關於 boundary value problem ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

📜 [專欄新文章] Uniswap v3 Features Explained in Depth

✍️ 田少谷 Shao

📥 歡迎投稿： https://medium.com/taipei-ethereum-meetup #徵技術分享文 #使用心得 #教學文 #medium

Once again the game-changing DEX 🦄 👑

Image source: https://uniswap.org/blog/uniswap-v3/

Outline

0. Intro1. Uniswap & AMM recap2. Ticks 3. Concentrated liquidity4. Range orders: reversible limit orders5. Impacts of v36. Conclusion

0. Intro

The announcement of Uniswap v3 is no doubt one of the most exciting news in the DeFi place recently 🔥🔥🔥

While most have talked about the impact v3 can potentially bring on the market, seldom explain the delicate implementation techniques to realize all those amazing features, such as concentrated liquidity, limit-order-like range orders, etc.

Since I’ve covered Uniswap v1 & v2 (if you happen to know Mandarin, here are v1 & v2), there’s no reason for me to not cover v3 as well ✅

Thus, this article aims to guide readers through Uniswap v3, based on their official whitepaper and examples made on the announcement page. However, one needs not to be an engineer, as not many codes are involved, nor a math major, as the math involved is definitely taught in your high school, to fully understand the following content 😊😊😊

If you really make it through but still don’t get shxt, feedbacks are welcomed! 🙏

There should be another article focusing on the codebase, so stay tuned and let’s get started with some background noise!

1. Uniswap & AMM recap

Before diving in, we have to first recap the uniqueness of Uniswap and compare it to traditional order book exchanges.

Uniswap v1 & v2 are a kind of AMMs (automated market marker) that follow the constant product equation x * y = k, with x & y stand for the amount of two tokens X and Y in a pool and k as a constant.

Comparing to order book exchanges, AMMs, such as the previous versions of Uniswap, offer quite a distinct user experience:

AMMs have pricing functions that offer the price for the two tokens, which make their users always price takers, while users of order book exchanges can be both makers or takers.

Uniswap as well as most AMMs have infinite liquidity¹, while order book exchanges don’t. The liquidity of Uniswap v1 & v2 is provided throughout the price range [0,∞]².

Uniswap as well as most AMMs have price slippage³ and it’s due to the pricing function, while there isn’t always price slippage on order book exchanges as long as an order is fulfilled within one tick.

In an order book, each price (whether in green or red) is a tick. Image source: https://ftx.com/trade/BTC-PERP

¹ though the price gets worse over time; AMM of constant sum such as mStable does not have infinite liquidity

² the range is in fact [-∞,∞], while a price in most cases won’t be negative

³ AMM of constant sum does not have price slippage

2. Tick

The whole innovation of Uniswap v3 starts from ticks.

For those unfamiliar with what is a tick:

Source: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/tick.asp

By slicing the price range [0,∞] into numerous granular ticks, trading on v3 is highly similar to trading on order book exchanges, with only three differences:

The price range of each tick is predefined by the system instead of being proposed by users.

Trades that happen within a tick still follows the pricing function of the AMM, while the equation has to be updated once the price crosses the tick.

Orders can be executed with any price within the price range, instead of being fulfilled at the same one price on order book exchanges.

With the tick design, Uniswap v3 possesses most of the merits of both AMM and an order book exchange! 💯💯💯

So, how is the price range of a tick decided?

This question is actually somewhat related to the tick explanation above: the minimum tick size for stocks trading above 1$ is one cent.

The underlying meaning of a tick size traditionally being one cent is that one cent (1% of 1$) is the basis point of price changes between ticks, ex: 1.02 — 1.01 = 0.1.

Uniswap v3 employs a similar idea: compared to the previous/next price, the price change should always be 0.01% = 1 basis point.

However, notice the difference is that in the traditional basis point, the price change is defined with subtraction, while here in Uniswap it’s division.

This is how price ranges of ticks are decided⁴:

Image source: https://uniswap.org/whitepaper-v3.pdf

With the above equation, the tick/price range can be recorded in the index form [i, i+1], instead of some crazy numbers such as 1.0001¹⁰⁰ = 1.0100496621.

As each price is the multiplication of 1.0001 of the previous price, the price change is always 1.0001 — 1 = 0.0001 = 0.01%.

