Spatial Planning for a Sustainable Singapore

SPATIAL PLANNING FOR A SUSTAINABLE SINGAPORE

Spatial Planning for a Sustainable Singapore Edited by

Tai-Chee Wong National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

Belinda Yuen School of Real Estate, National University of Singapore, Singapore

and Charles Goldblum Institut Français d’Urbanisme, Université de Paris VIII, Paris, France

In association with the Singapore Institute of Planners

Charles Goldblum Institut Français d’Urbanisme Paris, France

Tai-Chee Wong Nanyang Technological University Singapore Belinda Yuen National University of Singapore Singapore

ISBN 978-1-4020-6541-5

e-ISBN 978-1-4020-6542-2

Library of Congress Control Number: 2008920064 All Rights Reserved for Chapter 5. © 2008 Springer Science + Business Media B.V. No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher, with the exception of any material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Printed on acid-free paper springer.com

Contents

Preface. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

vii

Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

ix

Chapter 1

Sustainability Planning and Its Theory and Practice: An Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tai-Chee Wong and Charles Goldblum

1

Part I Global Development and Planning Chapter 2

Chapter 3

Chapter 4

Chapter 5

Planning the World Metropolis on an Island-City Scale: Urban Innovation as a Constraint and Tool for Global Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Charles Goldblum Sustainable City Centre Development: The Singapore City Centre in the Context of Sustainable Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ole Johan Dale Integrated Resort in the Central Business District of Singapore: The Land Use Planning and Sustainability Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tai-Chee Wong Singapore River: Six Strategies for Sustainability . . . . . . . . Chwee Lye Low

17

31

59

79

Part II Transport, Industrial, Housing and Nature Planning Chapter 6

Singapore’s Urban Transport: Sustainability by Design or Necessity? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Paul A. Barter

95

v

vi

Contents

Chapter 7

Chapter 8

Chapter 9

Achieving Sustainable Industrial Development Through a System of Strategic Planning and Implementation: The Singapore Model . . . . . . . . . . . . Kum Chun Seetoh and Amanda Hwee Fang Ong Public Housing in Singapore: A Sustainable Housing Form and Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tony Tan Keng Joo and Tai-Chee Wong

135

Vertical Living and the Garden City: The Sustainability of an Urban Figure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Xavier Guillot

151

Chapter 10

Nature and Sustainability of the Marine Environment . . . Loke Ming Chou

Chapter 11

Singapore’s Natural Environment, Past, Present and Future: A Construct of National Identity and Land Use Imperatives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Min Geh and Ilsa Sharp

Chapter 12

Index

113

169

183

Conclusion: Beyond Sustainable Development? . . . . . . . . . Belinda Yuen

205

......................................................

211

Preface

In the last four decades, Singapore’s urban development has gradually received an international reputation. From a city of just under two million people in 1960, we replaced squatters and slums with mostly high-rise, high-density public housing as well as industrial estates, commercial centres and parks and gardens. We demonstrated to our earlier well-meaning critics that a high-rise housing programme need not be automatically doomed to failure. Indeed Singapore now serves as an example of shaping successful residential communities to the massive population of Asia. Our city is now at nearly 4.5 million people. It is green and clean, with flowing traffic, functioning infrastructure and proper space allocated for every urban need. It is no longer as clinical as it was in the 1970s, as we can afford to go beyond the basic needs and have added finer and more colourful things to our cityscape. Yet, when people ask me for books to provide an overview of the experience of our urban transformation, there are sadly very few. Singaporeans are more workers than writers. Not enough people have recorded how we did it, or shared the experience with people in other countries, or even with our own younger urban planners and administrators who are less familiar with the historical perspective. This matter is becoming very pressing as most pioneers who went through the start up process of transformation have retired by now. Some are no longer with us and so their valuable visionary yet pragmatic experience is gone for good. As the years go by, I have increasingly realized that there is a wealth of wisdom and know-how amidst us yet to be unearthed. The publication of this broad-based book on our urbanization effort, therefore, is most timely. But we should think of it only as a beginning. If I appear to be speaking rather immodestly about our urbanization, there are good reasons. More and more people, from both developed and developing countries, come to find out about our experiences. Despite the fact Singapore is only a newly developed country, our planners and a whole host of related experts are sought out by the developing world. In fact, it is because we are newly developed, and we have done well, that our experience is most useful. We learned the theories from the west, we managed to adapt them to Asian conditions, and we have had the strong support of our political leaders, who generally stayed clear of professional matters and let us do the right things without undue interference. Singapore in the last 40 years thus functioned as an urban laboratory in its full scientific sense. I can vii

viii

Preface

think of few parallel examples like ours. Our experience is therefore relevant to the majority of cities in the newly developed and developing countries, particularly in populous but land-short Asia. This book offers a peek into these experiences. Thai-Ker LIU Director, RSP Architects, Planners & Engineers (Pte) Ltd, Singapore Former Chief Planner & CEO of Urban Redevelopment Authority, Singapore and former CEO of Housing and Development Board, Singapore

