香港旅游官员明智地叫停了山顶一项备受争议的灯光表演项目——这一决定证明，未获关键持份者支持的表演不能强行推进。这一逆转似乎与一个奉行“以结果为目标”口号、在短时间内强行通过一系列争议政策和法例的政府作风不符。但此事表明，当局必须审慎考虑如何妥善落实“处处是旅游”策略。
Hong Kong tourism officials have sensibly pulled the plug on a controversial light spectacle project at The Peak – a decision that proves that shows which are not backed by key stakeholders must not go on. The reversal may seem uncharacteristic of an administration that has pushed through a raft of contentious policies and legislation in no time under its “result-oriented” mantra. But the episode shows that the authorities must carefully consider how to properly implement the “tourism is everywhere” strategy.
经过数月筹划、且已花费一笔未公开的“有限”款项后，这项熄灯决定是最新挫折；官员正寻求在区内竞争日益激烈之际提升旅游产品。在卢吉道和夏力道附近步行径沿线安装的低眩光装置，原本由2亿港元（2549万美元）拨款涵盖，用于举办新的光影巡游，以取代自2004年起每晚在维多利亚港上演的“幻彩咏香江”灯光、激光和音乐同步表演。
The lights-out decision following months of planning – and an undisclosed “limited” amount of money already spent – is the latest setback as officials seek to enhance tourism offerings amid growing competition in the region. The low-glare installations along the walking trail near Lugard Road and Harlech Road were covered by the HK$200 million (US$25.49 million) earmarked for a new light and shadow parade that replaces “A Symphony of Lights”, a nightly synchronised light, laser and music show that has run along Victoria Harbour since 2004.
但山顶项目如今面临红灯，原因是外界日益关注其对环境和安全的影响，因为项目涉及清除植被，并在树木上安装数百盏射灯和电缆。一些人还认为，这些人造灯光“格格不入”且“碍眼”，可能破坏山顶的宁静氛围并滋扰野生动物。立法会议员批评旅游发展局公众参与不足。
But the project on The Peak now faces a red light amid mounting concerns over the impact on the environment and safety, as it involved removing vegetation and mounting hundreds of spotlights and electric cables on trees. The artificial lighting was also seen by some as “incongruous” and an “eyesore” that could ruin the tranquil ambience and disturb wildlife at The Peak. Lawmakers criticised the Tourism Board for insufficient public engagement.
官员们最初试图通过缩减项目规模来挽救该项目，将灯光点从10个减少到7个，将树上的灯从52个减少到约24个，拆除一些装置，并将展示时间从圣诞节开始的12个月试行缩短至2027年2月底。这些让步出于好意，最初旨在提升香港夜间旅游吸引力的目标也是如此。但修订后的方案并未解决一个问题：是否应在一个价值在于自然美景的风景步道上安装人工装饰灯。
Officials initially attempted to save the project by scaling it down, reducing the number of lighting points from 10 to seven, cutting tree-mounted lights from 52 to about 24, removing some fixtures and shortening the display from a 12-month trial beginning from Christmas to the end of February 2027. The concessions were well-intentioned, as was the original aim to enhance Hong Kong’s nighttime tourism appeal. But the revised plan did not address the question of whether artificial decorative lights should be installed along a scenic trail whose value lies in its natural beauty.
而当一个大打折扣的版本既无法消除担忧，也无法提供当初证明该计划合理性的视觉冲击力时，取消便成为一种令人尴尬但明智的回应。
And when a much watered-down version can neither remove concerns nor provide the visual impact that justified the initiative in the first place, cancellation becomes an embarrassing but sensible response.
当局已正确地承诺拆除这些装置并修复受影响的地点。这不仅仅是损害控制。这是对具有生态价值的地方进行开发必须经过仔细思考的承认。山顶不仅仅是热门旅游景点。多年来，它一直是公共空间、城市庇护所、自然爱好者的天堂、健身爱好者的向往之地以及住宅区。当局在实施前寻求与利益相关者接触，并最终通过放弃该项目来回应他们的合理关切，这是好事。
The authorities have rightly undertaken to remove the installations and restore the affected site. This is more than damage control. It is an acknowledgement that development in places with ecological value must be carefully thought through. The Peak is not just a popular tourist attraction. For years, it has been a public space, an urban sanctuary, a nature lovers’ paradise, a draw for fitness enthusiasts and a residential neighbourhood. It is good that the authorities sought to engage stakeholders in the run-up to implementation and eventually responded to their legitimate concerns by dropping the project.
这一事件暴露出环境影响评估和公众参与方面的不足。尽管旅游发展局早在4月就已咨询区议会，并向当地居民发函解释项目构想，但当树木被缠上巨型聚光灯和胶带的照片在社交媒体上疯传时，公众感到担忧也是情有可原的。香港有充分理由推动旅游产品多元化。在旅行偏好不断变化、来自其他目的地的竞争日益加剧的背景下，这座城市需要能够吸引游客停留更久、走出熟悉街区、并因购物和餐饮之外的理由再次到访的体验。政府推动“处处是旅游”体现了更新既有景点、更广泛地分享旅游收益的合理抱负。
The episode has exposed inadequacies in environmental assessment and public engagement. Although the Tourism Board had consulted the district council as early as April and sent letters explaining the project’s concept to local residents, the public can be excused for feeling concerned when images of trees strung with massive spotlights and tape went viral on social media. Hong Kong has good reason to diversify its tourism offerings. Amid changing travel preferences and growing competition from other destinations, the city needs experiences that encourage visitors to stay longer, look beyond familiar districts and return for reasons other than shopping and dining. The government’s “tourism is everywhere” push reflects a legitimate ambition to refresh established attractions and spread the benefits of tourism more widely.
然而，这并不意味着每条步道或每个街区都可以被改造或纳入旅游版图。对于一个需要在娱乐与环境之间取得微妙平衡的项目而言，显然需要更高的敏感度和更多的公众参与。香港的旅游品牌不仅取决于新的产品或改造翻新，也取决于能否保留这座城市与众不同的特质。这一事件为其他政府举措树立了一个范例，说明有必要与社区沟通、评估利弊，从而就前进方向作出明智决策。对于香港推动旅游产品多元化的努力而言，这是正确做法的一个良好参考。
Yet that does not mean every trail or neighbourhood can be revamped or placed on the tourism map. For a project that requires a delicate balance between entertainment and the environment, the need for greater sensitivity and public engagement is evident. Hong Kong’s tourism brand depends not only on new offerings or makeovers but also on preserving the qualities that make the city distinctive. The incident has set an example for other government initiatives on the need to engage the community and assess the pros and cons to make sensible decisions on the way forward. This is a good reference on the right approach to Hong Kong’s efforts to diversify our tourism offerings.