For example, when i=1, p(1) = 1.0001; when i=2, p(2) = 1.00020001.

p(2) / p(1) = 1.00020001 / 1.0001 = 1.0001

See the connection between the traditional basis point 1 cent (=1% of 1$) and Uniswap v3’s basis point 0.01%?

Image source: https://tenor.com/view/coin-master-cool-gif-19748052

But sir, are prices really granular enough? There are many shitcoins with prices less than 0.000001$. Will such prices be covered as well?

Price range: max & min

To know if an extremely small price is covered or not, we have to figure out the max & min price range of v3 by looking into the spec: there is a int24 tick state variable in UniswapV3Pool.sol.

Image source: https://uniswap.org/whitepaper-v3.pdf

The reason for a signed integer int instead of an uint is that negative power represents prices less than 1 but greater than 0.

24 bits can cover the range between 1.0001 ^ (2²³ — 1) and 1.0001 ^ -(2)²³. Even Google cannot calculate such numbers, so allow me to offer smaller values to have a rough idea of the whole price range:

1.0001 ^ (2¹⁸) = 242,214,459,604.341

1.0001 ^ -(2¹⁷) = 0.000002031888943

I think it’s safe to say that with a int24 the range can cover > 99.99% of the prices of all assets in the universe 👌

⁴ For implementation concern, however, a square root is added to both sides of the equation.

How about finding out which tick does a price belong to?

Tick index from price

The answer to this question is rather easy, as we know that p(i) = 1.0001^i, simply takes a log with base 1.0001 on both sides of the equation⁴:

Image source: https://www.codecogs.com/latex/eqneditor.php

Let’s try this out, say we wanna find out the tick index of 1000000.

Image source: https://ncalculators.com/number-conversion/log-logarithm-calculator.htm

Now, 1.0001¹³⁸¹⁶² = 999,998.678087146. Voila!

⁵ This formula is also slightly modified to fit the real implementation usage.

3. Concentrated liquidity

Now that we know how ticks and price ranges are decided, let’s talk about how orders are executed in a tick, what is concentrated liquidity and how it enables v3 to compete with stablecoin-specialized DEXs (decentralized exchange), such as Curve, by improving the capital efficiency.

Concentrated liquidity means LPs (liquidity providers) can provide liquidity to any price range/tick at their wish, which causes the liquidity to be imbalanced in ticks.

As each tick has a different liquidity depth, the corresponding pricing function x * y = k also won’t be the same!

Each tick has its own liquidity depth. Image source: https://uniswap.org/blog/uniswap-v3/

Mmm… examples are always helpful for abstract descriptions 😂

Say the original pricing function is 100(x) * 1000(y) = 100000(k), with the price of X token 1000 / 100 = 10 and we’re now in the price range [9.08, 11.08].

If the liquidity of the price range [11.08, 13.08] is the same as [9.08, 11.08], we don’t have to modify the pricing function if the price goes from 10 to 11.08, which is the boundary between two ticks.

The price of X is 1052.63 / 95 = 11.08 when the equation is 1052.63 * 95 = 100000.

However, if the liquidity of the price range [11.08, 13.08] is two times that of the current range [9.08, 11.08], balances of x and y should be doubled, which makes the equation become 2105.26 * 220 = 400000, which is (1052.63 * 2) * (110 * 2) = (100000 * 2 * 2).

We can observe the following two points from the above example:

Trades always follow the pricing function x * y = k, while once the price crosses the current price range/tick, the liquidity/equation has to be updated.

√(x * y) = √k = L is how we represent the liquidity, as I say the liquidity of x * y = 400000 is two times the liquidity of x * y = 100000, as √(400000 / 100000) = 2.

What’s more, compared to liquidity on v1 & v2 is always spread across [0,∞], liquidity on v3 can be concentrated within certain price ranges and thus results in higher capital efficiency from traders’ swapping fees!

Let’s say if I provide liquidity in the range [1200, 2800], the capital efficiency will then be 4.24x higher than v2 with the range [0,∞] 😮😮😮 There’s a capital efficiency comparison calculator, make sure to try it out!

Image source: https://uniswap.org/blog/uniswap-v3/

It’s worth noticing that the concept of concentrated liquidity was proposed and already implemented by Kyper, prior to Uniswap, which is called Automated Price Reserve in their case.⁵

⁶ Thanks to Yenwen Feng for the information.