Contributors

Amanda ONG Hwee Fang is a Planner with JURONG International, a whollyowned industrial consultancy arm of JTC Corporation, Singapore. As a strategic planner, she undertakes consultancy work comprising strategic, economic and feasibility studies for overseas industrial parks and specialised economic zones, particularly in the MENA region. She was involved in the consultancy work for establishing the institutional and organizational set-ups for free zone authorities and park operations respectively. Amanda’s research interests focus on sustainable industrial development, sustainable economic development, green energy policy and Renewable Energy Sourced Electricity (RES-E). Amanda holds an Honours Degree in Real Estate and a Masters of Science in Environmental Management from the National University of Singapore. H.-F.A. ONG, Jurong Consultants Pte Ltd, 8 Jurong Town Hall Road, #08-00, The JTC Summit, 609434, Singapore, Republic of Singapore. E-mail: [email protected] Belinda YUEN is a Chartered Town Planner and Associate Professor at the National University of Singapore. She is currently President, Singapore Institute of Planners, and Vice-President, Commonwealth Association of Planners (Southeast Asia) (2006–2008). Belinda has widely published in the discipline of urban planning, most recently on planning vertical living. She is the editor/co-author of the following books that explicate Singapore’s urban planning: Development Control and Planning Law in Singapore, Planning Singapore: From Plan to Implementation, Urban Quality of Life, Sustainable Cities in the 21st Century, Enhancing Urban Management in East Asia. Belinda serves on various Singapore as well as international committees including on the Editorial Board of Asia Pacific Planning Review; Regional Development Studies; Cities; International Advisory Board, UN State of the World’s Cities Report 2008/09; Working Group 2 of the UN Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor. B. YUEN, School of Real Estate, National University of Singapore, 4 Architecture Drive, 117566, Singapore, Republic of Singapore. E-mail: [email protected]

ix

x

Contributors

Chwee Lye LOW is former Head of Urban Studies Unit, Urban Redevelopment Authority, Singapore. He is currently consultant to a private consulting firm in Singapore. C.-L. LOW, Formely Head of Urban Studies Unit, Urban Redevelopment Authority, Singapore. E-mail: [email protected] Charles GOLDBLUM is currently professor at the University of Paris – Institut Français d’Urbanisme (former director of this Urban Planning Institute) and senior researcher at the Laboratoire Théorie des Mutations Urbaines, French National Scientific Research Centre (CNRS). He is a specialist in the realm of urban planning, development and urban policy issues on Southeast Asia and has published several books and a large number of academic papers in these areas. He is presently involved in several research and academic cooperation projects (with RDP Lao, Indonesia and Thailand) as well as in expertise activities (recently in Cambodia). He has been Chairman of the Scientific Committee on urban development in developing countries, a broad-based research program launched in 2001 by the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Programme de Recherche Urbaine pour le Développement). C. GOLDBLUM, Institut Français d’Urbanisme, Université de Paris VIII, 4 rue Nobel, Cite Descartes, Champs-sur-Marne 77420 Marne-la-Vallée Cedex2, France. E-mail: [email protected] Kum Chun SEETOH is Vice President (planning) at Jurong Consultants Pte Ltd and is also a Fellow and Immediate Past President of the Singapore Institute of Planners. She has over 30 years of experience in the planning and designing of townships, industrial estates, science parks, business parks; Special Economic Zones and recreational facilities in Singapore, Middle East and the Asia Pacific region. She is one of the key team members of the Singapore Business Parks Study Group involved in designing over 50 planning projects at home and abroad. She has worked on various strategic planning projects which include reviewing the Singapore Concept Plan (1978–1991); the Abu Dhabi Industrial strategic study (2004–2005); the blueprint for the South Africa IDZ project in 2003. Mrs Seetoh has delivered several papers at international conferences, and is author of papers: “Planning and Design of Industrial Estates for Regional Development in Singapore” for the UNCRD (1993); “Singapore Science Park MasterPlan Design” (1984); and “The Business Park Concept” (1997). In May 2006, she was invited by the Bombay Chamber of Commerce and Industry to speak on `City Planning and Development’ at the International Conference at Bombay. K.C. SEETOH, Jurong Consultants Pte Ltd, 8 Jurong Town Hall Road #08-00 The JTC Summit, 609434, Singapore, Republic of Singapore. E-mail: [email protected] Ilsa SHARP, an Australian freelance writer, is a former Council member of the Nature Societies of Malaysia/Singapore. A Chinese Studies graduate of Leeds University, England, she has worked in Singapore/Southeast Asia since 1968 and is the author of some 20 titles on the region’s natural history and historical heritage.

