the unipolar era in which America set the rules for the rest of the world is ending. In its place, a new constellation of powers is emerging, with Asia at the forefront. Yet amidst this shift in economic and political gravity, the frameworks guiding 'sustainable development' remain firmly rooted in the old order's worldview. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), ESG standards and climate finance mechanisms still reflect assumptions born from the Global North—technocratic, metric-heavy and often detached from the lived realities of the Global South. This is the paradox of our time: Asia is rising, but the paradigms are not changing. Across the region, governments and corporations are racing to align with global sustainability norms. Green bonds are being issued, ESG scores reported and SDG targets integrated into national plans. On paper, Asia looks like a model pupil. But dig deeper and a troubling pattern emerges: sustainability has become a performance, more about signaling alignment than pursuing actual transformation. Many countries approach SDGs and ESG as compliance checklists, not as contextual pathways of change. The result is a wave of ESG-washing, carbon colonialism disguised as 'energy transition' and a proliferation of projects that bear the sustainability label but fail to address inequality, ecological degradation or the erosion of local cultures. This is not a failure of ambition. It is a failure of imagination. Sustainability frameworks today still carry the DNA of Bretton Woods logic—growth-centered, finance-driven and governed by institutions where the Global South has little real voice. Even well-intentioned instruments like climate finance often come with rules that reflect the risk appetites of Western investors, not the priorities of frontline communities. Asia's diversity—its civilizational wisdoms, ecological traditions, and collective ways of living—is rarely acknowledged as a source of sustainability. Instead, the region is cast as a testing ground for external models: carbon trading, green taxonomy and blended finance. These tools may have value, but when imposed without adaptation, they risk becoming the new tools of dependency rather than emancipation. If Asia continues down this path, it may succeed in appearing sustainable while failing to build systems that are resilient, just and rooted in local meaning. To break free, Asia needs to reclaim its narrative and redefine what sustainability means—on its own terms. This is not about rejecting the global agenda, but rather reimagining it from the inside out. That is, sustainability must move beyond carbon metrics and GDP growth painted green. In many Asian cultures, the idea of balance—between humans and nature, individual and community, material and spiritual—has long existed. These are not romanticized relics; they are living philosophies that can inform a richer, more grounded model of development. Global frameworks love numbers. But not everything that matters can be measured. ESG scores and SDG dashboards cannot capture the strength of a community, the resilience of local economies or the dignity of indigenous governance systems. Asia must define success by its own indicators—ones that reflect life, not just compliance. Transforming sustainability from a borrowed framework into an endogenous movement also requires courageous institutions. Governments, universities, civil society and businesses must take risks: to pilot alternative models, to question imported standards and to assert the legitimacy of home-grown innovations. The question is no longer whether Asia can meet global standards of sustainability. The real question is whether the world is ready to meet Asia's. In a fractured world, Asia does not need to become a hegemon. It does not need to 'win' the sustainability race. Indeed, what it can offer is far more powerful: a new compass, one that centers dignity, relationality and regeneration rather than control, extraction and cosmetic green branding. Already, seeds of this paradigm exist. From the adat forests of Indonesia to the eco-spiritualism of Bhutan, from cooperative farming in Vietnam to localized disaster governance in the Philippines, Asia is not a blank slate. It is a wellspring of living alternatives hidden in plain sight. The challenge is not the absence of models – it is the lack of recognition. The post-hegemonic world will be defined not just by shifts in power, but by shifts in meaning. And in this search for new foundations, sustainability cannot remain a managerial tool of global finance: it must become a civilizational question. Who defines what is worth sustaining? Whose knowledge counts? Whose future are we protecting? If these questions remain unanswered—or worse, answered only by those at Davos or on Wall Street—then even the greenest of futures may be built on the same old exclusions. But if Asia dares to speak from its roots, not just its rise, it could offer what the world sorely lacks: a sustainability that is not a slogan, but a soul. Setyo Budiantoro is Nexus Strategist at The Prakarsa, MIT Sloan IDEAS Fellow 2024 and member of the advisory committee of Fair Finance Asia
HKFP
30-04-2025
- HKFP
Hong Kong corrections dept. defends use of private vehicles to release 4 democrats from prison
Hong Kong's corrections department has defended the use of private vehicles for the release of four former lawmakers who completed their jail terms for their involvement in an unofficial 2020 primary election. The Correctional Services Department (CSD) told HKFP on Tuesday that it would 'make appropriate arrangements' for the release of prisoners based on factors such as the security and order of the prison, as well as the privacy and safety of the person in custody. 'The Correctional Services Department handles matters concerning the custody and discharge of persons in custody strictly in accordance with the law,' the CSD wrote in an email to HKFP. HKFP sent enquiries to the CSD shortly after former pro-democracy lawmakers Claudia Mo, Gary Fan, Jeremy Tam, and Kwok Ka-ki were released from prison early Tuesday morning. Mo was released from the Lo Wu Correctional Institution, while Fan left Lantau's Shek Pik Prison. Tam and Kwok were discharged from Stanley Prison. The four were the first group of 45 democrats to be discharged from prison in the early morning of Tuesday after being sentenced in the city's largest national security trial in November. The former legislators were jailed for four years and two months after pleading guilty to the charge of conspiracy to commit subversion. Instead of walking out of prison as released detainees usually do, Mo, Fan, Tam, and Kwok left their respective detention facilities in seven-seater vehicles with curtains drawn. Journalists at the scene were barred from following the cars as police set up cordons when the vehicles drove away. Members of the press waited at the democrats' homes, with local media outlet HK01 capturing Fan on video as he arrived at his residence in Tseung Kwan O. The ex-legislator said he was heading home to reunite with his family and thanked Hongkongers and the media for their concern. Journalists also visited Mo's home. Her husband, Philip Bowring, confirmed with reporters that Mo was inside the flat and resting, adding she was 'well and in good spirits.' Inside the living room of Mo's home, there was a banner that read: 'Welcome Home Mum.' In a Facebook post on Tuesday, activist Figo Chan questioned why the democrats were escorted from prison to their homes, suggesting that this practice was unusual. He said the same arrangement was made in January 2022, when independence activist Edward Leung was released from jail after being sentenced to six years for rioting in 2016. 'No one could witness it firsthand. This time, I really want to thank your media friends for waiting at various prisons from the early morning… allowing everyone to see it for themselves,' Chan wrote in Chinese. Three handpicked national security judges ruled that the 45 democrats had planned to use their constitutional powers to veto the government budget, ultimately forcing the resignation of the chief executive and a government shutdown. With Mo, Fan, Tam, and Kwok released, there are still 41 democrats serving time in prison for up to 10 years for the charge that evolved around an unofficial primary election held in July 2020. The polls aimed to help the pro-democracy camp win a controlling majority in the legislature. This, the judges ruled, would have resulted in a 'constitutional crisis.' Beijing inserted national security legislation directly into Hong Kong's mini-constitution in June 2020 following a year of pro-democracy protests and unrest. It criminalised subversion, secession, collusion with foreign forces and terrorist acts – broadly defined to include disruption to transport and other infrastructure. The move gave police sweeping new powers and led to hundreds of arrests amid new legal precedents, while dozens of civil society groups disappeared. The authorities say it restored stability and peace to the city, rejecting criticism from trade partners, the UN and NGOs.