4. Range orders: reversible limit orders

As explained in the above section, LPs of v3 can provide liquidity to any price range/tick at their wish. Depending on the current price and the targeted price range, there are three scenarios:

current price < the targeted price range

current price > the targeted price range

current price belongs to the targeted price range

The first two scenarios are called range orders. They have unique characteristics and are essentially fee-earning reversible limit orders, which will be explained later.

The last case is the exact same liquidity providing mechanism as the previous versions: LPs provide liquidity in both tokens of the same value (= amount * price).

There’s also an identical product to the case: grid trading, a very powerful investment tool for a time of consolidation. Dunno what’s grid trading? Check out Binance’s explanation on this, as this topic won’t be covered!

In fact, LPs of Uniswap v1 & v2 are grid trading with a range of [0,∞] and the entry price as the baseline.

Range orders

To understand range orders, we’d have to first revisit how price is discovered on Uniswap with the equation x * y = k, for x & y stand for the amount of two tokens X and Y and k as a constant.

The price of X compared to Y is y / x, which means how many Y one can get for 1 unit of X, and vice versa the price of Y compared to X is x / y.

For the price of X to go up, y has to increase and x decrease.

With this pricing mechanism in mind, it’s example time!

Say an LP plans to place liquidity in the price range [15.625, 17.313], higher than the current price of X 10, when 100(x) * 1000(y) = 100000(k).

The price of X is 1250 / 80 = 15.625 when the equation is 80 * 1250 = 100000.

The price of X is 1315.789 / 76 = 17.313 when the equation is 76 * 1315.789 = 100000.

If now the price of X reaches 15.625, the only way for the price of X to go even higher is to further increase y and decrease x, which means exchanging a certain amount of X for Y.

Thus, to provide liquidity in the range [15.625, 17.313], an LP needs only to prepare 80 — 76 = 4 of X. If the price exceeds 17.313, all 4 X of the LP is swapped into 1315.789 — 1250 = 65.798 Y, and then the LP has nothing more to do with the pool, as his/her liquidity is drained.

What if the price stays in the range? It’s exactly what LPs would love to see, as they can earn swapping fees for all transactions in the range! Also, the balance of X will swing between [76, 80] and the balance of Y between [1250, 1315.789].

This might not be obvious, but the example above shows an interesting insight: if the liquidity of one token is provided, only when the token becomes more valuable will it be exchanged for the less valuable one.

…wut? 🤔

Remember that if 4 X is provided within [15.625, 17.313], only when the price of X goes up from 15.625 to 17.313 is 4 X gradually swapped into Y, the less valuable one!

What if the price of X drops back immediately after reaching 17.313? As X becomes less valuable, others are going to exchange Y for X.

The below image illustrates the scenario of DAI/USDC pair with a price range of [1.001, 1.002] well: the pool is always composed entirely of one token on both sides of the tick, while in the middle 1.001499⁶ is of both tokens.

Image source: https://uniswap.org/blog/uniswap-v3/

Similarly, to provide liquidity in a price range < current price, an LP has to prepare a certain amount of Y for others to exchange Y for X within the range.

To wrap up such an interesting feature, we know that:

Only one token is required for range orders.

Only when the current price is within the range of the range order can LP earn trading fees. This is the main reason why most people believe LPs of v3 have to monitor the price more actively to maximize their income, which also means that LPs of v3 have become arbitrageurs 🤯

I will be discussing more the impacts of v3 in 5. Impacts of v3.

⁷ 1.001499988 = √(1.0001 * 1.0002) is the geometric mean of 1.0001 and 1.0002. The implication is that the geometric mean of two prices is the average execution price within the range of the two prices.

Reversible limit orders

As the example in the last section demonstrates, if there is 4 X in range [15.625, 17.313], the 4 X will be completely converted into 65.798 Y when the price goes over 17.313.

We all know that a price can stay in a wide range such as [10, 11] for quite some time, while it’s unlikely so in a narrow range such as [15.625, 15.626].

Thus, if an LP provides liquidity in [15.625, 15.626], we can expect that once the price of X goes over 15.625 and immediately also 15.626, and does not drop back, all X are then forever converted into Y.