Contributors

xi

From 1998 to 2000, she worked as Marketing and Public Relations Manager for Greening Australia (Western Australia), a national NGO dedicated to native vegetation conservation. I. SHARP, PO Box 170, Bentley, Western Australia, 6982, Bentley, Australia. E-mail: [email protected] Loke-Ming CHOU is Professor in the Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore. His research interests include coral reef ecology and restoration, and integrated coastal management. He has studied coral reefs in Okinawa and the ASEAN region and been a member of the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (International Coral reef Initiative) since its formation. He has provided consultancy services in the field of marine environment management to UNEP, FAO, World Bank, ICLARM (now WorldFish Center) and many national agencies. He has 70 publications in international journals and over 40 book chapters focusing on the marine environment. L.-M. CHOU, Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore, 14 Science Drive 4, 117543, Singapore, Republic of Singapore. E-mail: [email protected] Min GEH is a Singaporean eye surgeon and also President of the Nature Society (Singapore); she is a Board member of the Asia Pacific Council of The Nature Conservancy (USA) and a director of the Singapore Environment Council. She sat on the Focus Group on Land Use for the Singapore Government’s Concept Plan/Green Plan 2012 and co-chaired the Focus Group on Air and Climate Change. M. GEH, Mount Elizabeth Hospital, 3 Mount Elizabeth, #17-11, 228510, Singapore, Republic of Singapore. E-mail: [email protected] Ole Johan DALE holds professional qualifications in both architecture and urban/ regional planning from the United Kingdom. His PhD is from the National University of Singapore. He has worked for a number of years in Singapore where he held senior positions with Urban Redevelopment Authority and private consultancy firms as well as lecturing part-time at National University of Singapore. His research interests focus on urban planning in Asia with special interests in sustainable development. He is the author of Urban Planning in Singapore: The Transformation of a City (Oxford University Press, 1999) as well as several journal articles. He is currently practicing as planning consultant based in Norway. O.J. DALE, Seberg 7, 6863, Leikanger, Norway. E-mail: [email protected] Paul A. BARTER is an Assistant Professor in the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy at the National University of Singapore where he teaches on infrastructure policy, urban policy and transport policy. His published research has focused on various dimensions of the interactions between urban transport policy and urban policy more widely. Geographically the work has focused on eastern Asia with a

xii

Contributors

particular focus on Malaysia and Singapore (including their cross-border transport). His recent and current research focuses on innovation in transport demand management and the contested fundamental priorities of urban transport policy. P.A. BARTER, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore, 469C Bukit Timah Road, 259772, Singapore, Republic of Singapore. E-mail: [email protected] Tai-Chee WONG is Associate Professor at Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. He teaches urban studies and other human geography modules. He is currently Council Member of Singapore Institute of Planners. He received his BA and MA in Urban Planning from University of Paris and a PhD from Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University, Canberra. His main research interests are in urban and regional issues on which he has published books and many international journal articles. His three latest books are Four Decades of Transformation: Land Use in Singapore 1960-2000 (Eastern University Press, Singapore); A Roof over Every Head: Singapore’s Housing Policies between State Monopoly and Privatisation (Sampark 2005), and edited volume with Brian J. Shaw & Goh Kim Chuan, Challenging Sustainability: Urban Development and Change in Southeast Asia (Marshall Cavendish 2006). T.-C. WONG, National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, 1 Nanyang Walk, 637616, Singapore, Republic of Singapore. E-mail: [email protected] Tony TAN Keng Joo graduated in 1967 with a Diploma in Architecture from the Singapore Polytechnic. He joined Housing and Development Board (HDB) in 1968 and became its Chief Architect in 1982 till June 2002. From July 2003 onwards, he was appointed Senior Advisor of Surbana International Consultants Pte Ltd., a subsidiary company of HDB. In 1998, he became a fellow of Singapore Institute of Architects. He contributed a chapter on ‘Physical Planning and Design in Housing a Nation, 25 Years of Public Housing in Singapore’, and delivered many papers in international conferences. The latest was at Asia Pacific Congress IFPRA held during 28 August–3 September 2005. K.J.T. TAN , Surbana Intl Consultants Pte Ltd, 168 Jalan Bukit Merah #01-01 Surbana One, 150168, Singapore, Republic of Singapore. E-mail: [email protected] Xavier GUILLOT teaches at the National School of Architecture of Saint Etienne (France) and is a research associate at the French Institute of Urban and Regional Planning (University of Paris VIII). He received his DPLG Degree in Architecture from the School of Architecture of Paris La Villette in Paris and his PhD in Urban Planning from the University of Paris VIII. His main research interests are in urbanization, the study of globalization processes and cultural changes in relation to local identities and heritage. He has published academic articles, and has jointly

Contributors

xiii

published a book with Wong Tai Chee, A Roof Over Every Head. Singapore’s Housing Policy between State Monopoly and Privatisation (Sampark, IRASEC Studies on South-East Asia, 2005). X. GUILLOT, Ecole d’architecture de Saint-Etienne, 7, rue Etienne Dolet, BP 94, 42003 Cedex 1, Saint-Etienne, France. E-mail: [email protected]

Chapter 1

Sustainability Planning and Its Theory and Practice: An Introduction Tai-Chee Wong1 and Charles Goldblum2

The more specific characteristics that make sustainability planning different from business-as-usual in the profession include a long-term approach to decision-making, a holistic outlook integrating various disciplines, interests, and analytic approaches, a questioning of traditional models of growth and acceptance that limits to these exist, a new appreciation of the importance of place, and proactive involvement in healing societies and ecosystems. (Wheeler 2004: 34)

