Product details

When the Hong Kong Housing Authority--he world''s largest landlord-- becomes concerned, in the early 1990s, that too many of its 650,000 apartments are occupied by tenants who could afford to live elsewhere, it moves to adopt a policy designed to encourage them to leave. The Authority hopes to make apartments available for many poorer tenants on a waiting list of more than 150,000. The "assets test" policy is meant to determine whether residents owned residential property and other significant assets which, in conjunction with their income, should lead to their being charged much higher rents. This case focuses on the "public consultation" process undertaken by the Housing Authority as it seeks to design and implement the new policy. Specifically, it focuses on how the Authority responds to a vote by Hong Kong''s Legislative Council (Legco)--a body with little formal power but which includes the highest elected officials in the territory--recommending against the adoption of the assets test. The Authority must decide whether to take the Legco decision as a mandate or to find new ways to sell the policy to the public and to its own board of directors, in whom the final decision- making power is vested. The case is meant both for those interested in public housing management issues and, more broadly, in questions of the relationship between agency policy-makers and elected officials.