The concept of having a targeted price and the order will be executed after the price is crossed is exactly the concept of limit orders! The only difference is that if the range of a range order is not narrow enough, it’s highly possible that the conversion of tokens will be reverted once the price falls back to the range.

As price ranges follow the equation p(i) = 1.0001 ^ i, the range can be quite narrow and a range order can thus effectively serve as a limit order:

When i = 27490, 1.0001²⁷⁴⁹⁰ = 15.6248.⁸

When i = 27491, 1.0001²⁷⁴⁹¹ = 15.6264.⁸

A range of 0.0016 is not THAT narrow but can certainly satisfy most limit order use cases!

⁸ As mentioned previously in note #4, there is a square root in the equation of the price and index, thus the numbers here are for explantion only.

5. Impacts of v3

Higher capital efficiency, LPs become arbitrageurs… as v3 has made tons of radical changes, I’d like to summarize my personal takes of the impacts of v3:

Higher capital efficiency makes one of the most frequently considered indices in DeFi: TVL, total value locked, becomes less meaningful, as 1$ on Uniswap v3 might have the same effect as 100$ or even 2000$ on v2.

The ease of spot exchanging between spot exchanges used to be a huge advantage of spot markets over derivative markets. As LPs will take up the role of arbitrageurs and arbitraging is more likely to happen on v3 itself other than between DEXs, this gap is narrowed … to what extent? No idea though.

LP strategies and the aggregation of NFT of Uniswap v3 liquidity token are becoming the blue ocean for new DeFi startups: see Visor and Lixir. In fact, this might be the turning point for both DeFi and NFT: the two main reasons of blockchain going mainstream now come to the alignment of interest: solving the $$ problem 😏😏😏

In the right venue, which means a place where transaction fees are low enough, such as Optimism, we might see Algo trading firms coming in to share the market of designing LP strategies on Uniswap v3, as I believe Algo trading is way stronger than on-chain strategies or DAO voting to add liquidity that sort of thing.

After reading this article by Parsec.finance: The Dex to Rule Them All, I cannot help but wonder: maybe there is going to be centralized crypto exchanges adopting v3’s approach. The reason is that since orders of LPs in the same tick are executed pro-rata, the endless front-running speeding-competition issue in the Algo trading world, to some degree, is… solved? 🤔

Anyway, personal opinions can be biased and seriously wrong 🙈 I’m merely throwing out a sprat to catch a whale. Having a different voice? Leave your comment down below!

6. Conclusion

That was kinda tough, isn’t it? Glad you make it through here 🥂🥂🥂

There are actually many more details and also a huge section of Oracle yet to be covered. However, since this article is more about features and targeting normal DeFi users, I’ll leave those to the next one; hope there is one 😅

If you have any doubt or find any mistake, please feel free to reach out to me and I’d try to reply AFAP!

Stay tuned and in the meantime let’s wait and see how Uniswap v3 is again pioneering the innovation of DeFi 🌟

Uniswap v3 Features Explained in Depth was originally published in Taipei Ethereum Meetup on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

👏 歡迎轉載分享鼓掌

柬埔寨土地權狀有那幾種？
2019年11月27
可以通過柬埔寨產權的四種主要形式之一來確保財產所有權，即：硬產權，軟產權，LMAP產權和分層產權。我們將簡要介紹您要記住的重要事項。

硬卡-\-\硬卡是柬埔寨最強的財產所有權形式，是土地管理和計劃辦公室提供的土地所有權證書。硬標題包含詳細的信息，這些信息已在國土部和有關地籍辦公室的國家級正式認可和認證。土地交易將根據財產總值支付4％的轉讓稅。硬卡轉讓的協助通常需要長達12週的時間

軟卡-\-\軟卡是最常見的所有權形式，也是最常見的柬埔寨土地產權，因為它們轉讓稅款和費用要比硬產權便宜。據估計柬埔寨有85％的財產所有人僅擁有軟卡。在地方政府一級得到認可（Sangkats＆Khans）當地縣或地區辦公室提供，未在國家/地區一級註冊-但仍被視為有效的所有權法律文件。軟標題相對便宜且購買速度更快，轉讓估計需要10到12個工作日