1.1 Background of Urban Planning in Global Cities To begin with, the 1987 Brundtland Commission Report’s statement that “sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of the future generations to meet their own needs” (WCED 1987) may arouse little passion but it is necessary for resuscitating the origins of associating urban planning with modern values of sustainability. For over three decades, planning for sustainable urban development has been an attempt to monitor runaway and seemingly uncontrollable rates of urban expansion with particular relevance to developing countries. Not only that, but planning for the upper circuit global cities in the developed world has turned out to be equally critical as globalization and city competition intensify. What has characterized city competition is that it requires entrepreneurship and economic growth to support job creation, professional and skills training as well as research and development to enable further reinvestment. Accompanying growth are nevertheless the reward and outcome of tangible material incentives and motivation leading to rising automobile use, consumerism and waste, environmental damage, and greater commuting distances. Cities are increasingly

1 National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, 1 Nanyang Walk, 637616, Singapore, Republic of Singapore, e-mail: [email protected] 2 Institut Français d’Urbanisme, Université de Paris VIII, 4 rue Nobel, 77420, Champs-sur-Marne, Marne-la-Vallée, France

T.-C. Wong et al. (eds.), Spatial Planning for a Sustainable Singapore, 1–13 © Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2008

2

T.-C. Wong and C. Goldblum

designed primarily for car users, much less for pedestrians or cyclists. Globalization has also resulted in social polarization, exasperating the drive towards equity and wealth redistribution. Social sustainability is being challenged (see Sassen 2001; Hugon 2003; Wong and Yap 2004). Economic restructuring in the globalization era has strengthened links and interaction between major cities situated at the top of the transcontinental urban system organized in a hierarchical manner. The bulk of the surplus would be gained by global cities in proportion to their scaling effects of agglomerations and productivity levels, specified sometimes as “surproductivity”. Because of the multiplier effects of their high-value activities, global cities are also described as the “growth machines” (Logan and Molotch 2002). Financial liberalization and rising connectivity of the information and goods flow has nullified the physically rigid meaning of time and space (Bonnet 2000; Hugon 2003; Newman and Thornley 2002). Apart from highly localized issues, common problems, especially the global environmental ones which are considered counterproductive, are transferable across national boundaries. Indeed, the concern with sustainable urban development arises and takes place in a world of economic globalization and of technological revolution, a world where the financial market’s selective expansion and innovation in the realm of communications systems has benefited strategic urban locations specifically catalytic to economic growth. Cities having built up a silent but revolutionary capacity in mastering flows (goods, people and information), in terms of paths and speed could affect their position and functions, their scale and ability in coping with these issues. If the rise of ecological ideas and consciousness in the early 1970s has been associated with “zero economic growth” (a concept promoted by the Club of Rome during the first oil crisis) and with the ideals of small/local dimensions (Schumacher 1973), the relationship between global dynamics and local development as expressed by the notion of “glocalism” are associated with mega-urban dimensions. The processes leading to this new representation of urban growth, the way to master its effects at urban, territorial and world scales, and to match it with the ideal of “sustainable development” naturally question the significance and the very nature of urban planning. The objective of spatial planning for sustainability is primarily to counter the adverse effects of urban developments by means of systematic and organized land use planning activities. Sustainability planning has a holistic outlook which calls for an integration of the goals of the three Es (Economic, Environmental and Equity concerns) into an organized coherent system for a long-term objective formulation and plan implementation. No country can or should conduct sustainability planning in isolation, as the “stretching and deepening of global-scale processes” has exerted intricate interaction and reaction in one way or another on local scales (see Olds 2001: 19). The extent of local impact depends on the level of integration with the advanced economies, from supply and demand, trends and cycles in the international marketplace, as far as sales of land parcels in the city centres. Such a commodity chain is functionally organized on the premises of the international division of labour, the technological ladder position and the pricing mechanism.

1 Sustainability Planning and Its Theory and Practice: An Introduction

3

The potential for profitability is highly dependent on the timing and specific location of the commodity at stake. Olds (2001: 20–32) has identified five dimensions in which globalization could change urban space: (a) greater inflow of international financial capital and credit into the local/regional marketplace – their significance of growth in volume, complexity and transactions; (b) globalization of property markets; (c) role and intensity of transnational corporations’ activities; d) extent of the stretching of world social networks, social relations (impact of lifestyle by distant sources), and consumption; and (e) mega-projects which create new forms of urbanity. To be effective in sustainability planning, therefore, concerted efforts need to be derived from three levels: (a) both the public and private sectors at the national level; (b) cross-country cooperation at the regional level; and (c) intercontinental cooperation at the world community level. Within cities, movements such as “livable communities”, “landscape ecology” and “participatory planning” have been placed on the planning agenda aimed respectively at enhancing neighbourhood livability, preserving and restoring the natural landscape as well as sharing power between the top municipal officials and ordinary citizens in the planning and decision-making processes (Wheeler 2004: 16). Apparently, they all constitute desirable elements to improve quality of life and to tackle public health problems and deteriorating physical conditions that all citizens are concerned with.

