According to a recent survey among Asian expatriates by ECA International, Hong Kong has dropped out of the list of the world's top 30 most-liveable cities. But Singapore remains at the top of the list. The report cited the poor air quality and the social unrest associated with the "Occupy Central" movement in Hong Kong as the main reasons for its fall in the rankings. Among Asian cities, the same survey ranked Hong Kong as No 6, after Singapore, Osaka, Nagoya, Tokyo and Yokohama.

What makes a city liveable? As a person who migrated from Hong Kong to Singapore some 30 years ago, perhaps I could offer a very personal comparison of the liveability of the two cities based on very personal terms, and not on statistics.

"Clothing, food, housing and transport" have, since time immemorial, been considered the basic essentials for human lives in Chinese philosophy. So let's see how Hong Kong and Singapore rate with respect to these four elements.

There is undoubtedly an abundance of clothing available in Hong Kong and Singapore. However, because Hong Kong does have four distinct seasons, whereas Singapore enjoys year round tropical weather, the wardrobe one has to maintain in Hong Kong must necessarily be more varied and larger to cope with the four seasons. Is that a plus point for Singapore? That depends on one's viewpoint. If one prioritizes convenience, then yes, it is an advantage for Singapore. However, if one wants variation and variety, or prefers to live in a place with variable seasons, then that would be a plus for Hong Kong. So Hong Kong and Singapore rank equally in this area.

We now come to food. I am sure to be on solid ground in saying that nobody starves in either Hong Kong, or Singapore. Both places have regulations governing food safety and both are reliant on imports for most of their food supplies. While there have been a number of food scares in Hong Kong involving chicken, eggs and milk, there have been none in Singapore. But if one examines the incidence of food poisoning in both territories, the rates are both similarly very low. So in terms of the safety of food supply they are again on an equal par. However, when it comes to quality, there is no doubt Cantonese food in Hong Kong is far superior to that of Singapore, and I am not merely talking of Cantonese haute cuisine. I love the little eateries dotted throughout Hong Kong and Kowloon, where a simple bowl of wonton noodle, or liver and kidney congee, can be something out of this world. One simply can't find such simple fare anywhere else in the world. But then, when it comes to the variety of different national cuisines, I think Singapore beats Hong Kong. For instance there's no comparable Indian cuisine in Hong Kong to that served in Singapore. And one can find an amazing array of different foods from the Middle East around Arab Street in Singapore. So on balance, I would again say the two territories are equal with regards to food.

But housing is where Singapore has the big advantage over Hong Kong. One reads of the horrific stories of families living in "apartments" of 500 sq feet or smaller in Hong Kong. Does that happen in Singapore? While I cannot say there is nothing of the sort, the fact that 80 percent of people in Singapore live in apartments, averaging 1,000 sq ft, built and sold by the Housing Development Board (HDB), is an achievement of which Hong Kong people can only dream.

For a time, there was a growth of what were called "shoe-box" apartments in Singapore, defined as apartments less than 500 sq feet. To counter Singapore's low birth rate, since 2012 the government has passed regulations to restrict the number of shoe-box apartments as they are not conducive to family growth. The HDB housing program provides void decks where children can play, and in each estate of a certain size, there is space for the provision of food courts, making it simple for residents of those estates to buy food. Both Hong Kong and Singapore are well known as expensive places to purchase apartments. But because of the HDB schemes, and the government allowing people to use their money in the Central Provident Fund to pay the mortgages for their apartments, home ownership is at a much higher level in Singapore than in Hong Kong. So as far as housing goes, I would say Singapore wins hands down over Hong Kong.

Next we examine transport. Trains and buses are equally cheap, safe and plentiful in Hong Kong and Singapore, and they are just as crowded. Taxis in both places are reasonably priced and just as difficult or easy to get, depending on the time of day. But Hong Kong has an advantage with its mini-buses. If one knows how to use them, they are probably the most convenient form of transport in the city. Singapore doesn't have them, and I would therefore say in terms of ease of transport, Hong Kong has the upper hand. It is also less expensive to own a car in Hong Kong than in Singapore, but Singapore suffers less traffic jams.

(HK Edition 03/10/2015 page11)