土地管理和行政項目（LMAP）卡-\-\LMAP卡是土地管理，城市規劃​​和建設部（MLMUPC）以及相關地籍辦公室在國家一級發布並認可的另一項財產所有權標題。LMAP標題與硬標題的主要區別在於，它包含確定問題屬性邊界的精確GPS坐標。LMAP標題只能在已在地籍地圖上建立索引的土地上獲得。因此，如果尚未對一塊土地進行索引，則無法為該屬性發布LMAP標題。轉讓後將根據財產總值支付4％的轉讓稅。

地層卡-\-\分層卡是通常用於購買公寓單位的特殊標題，柬埔寨國民和外國國民均可使用。您可以在我們的投資指南中看到其他機制，不一定涉及可用於外國人財產所有權的分層標題。僅當相關物業滿足以下條件時，才能授予層標題：僅適用於2010年及以後建造的建築物，外國人只能擁有建築物或物業總表面積的70％，無法為地下和/或地下的物業頒發地層產權，距離最近的陸地邊界30公里之內的任何財產均不得發行地層產權，共同擁有建築物中的私有所有權（又名“地層”）是最新的所有權形式，允許外國人在柬埔寨合法擁有財產。地層權是一種不太常見的柬埔寨地權，但數量正在快速增長。大多數新的公寓開發項目都提供此類所有權。

柬埔寨土地出售
地點: 4號路距離塔山寺116公里
面積: 共1300 公頃, 路邊100米,適合綜合商業開發
卡別: 硬卡
單價: 5 USD/M2
聯繫: 012473236 張先生 WECHAT ID: j012661511
LINE ID: CAMBODIA 012473236
0973950962 彭先生WECHATID:winson0909691866
LINE ID: CHINA 13862638726
089361886 林先生 (柬語.華語)
登錄時間: 2019/11/24
備註: 如欲採購本土地請聯繫手機,確認您需求後提供詳細資料,含地籍圖,現場照片 ,安排土地現場參觀及後續簽約事宜。

What are the land titles in Cambodia?
November 27, 2019
Property ownership can be secured through one of the four main forms of Cambodian property rights, namely: hard property rights, soft property rights, LMAP property rights and hierarchical property rights. We'll briefly explain what you need to remember.

Hard Card-Hard card is the strongest form of property ownership in Cambodia and is a land ownership certificate provided by the Office of Land Management and Planning. Hard headings contain detailed information that has been formally recognized and certified at the national level by the Department of Homeland and the relevant cadastral office. The land transaction will pay 4% transfer tax based on the total value of the property. Assistance with hard card transfers typically takes up to 12 weeks

Soft cards-Soft cards are the most common form of ownership and the most common type of land property rights in Cambodia because they transfer taxes and fees cheaper than hard property rights. It is estimated that 85% of property owners in Cambodia only own soft cards. Provided by the local county or district office that is recognized at the local government level (Sangkats & Khans), is not registered at the national level-but is still considered a valid legal document of ownership. Soft titles are relatively cheap and faster to buy, and transfers take an estimated 10 to 12 business days

Land Management and Administration Project (LMAP) Card-The LMAP card is another title of property ownership issued and recognized at the national level by the Ministry of Land Management, Urban Planning and Construction (MLMUPC) and related cadastral offices. The main difference between an LMAP header and a hard header is that it contains precise GPS coordinates that determine the boundary of the problem attribute. LMAP titles are only available on land that has been indexed on a cadastral map. Therefore, if a piece of land has not been indexed, an LMAP title cannot be published for the property. After the transfer, a 4% transfer tax will be paid based on the total value of the property.

Strata Cards-Strata cards are special titles commonly used to buy apartment units, and can be used by both Cambodian and foreign nationals. You can see other mechanisms in our investment guide that don't necessarily involve hierarchical headings that can be used for foreigner property ownership. Tier titles can only be granted if the relevant property meets the following conditions: only applicable to buildings constructed in 2010 and later, foreigners can only own 70% of the total surface area of ​​the building or property and cannot be underground and / or underground properties Issue stratum property rights. No property within 30 kilometers from the nearest land border may issue stratum property rights. The joint ownership of private ownership in buildings (also known as "stratigraphy") is the latest form of ownership, allowing foreigners to legally own in Cambodia. property. Strata rights are a less common type of land rights in Cambodia, but the number is growing rapidly. Most new apartment developments provide such ownership.