1.2

The New Trends in Asia

As a matter of fact, urban territories are not to be considered as passive receivers of flows generated or accelerated by the transactional revolution (McGee 1998; Castells 1996; Ascher 1995). They react, adapt to this trend or even anticipate it. But haphazard growth and fierce world competition together with social and geopolitical insecurity tend to place mega-urban development and urban planning in a new and, in some instances, contradictory situation with regard to environmental issues. In Asia, the new trends affecting city status and the logics of urban development might be observed as in other parts of the world. Asia’s major urban regions have experienced, for example, urban peripheral expansion in the form of the “extended metropolis” (Ginsburg et al. 1991). Beyond the exclusive case of “global cities” like Tokyo, New York and London (Sassen 1991), we have witnessed the opening of selective places where there is a new generation of urban projects strongly related to new information and communication technologies (namely technopoles and high-tech corridors following more or less the NorthAmerican Silicon Valley pattern) to international functions and events (World Exhibitions, World Cups, Olympic Games). Developing new urban districts to incorporate a new stadium, a new university and research laboratory or other international tertiary functions is definitely not an innovation in itself; but these

4

T.-C. Wong and C. Goldblum

developments are now part of a typology of projects characterized by their large scale and their international dimension (in terms of investment resources, of urban actors, as well as of urban functions). New urban projects are also defined as a new way of making or modernizing cities which appears as a result of mega-projects led by investment opportunities more than as a product of comprehensive, problem-solving planning. Because of their strategic position in the world economy and their situation on the major international trade routes, also under the combined effects of the accelerated urbanization of their populations and of the accelerated transformation of their territories, South and East Asian countries are particularly responsive to these trends, which might be illustrated by some projects often presented as showcases (Antier 2006). Under the category of technological parks, we may mention the Hyderabad Knowledge Park, the Mumbai-Pune Knowledge Corridor, the Electronic City of Bangalore. Projects of this kind are often furnished with international airport and new town projects, such as Cyberjaya and the Multimedia Supercorridor in Kuala Lumpur Metropolitan Area or the Media Valley High-Tech Development Corridor connected with the Incheon International Airport in the Seoul Metropolitan Region. Mega-projects are also strongly associated with international events like the Olympic Games (Seoul 1998; Beijing 2008) or World Exhibitions (Lisbon 1998; Nagoya-Aichi 2005; Shanghai 2010). These projects have a direct or indirect effect on the whole urban structure, the redefining of the central functions, the shape and dimension of the core area (and often its exclusiveness in terms of land prices and eviction of the poor urban dwellers, and the rejection of their ‘informal’ activities and settlements). Furthermore, the extension and structure of the peripheral zone through an expressway and mass transportation have brought about mixed land use to the rural areas by creating new industrial zones with the support of foreign direct investment, often in association with public or private new town development (like Muang Thong Thani in the Bangkok Extended Metropolitan Region or the new town development in the Jakarta Metropolitan Region – Jabotabek). The “territorial revolution” introduced in the rural areas by these large scale developments also signifies a large scale environmental revolution. The mixed land use, if examined from a functional and social point of view, questions the compatibility of agricultural and industrial or even tourist land uses, the economic conditions of access to water, sanitation, transportation, employment, and even the participation of the local inhabitants in the decision-making process that had made these new developments happen. In other words, the holistic concept of “sustainable development” apparently warrants a strong claim to address the complexity of these issues. It should be noticed that these critical dimensions are partly or progressively integrated within the programme of urban projects, at least as a means of access to international loans, or to gain a positive image in the international city competition for foreign investment or tourist attraction. The object could be attributable to an extended awareness of the magnitude of the environmental challenge which the public authorities or developers have opted not to deny. Since the Rio de Janeiro Earth Summit of June 1992, many cities have adopted the principles of Agenda 21

1 Sustainability Planning and Its Theory and Practice: An Introduction

5

and, at least, implement green plans and create new urban forests and parks, like Beijing in the perspective of the 2008 Olympic Games, Bangalore in relation to its high tech corridor mega-project, Shanghai Century Park in relation to the development of Pudong. In this respect Singapore with its “park connector” system as an innovative urban development project is often referred to as a “model city”, a key for exporting its expertise in the realm of urban planning. But when it comes to the goals of sustainable urban development, how far can the remarkable experience of Singapore be separated from the specificities of the city-state? The dimension of Singapore’s territory questions its relevance to approaching the sustainable urban development issues. Also, the specificity of its urban planning system, the new generation of projects like high-tech corridors, regional urban centres, or the Punggol 21 waterfront new town – and most recently the multi-billion integrated resorts approved for Marina Bay and Sentosa Island which have been well integrated within the comprehensive urban planning system and guided by its Concept Plan – seldom exist in other Asian megacities. The case of Singapore appears to be an important prototype for reflection on the question of sustainable urban development and its specific conditions, practices and requirements in the context of Asian world city developments.

