evidoria

What works in Hong Kong

All catalogues · Hong Kong profile

18
evaluated practices
64/100
average quality score
12%
strong evidence, of 16 assessed

Quality scores are 0–100 rubric scores; “strong evidence” reflects study design; adoptions count documented replications elsewhere. Know more

Evidence snapshot for Hong Kong

Drawn from: "Smart Silver" Digital Inclusion Programme for Elders · Hong Kong's Innovation and Technology Fund for Elderly and Rehabilitation Care (Gerontechnology) · Digital Accessibility Recognition Scheme — Hong Kong's Certification Model for Accessible Websites and Apps · Hong Kong Stock Exchange's Single-Gender Board Ban (2022–2024) · GenA.I. Sandbox++ — Hong Kong's Four-Regulator Agentic-AI Testing Programme for Banks, Insurers and Asset Managers · 1823 — Hong Kong's AI-Assisted Citizen Contact Centre Now Resolving 90%+ of Chatbot Enquiries · Cyberport — Hong Kong's Government-Backed Digital Technology Flagship · University of Hong Kong — Redesigning Assessment Instead of Policing It in the GenAI Era

Generated from this place's cited practices only. Always check the linked sources.

Strengths & weaknesses vs peers

Strengths

Effectiveness +32 pts 100 here · 68 average

Evaluation evidence +31 pts 80 here · 49 average

Impact on gender equality +29 pts 100 here · 71 average

Curator validation +27 pts 100 here · 73 average

Evidence of learning impact +24 pts 50 here · 26 average

Evaluated outcomes +21 pts 100 here · 79 average

Transparency, ethics & data protection +20 pts 67 here · 47 average

Water & soil — retention, infiltration, erosion control +19 pts 67 here · 48 average

Governance, certification & transferability +14 pts 78 here · 64 average

Teacher capability & pedagogy +13 pts 50 here · 37 average

Achievement / evidence +12 pts 100 here · 88 average

Scalability & sustainability +11 pts 73 here · 62 average

Gender-mainstreaming embedding +11 pts 100 here · 89 average

Evidence of impact / measured public value +9 pts 67 here · 57 average

Weaknesses

Inclusiveness / equity -9 pts 33 here · 43 average

Carbon — sequestration / storage, evidenced -11 pts 17 here · 28 average

Innovation level -13 pts 49 here · 62 average

Multi-stakeholder collaboration -24 pts 50 here · 74 average

Biodiversity — conservation / improvement, evidenced -32 pts 17 here · 48 average

Efficiency -33 pts 0 here · 33 average

Score profile vs peers

Effectiveness
100 · 68
Evaluation evidence
80 · 49
Impact on gender equality
100 · 71
Curator validation
100 · 73
Evidence of learning impact
50 · 26
Evaluated outcomes
100 · 79
Transparency, ethics & data protection
67 · 47
Water & soil — retention, infiltration, erosion control
67 · 48
Governance, certification & transferability
78 · 64
Teacher capability & pedagogy
50 · 37
Achievement / evidence
100 · 88
Scalability & sustainability
73 · 62
Gender-mainstreaming embedding
100 · 89
Evidence of impact / measured public value
67 · 57
Transferability / replicability
67 · 60
Documented learning
80 · 74
Transparency, fairness & accountability
58 · 54
Demonstrated reach
80 · 76
Sustainability (ongoing)
79 · 78
Equity & inclusion
50 · 50
Fire resilience — risk reduction, evidenced
0 · 6
Inclusiveness / equity
33 · 43
Carbon — sequestration / storage, evidenced
17 · 28
Innovation level
49 · 62
Multi-stakeholder collaboration
50 · 74
Biodiversity — conservation / improvement, evidenced
17 · 48
Efficiency
0 · 33

Coloured bar: Hong Kong. Grey bar: peer average across the corpus. Both on a common 0–100 scale.

Points compare this place's average on each dimension with the average across all evaluated places, on a common 0–100 scale. Know more

Top good practices here

"Smart Silver" Digital Inclusion Programme for Elders · 92

Hong Kong's Innovation and Technology Fund for Elderly and Rehabilitation Care (Gerontechnology) · 88

Digital Accessibility Recognition Scheme — Hong Kong's Certification Model for Accessible Websites and Apps · 88

Hong Kong Stock Exchange's Single-Gender Board Ban (2022–2024) · 85

GenA.I. Sandbox++ — Hong Kong's Four-Regulator Agentic-AI Testing Programme for Banks, Insurers and Asset Managers · 80

1823 — Hong Kong's AI-Assisted Citizen Contact Centre Now Resolving 90%+ of Chatbot Enquiries · 80

Cyberport — Hong Kong's Government-Backed Digital Technology Flagship · 76

University of Hong Kong — Redesigning Assessment Instead of Policing It in the GenAI Era · 73

Each number is the practice's overall 0–100 quality score against its catalogue's rubric. Know more

Recommended to adopt or replicate

Transferable practices from elsewhere that address this place's gaps.

Ciudad Mujer — El Salvador's Integrated Women's Services Programme · fit 100/100

  • Rated highly transferable
  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions

Already adopted in 3 other places

SASA! Community Mobilisation Programme against Intimate Partner Violence — Uganda · fit 100/100

  • Rated highly transferable
  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions

Already adopted in 4 other places

Karya — Fair-Wage AI Data-Work Platform Bringing Digital Income to Rural India · fit 100/100

  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions

safe+natal — Comadrona-Designed Smartphone Checklist for Maternal Risk Screening in Rural Guatemala · fit 100/100

  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions

Digital Green — Video-Mediated Agricultural Extension · fit 100/100

  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions

Kartu Prakerja – National Digital Skills and Financial Inclusion Programme · fit 100/100

  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions

Rwanda's Land Tenure Regularization Programme — Titling Land in Women's Names · fit 90/100

  • Rated highly transferable
  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions

Sweden's Barnahus (Children's House) — Multidisciplinary One-Stop Centres for Child Victims of Sexual Abuse and Violence · fit 90/100

  • Rated highly transferable
  • Backed by strong evidence
  • Addresses this place's weak dimensions

Already adopted in 6 other places

Fit estimates how well a practice matches this place, 0 (poor) to 100 (excellent); the list is ordered to favour practices that address this place's gaps. Know more