Cambodia land for sale
Location: Road 4 is 116 km from Tashan Temple
Area: 1300 hectares, 100 meters by the road, suitable for comprehensive commercial development
Card: Hard card
Price / u: 5 USD / M2
Contact: 012473236 Mr. Zhang WECHAT ID: j012661511
LINE ID: CAMBODIA 012473236
0973950962 Mr. Peng WECHATID: winson0909691866
LINE ID: CHINA 13862638726
089361886 Mr. Lin (Cambodian. Chinese)
Login time: 2019/11/24
Note: If you want to purchase the land, please contact your mobile phone, provide detailed information after confirming your needs, including cadastral maps, on-site photos, arrange site visits and follow-up contract matter

See how our research demystifies the land politics of the northern New Territories

本組向HK Magazine專題提供了反對新界北淪陷的重要理據，而新界東北正正就是撐住新界融合戰的橋頭堡!
--
[cover story] What Will Happen to the New Territories?
http://hk.asia-city.com/…/…/what-will-happen-new-territories

The government’s little-publicized plans for developing the northeastern New Territories are much bigger than it would have you believe—under the current plans, huge tracts of green land will be turned to concrete. Grace Tsoi takes a closer look at the many complex issues and concerns surrounding the project.

On September 2, while secondary school students were hunger striking at Tamar, a smaller-scale but equally vociferous protest was being staged. Several hundred villagers from Kwu Tung North, Fanling North, Ping Che and Ta Kwu Ling also staked out the government offices. They chanted slogans protesting against demolition and removal—their homes are slated to be destroyed, according to the government’s plan to develop the northeastern New Territories.

The development plan is not a new one. As early as 1998, former Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa floated the idea to develop Kwu Tung North, Fanling North, Ping Che and Ta Kwu Leng into three new development areas (NDAs). However, the plan was halted due to a slower-than-expected population expansion in 2003. Then in 2007, Donald Tsang restarted the Hong Kong 2030 Planning Vision and Strategy scheme, and the Northeastern New Territories were again slated to be developed. The three NDAs will total 787 hectares, of which 533 hectares will be built upon. The consultation was done in the dark, and the majority of the public only learnt of the development plan at the last stage of the consultation. Originally the consultation was set to conclude at the end of August, but due to staunch opposition, the government has extended the deadline until the end of September. Here, we line out the many problems and shortcomings of the government’s plans.

Can It Satisfy Housing Demand?

The government backs up the development plan by stating that more homes will be built in the northeast New Territories—an appealing idea in the wake of rocketing house prices. Around 54,000 homes will be built, with 40 percent of the flats set aside for public housing. During her tenure as Secretary for Development, Carrie Lam said the ratio of public housing should be kept at less than 50 percent in order to avoid a repeat of the disastrous Tin Shui Wai new town in Yuen Long. “The problem with Tin Shui Wai is not that there is too much public housing. It is because of the monopolies [for example, the community is served only be The Link and Li Ka-shing’s shopping malls and there are very few independent vendors] and insufficient jobs for the working class. Even hawking is prohibited,” says Chan Kim-ching, a researcher from Local Research Community, a think-tank focusing on urban planning. On the other hand, the project’s 21,600 public housing flats, which will be made available by the year 2022, don’t even come close to satisfying the government’s target of building 15,000 public housing homes per year. We have to ask—is getting rid of all this precious green space worth it? On the private housing side, low-density homes will be built. However, it is questionable whether these flats will be affordable for the majority of the Hong Kong public—Chan worries that they will be snapped up by mainland buyers instead of satisfying local housing needs.

Overestimating Population Growth

In order to justify the project, the government has, once again, cited population growth in its push to build more housing. A government press release states: “According to the latest population projections, there will be an increase of about 1.4 million people in the coming 30 years. There is still a strong demand for land for housing and economic development.” However, the Census and Statistics Department has a track record of overestimating Hong Kong’s population growth. In 2002, the department predicted that Hong Kong’s population would hit 7.53 million by 2011. But today, Hong Kong’s population is 7.14 million—way off government estimates. The department itself has also lowered its population estimates. In 2004, it predicted that Hong Kong’s population would surge to 8.72 million by mid-2031. But latest predictions stand at 8.47 million by mid-2041. So if the government’s predictions are not accurate and consistent, how can it justify such a large-scale development?