1.3

Sustainability Planning in Practice: Singapore in Search of Status as a Global City

Globalization has indeed a deep-rooted influence and implications for land use planning and related professional practice worldwide. While the globalization processes have generated a predominant proportion of revenues for the winners, a substantial part of the revenues are however used to counteract the adverse effects of globalization such as environmental pollution, heritage loss, widening income gaps or polarization, deskilling of certain categories of the workforce. This being necessary as the winners need to share power with the losers in order to sustain their profitable undertakings, and in doing so create new sources of revenue. Waste, for instance, can effectively be treated as a resource for renewed consumption. The practice of sustainability planning in Singapore is most significantly reflected by its economic-centred national planning programme, which at the same time is supported by other relevant measures of sustainability. The economic core is a policy presumption that economic growth is the key to the creation of wealth and resources to support other pursuits in the context of a city-state restricted by land and natural resources that survives in prosperity but is always fragile – a notion that commands a popular acceptability among the population. Growth produces environmental damage. But without remedial resources to prevent further damages and in order to safeguard long-term health and environmental integrity, sustainable environmental development would be hardly tenable. Figure 1.1 shows the Singapore model of sustainability planning. It portrays the interconnectivity and

6

T.-C. Wong and C. Goldblum Multi-ethnic tolerance

Birth incentive, skilled-led immigration law

Cultural Sustainability

Universal public housing & law enforcement

Social Sustainability

Demographic Sustainability Economic Sustainability

Environmental Sustainability

Educational Sustainability Universal education, skill training

Political Sustainability

National Green Plan, land transport policy

One-party dominance & efficiency

Fig. 1.1

The Singapore model of sustainability planning

integration of social, cultural, demographic, educational, political and environmental measures, with the core component being economic sustainability. Each of these measures is again backed by effective and pragmatic plans aimed at achieving sustainable results. For example, the National Green Plan which traces its origins in the “garden city” tree planting campaign of the early 1960s provides a comprehensive undertaking and commitment to the prospect of providing Singapore with a healthy environment, in eight ways: (a) averting a wasteland by optimizing the use of its limited land resources; (b) living in harmony with nature by permanently conserving some of its natural heritage and thus biodiversity; (c) ensuring clean air through rigorous enforcement of the law against polluters; (d) keeping the water flowing to enhance supply reliability, operational efficiency and recycling; (e) improving public health by a rapid response to disease outbreaks; (f) forging a strategic partnership to build up an environmentally aware citizenship; (g) enhancing external collaboration for tackling transboundary environmental problems; and (h) innovating sustainability by adapting world standard practices in sustaining environmentally friendly development (Ministry of the Environment 2002). Supplementary to the National Green Plan is the painstaking land transport policy of mitigating pollution and energy consumption. Tough measures were introduced to control car ownership in 1990, whilst the road network was expanded to cater for changing travel needs. Using the Vehicle Quota System (VQS), the car

1 Sustainability Planning and Its Theory and Practice: An Introduction

7

population was pegged to a maximum of three percent annual growth where potential buyers have to bid for a Certificate of Entitlement (COE) before car registration. Starting in 1998, the Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) System was used to monitor traffic flow and congestion. ERP gantry points that charge vehicle users during operating hours have been installed in many parts of the island for such purposes. In a sustainable way, the notions of integrated land use planning (to reduce the need for travel), promotion of public transport (to make it attractive and comfortable for commuters), and finally, the “users pay” principle is deployed as usage management measures to ensure a more optimal use of road space (LTA 2007). Guided by economic growth as the national planning focus, land use planning practices are primarily led by the Concept Plan.

1.4

The Concept Plan and Sustainability Planning

The Singapore Concept Plan was first drafted in 1970 with the assistance of a United Nations expert team to guide the country’s long-term development. It is a land use planning blueprint designated by a specialized role for meeting the national goal of modernization and to raise Singapore’s economic standing underlain in respect of industrialization, public housing, infrastructure and building a modern central financial district. In responding to the set targets assigned, planning practitioners have to conceive strategic and concrete measures in order to realize them and to bring their actions to a fruitful end wherever possible. These measures are constantly adjusted subject to the impacts and processes of internal and external movements, notably the globalization factor. Ideas and theories have often been adapted to practices that are suited to local requirements. The Singapore Concept Plan has a longstanding reputation for being continuous, and its consistency has been rendered possible by the same government being in charge over the last four decades. Established in 1971 on the basis of an export and multinational-led land use strategy, a full urbanization and infrastructural provision, supported by a “garden city” notion had been conceived to lift Singapore from a small to a large regional centre. Twenty years after, the Concept Plan was revised significantly in 1991 to reflect the newly identified goal of a dynamic global city that, in the early 2000s, promised to build a great city in which to live, work and play (Ministry of Trade and Industry 2003). In terms of planning approach, practicing planners in Singapore could well have been consciously influenced by the prevailing thinking of different periods, such as the comprehensive and rational planning of the 1950s and 1960s, largely of positivist origins. From the 1970s onwards, more attention has been paid to advocacy and community-based planning in order to seek for more public participation; Singapore planners in public authorities have been comparatively much less “critical” and complex than the British planners as Watson claimed the latter were (Watson 2002). Singapore public authority planners have been more effective in response to calls of national ambitions and “instrumental in action and as implementers to particularly