Non-indigenous Villagers Lose Out

It is estimated that more than 10,000 villagers will be affected by the plan, and that more than 10 villages will be demolished. Almost all of the villages that are under threat are largely inhabited by non-indigenous villagers. Non-indigenous villagers migrated to Hong Kong after World War II. They farmed in the New Territories and built their homes near their fields. However, they are not landowners because land in the New Territories belongs to indigenous villagers. So even though the non-indigenous villagers have lived in the area for decades, according to authorities, they have no rights to the land. “The most ridiculous thing is, even though non-indigenous villagers have been living there for 50 or 60 years, their houses are still classified as squatter huts, a temporary form of housing. The authorities don’t recognize their housing rights… Non-indigenous villagers are easy targets of bullying because their rights are not protected by law,” says Chan.

Although it is the non-indigenous villagers who will be most affected by the development plans, no one sought to gain their input. In fact, the first and second phases of the consultation, which were conducted in 2009 and 2010, did not actively engage them at all. “The villagers of Ping Che did not know about the plan before—they only learned of the plan when they were invited to a poon choi banquet hosted by gleeful indigenous villagers. Some of the elderly villagers attended, and they were only told at the feast that the celebration was because the government would claim the land for development. They only learned that they would have to move at the banquet,” Chan says.

Unlike urban renewal projects, the government has not conducted any studies to investigate how many villagers are going to be affected; neither has it come up with any compensation or resettlement plans for the affected villagers. The only thing the government has done is to carve out a 3.2 hectare parcel of land in Kwu Tung North, where a public housing project will accommodate the non-indigenous villagers.

Meanwhile, indigenous villagers are set to reap huge profits. All the land in the new Territories land is either owned by indigenous villagers or property developers. As the government has allocated $40 billion to buy land, it is certain that indigenous villagers will pocket part of the money. To add insult to injury, while their non-indigenous counterparts face the demolition of homes, the indigenous villages will be kept largely intact. Also, the government has saved land for the future expansion of indigenous villages. Within the three NDAs, around six hectares of land has been set aside for this purpose.

Loss of Farmland

Another inevitable consequence of developing the New Territories is the loss of farmland. A spokesperson of the Planning Department tells HK Magazine that 22 hectares of land under active cultivation will be affected by the development. That figure is significantly lower than estimates by environmental groups, which have come up with the figure of 98 hectares. “The government data refers to the land being farmed currently, but we focus on arable land. When we talk about arable land, it also includes abandoned land which has the potential to be rehabilitated. It is for sure that the government has not included such land in its figure of 22 hectares. From the perspective of agricultural development, abandoned land can be rehabilitated. So why don’t we protect and rehabilitate this land?” says Roy Ng, the Conservancy Association’s senior campaign officer.

Displaced Farmers

The government has pledged to maintain a total of 54 hectares as agricultural zones. However, 37 of these so-called “protected” hectares are found in Long Valley, a well-established and very active farming area. The government plans to relocate many of the farmers who have been displaced by the project to Long Valley, a move that’s bound to cause friction between agriculturalists. “If we move all the affected farmers to Long Valley, it means that some of the farmers [who are already] in Long Valley have to move away,” Ng says. “The agricultural practices of the farmers are very different. In Long Valley, most of the farmers are growing wetland crops. But most farmland in Ping Che and Ta Kwu Ling is not wetland… If we move all these farmers to wetland areas, it may have an adverse impact on the conservation of Long Valley.”





Word on the Street

Villagers are fighting for the right to remain in th eir homes, undisturbed by government intervention. Here’s what they have to say.

I have been living in Ping Che for almost five decades, and all my children were born there. Ping Che is a large village, where thousands of people reside. We only knew that our village would be demolished a few months ago, and we only caught wind of some rumors before. Ping Che is spacious, and we grow produce for ourselves. When we first came to Ping Che, it was a primitive place. We have been renting land from the villagers since then. And Ping Che has become a beautiful village due to our efforts. I don’t want to see our village be destroyed. My children have grown up, and they don’t want to move out either.
Amy, 50s, Ping Che resident



Our family has been living in Kwu Tong for three generations. Two years ago, we found out that our land had to be claimed back [by the government]. The development plan had been formulated for a long time, but the officials never told us about it. We were shocked to learn of the plan, and we think the government has kept the plan in the dark. There are a few hundred villagers, and we all know each other. Even though I am young, I love the rural life a lot. I lived in private buildings in Fanling for more than two years as it was closer to my school. The feeling was very different. In our village, everyone says hi to each other; we even know the name of each dog! [In Fanling], I didn’t know my neighbors, and I didn’t even notice when they moved away. I hope our village will not be demolished because we want to keep our lifestyle. We will continue to fight for our rights.
Hiu Ching, 18, Kwu Tung North resident



I have never joined any protest. This is my first time because the government wants to take away the land from our village. The officials never consulted us, and it seems that we have to comply with every order of the government. There are fruit trees in front of our house, and the trees are 20 to 30 years old. We get all kinds of fruits to eat. Lychee, longan, jackfruit, aloe and melons…you name it. It’s no different from an orchard. When we were kids, we didn’t need to close our doors because we would just go next door to play with other children. A lot of structures are very old, and they are our heritage. We have gotten used to the rural way of living, and it’s difficult for us to adapt to a city life. We don’t want any compensation. There are many elderly people in our village, and they have been living here for decades. For those skeptics who think that we are only demanding more compensation, try to think from our perspectives. We have been living here for decades, and our home will be lost!
Mr. Lee, 30, Kwu Tung North resident


Development By Numbers

An outline of the redevelopment plans by region.

1. Kwu Tong, Fanling North, Ping Che/Tai Koo Leng New Development Areas (NDAs)
Size: 533 hectares.
Progress: Stage 3 of public engagement.

2. Hung Sui Kiu NDA
No outline development plan has been released, but it will be turned into an NDA that caters a population of 160,000. The government will also save land for the development of “Six Industries”—testing and certification, medical services, innovation and technology, cultural and creative industries, environmental industries and education services.
Size: 790 hectares.
Progress: Stage 2 of public engagement to be commenced; in operation by 2024.

3. Lok Ma Chau Loop
Once the property of Shenzhen, the Loop was allocated to Hong Kong after realignment of the Shenzhen river in 1997. The area will be turned into a higher education zone.
Size: About 87 hectares.
Progress: Stage 2 of public engagement completed; in operation by 2020.

4. Liangtang/Heung Yuen Wai Boundary Control Point
Progress: construction will start in 2013; in operation by 2018.

5. Frontier Closed Area (FCA)
Established by the British for strategic reasons, the FCA will be downsized and land will be released for development. Due to the area’s history, it hasn’t been touched by any development.
Use: A country park will be designated near Robin’s Nest. Other areas are zoned as green belt and for agricultural uses. But a comprehensive development zone and residential areas are designated for Hung Lung Hang. Hoo Hok Wai, another ecologically sensitive area that occupies 240 hectares, is zoned under “other specific uses,” which also means that further development is possible.
Size: 2,400 hectares.
Progress: 740 hectares of FCA has already been opened up in the first phase.

6. Southern Yuen Long
The government is planning to build housing—both private and public—in the area.
Size: About 200 hectares.
Progress: The Development Bureau will conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), planning and engineering study at the same time. In operation by 2015.

7. Sha Lo Tung
It has been earmarked as one of the 12 sites of ecological importance. The site is an important habitat for butterflies and fireflies. Under the government’s Public-Private Partnership scheme, the developer wants to build a columbarium with 60,000 niches, while establishing an ecological reserve.
Size: The columbarium is set to be four hectares in size.
Progress: The EIA has already been completed, but the Advisory Council on the Environment halted the decision.

8. Nam Shen Wai
Another spot for the Public-Private Partnership scheme. The developer is planning to build 1,600 housing units, including 600 Home Ownership Scheme flats, in the southern part. It also wants to build elderly care homes to increase the social care elements. The Northern part of Nam Shen Wai and Lut Chau will be designated as a conservation area. Green groups oppose the plan because parts of the wetland will be lost.
Size: 121 hectares.
Progress: The EIA has been completed. The application will be submitted to the Town Planning Board in September.

9. Fung Lok Wai
The area is also classified as one of 12 areas with significant ecological value. Five percent of the land will accommodate luxury homes, while 95 percent of land will be turned into a conservation area. Fung Lok Wai is very close to Mai Po.
Size: 4.1 hectares (development area).
Progress: Awaiting a decision from the Town Planning Board.

--
請加入反對新界東北融合計劃專頁：
http://www.facebook.com/defendntnorth