8

T.-C. Wong and C. Goldblum

set ends”. As a whole, notably in the post-1990s, planners have been involved in planning processes which are more an integrated and globally responsive approach in line with the ambition of the city-state in transforming itself into an influential global city. Accordingly, missionary statements had varied over time as they complied with the specific needs of each particular period. In 1991, for example, Singapore’s national planning authority, the Urban Redevelopment Authority’s mission was “to plan, facilitate and regulate the physical development of Singapore into a Tropical City of Excellence”. This changed to building “towards a thriving world-class city in the 21st century” in 2001, and in 2006 “to make Singapore a great city to live, work and play in” (URA 1995, 2001, 2007). In interpreting Flyvbjerg’s work Rationality and Power (1998), it may be understood that the link between the planner’s rationality and state power here is weaker in two-way communications but stronger and effective in implementation and adaptive modification of instructed plans by following up with changes in ideas or local/regional/global circumstances. Guided by American-led pragmatism and communicative rationality, communicative planning practitioners construct free spaces with competence and apply principles of logic, scientific and empirical knowledge to guide their actions (see Fainstein 2003: 175). The present trend among practitioners, in keeping with the purity of their profession, primarily avoids a close examination of the relationship between planning, politics and urban development. A common consensus, which appears popular, has been reached on how to pave the path of growth to build up a world-class global city. The focus of the most recent planning practice is revealed in the Concept Plan 2001 which has mapped out a vision over the next 40–50 years, based on a target population of 5.5 million. Land scarcity has remained the core planning element as it is expected that land demand will continue to rise following economic growth, which requires a larger population to support it. A greater variety of house types will continue to provide greater choice and also green and recreational spaces are made more accessible to the population. Flexibility and responsiveness are highlighted in support of businesses, especially those high-value and knowledge-driven industries able to help build Singapore into an international business hub (URA 2007).

1.5

The Chapters

This book is a collection of essays on a selected number of land use planning issues in Singapore. Of the two parts planned for the volume, Part 1 examines the relationship between the global development trend and the ways in which planning is organized and implemented in the context of a rapidly changing global landscape. In Chapter 2, Charles Goldblum focuses on the extent to which Singapore’s urban planning and approach has been impacted by world metropolitan development trends. Over the last four decades, the responsiveness of Singapore’s ruling government has been well reflected in its sectoral policies and strategic (social, economic, institutional, etc.) changes. The chapter aims to assess Singapore’s performance in

1 Sustainability Planning and Its Theory and Practice: An Introduction

9

its urban planning approach, ranging from the first Ring Concept Plan focusing on new town development in the 1970s to the current planning concepts of regions and specialized corridors. Urban planning has indeed been deployed as a tool for adaptation to the prerequisites of the international economy or for preventing adverse environmental and social effects resulting from this adaptation, and as a means of permanent strategic innovation (from “global city” strategy to the “re-Asianization” process). Changes in planning and orientations such as the heritage conservation approach in urban renewal or town councils in new town management are revisited and analysed. The ways where planned urbanization is being used as a key to sustainably maintain Singapore’s competitive advantages are equally highlighted. In following up Goldblum’s broad framework, Ole J. Dale in Chapter 3 presents a more detailed account of Singapore’s physical and socio-economic change in the city centre, from slums to modernity: what has taken place in the city centre is perceived to be most decisive in influencing its future path. It is a place that attracts tourist flow, a place built up with tall office blocks, retail outlets, convention and exhibition centres as well as being the cosmopolitan hub of the region. It is also a place that island-wide traffic converges on to witness commuting movements of a large number of white collar workers. Its importance has required sustainability planning to keep it up as a clean, green, efficient, pleasant and healthy environment. As a regional city and a global city, the city centre is symbolic of enhanced and global competitiveness, a talent hub and a centre for innovation and enterprise. Also pertinent is the city-state’s waterfront which acts as a magnet to future international design competition as a theme park. Its magnitude and scale capture international attention as a test of new elements of sustainability planning. The challenges are about environmental quality, reconciling environmental and economic needs and dealing with rising expectations. Singapore city centre stands as an exemplary vibrant core where it also manifests itself as a classic case of testing a good sustainable city environment. Tai-Chee Wong, in Chapter 4, follows up with a more substantive investigation of the current core activity in the Centre Area – the integrated resort at the Marina Bay. More specifically, his focus falls upon the newly emerged urban form being created downtown by global market forces to supplement financial and specialized services by high-value leisure businesses, seen as a rising pattern of Singapore’s post-modernist production system in the strategic and prime area. Hence, the chapter examines the changing and expanding functions of the Central Business District (CBD), and the circumstances in which this pattern has evolved and the land use planning implications. Arguably, it is interpreted as a continued effort of the citystate to pursue sustainable economic growth that requires the new input of knowledge-intensive and higher-end leisure industries. The sustainable economic development issue is justifiably weighed against the social issue, the casino. Chapter 5 by Chwee Lye Low deals with another Central Area issue focused on the revitalization process of the Singapore River – the lifeline of early migrants and local-cum-international trade. Lessons of sustainable development in this water margin and seafront figure most characteristically in tandem with its river cleaning

10

T.-C. Wong and C. Goldblum

programme in the 1970s. The successful clean-up has not only sustained fish life but has blended the reconfigured water landscape to support in subsequent decades the renewed lively night life along the river and beyond. It is a case in point that sustainable waterfront development practices carry a significance meaning in transforming as well as influencing the future of unique urban places with waterbodies. Part 2 examines sectoral sustainable planning issues in turn, beginning in Chapter 6 with Paul Barter’s study of Singapore’s urban transport policies which have often been held up by observers as model of “sustainable transport”. The chapter briefly interprets the meaning of sustainable development in relation to the arena of urban transport. It then applies the conclusions to a brief review of the claim that Singapore is an exemplar of sustainable transport. However, of most interest here are the rationales that have justified Singapore’s approach. Several pivotal policy choices were taken in the 1970s, before the idea of sustainable development was prominent. It is observed that locally focused, mainly non-environmental imperatives dominated Singapore’s motivations. The study also considers if there are underlying connections between the idea of sustainable development and the particular imperatives that prompted Singapore’s policies. The answers provide insights that may have wider relevance. Sustainable industrial development and planning is addressed in Chapter 7, where Kum-Chun Seetoh and Amanda Ong discuss the evolution and processes of the industrial policy from the 1960s to the present. They illustrate how Singapore began with the low-cost and labour-intensive industrialization programme which systematically transformed itself to capital-intensive and high-tech and high-value added over four decades. Industrial growth and the expanded market share have enabled JTC Corporation to pay greater attention towards environmentally friendly measures in order to safeguard the living environment whilst intensification of the industrial land has become inevitable. The study also highlights the important role of the industry as a key economic contributor in providing details of a multipronged approach towards achieving sustainable environmental and social development. Chapter 8 by Tony Tan and Tai-Chee Wong looks at the public housing of Singapore in terms of its longstanding and monumental existence as a sustained socio-political product serving the bulk of the population. Its form is characterized by high-rise and high-density buildings ornamented with ‘garden city’ greenery, and is complemented by central place services and infrastructure which have been in existence for over forty years. Yet, given its general popularity justified by the unanimous contention of land scarcity and ample potential in creating vertical living space, it is anticipated that this adapted Corbusian style and form will not merely continue but go higher to accommodate a larger population. Three key dimensions of analysis about sustainability are investigated by the authors: (a) social sustainability is imprinted by general affordability institutionalized by the self-financing central provident fund mechanism. This has been carved out in the political and welfare governance of the state; (b) public housing is integral to the economic sustainability because it is closely associated with Singapore’s growth-driven industrialization and

1 Sustainability Planning and Its Theory and Practice: An Introduction

11

urbanization processes; and (c) environmental sustainability is useful in countering urban sprawl and thus promoting energy saving through a more compact land use. Full state sponsorship and dedication have furnished a whole spectrum of technical expertise required for the planning, design, management and maintenance, laying the foundation for a sustained functioning of the public housing system in Singapore. In “Vertical Living and the Garden City: The Sustainability of an Urban Figure” (Chapter 9), Xavier Guillot’s interest lies with the sustainability of “Ring City” and “Garden City” to stay in people’s minds as a planning concept. In his exploration of this enquiry, he links it with the sustainability of existing urbanization processes and settlement patterns as they have developed in Singapore. By consensus, lowdensity residential living and high dependence on the automobile for commuting or urban sprawl beyond the city fringe driven by market demand does not fit in the sustainability norm. Constructing an urban figure sustainably involves equally sustainable planning of a cultural and political approach that deals meaningfully with the physical evolution of a place. A unique place is established over time on the basis of its identity, character and adaptability that are self-supporting in favour of a sustainable development. In Chapter 10, Loke Ming Chou’s study moves on to the marine environmental protection in Singapore – a small island state highly reliant on the port economy and its further expansion to support sustained economic growth. Four decades of coastal development and land reclamation have transformed the coastline and marine habitat to the extent of no return if we were to trace back to the earlier dynamic levels of ecosystem and rich natural heritage. Heavy losses in marine habitat, especially coral reefs, mangroves are seen to be a necessary evil given the little choice available for territorial and trade expansion. From the mid-1990s, greater care is given to environmental impact assessment, and the approach has also changed from a “close-door” investigation to a more transparent review, sharing public feedback to serve the end of sustainability. Efforts in favour of habitat restoration from nature activists and public authorities have helped to build up stronger biotic communities and to support a more balanced marine biodiversity. Since the marine habitat losses are never economically quantifiable, the future challenge is centred on the public’s appreciation of the natural environment and habitats, hence making them part of the quality of life that they value, and to which the government sees the need to accommodate. Another study on natural environment is presented by Min Geh and Ilsa Sharp in Chapter 11 from the perspectives of national identity and land use. For them, sustainability and preserving natural environment is tantamount to safeguarding Singapore’s identity and its “indigenous tropicality,” a uniqueness that needs to be differentiated from the parkland image of colonial and Western origins. As such, the local non-governmental organizations have a role to contribute. The identity with nature conservation has been established through the proactive involvement of NGOs, such as the Singapore Nature Society, academics and nature lovers and those conscious of or having a belief in conservationist movements as a means to arouse greater government commitment to preserve nature sites such as Chek Jawa

12

T.-C. Wong and C. Goldblum

(a shallow coastal marine habitat) and Sungai Buloh (a swamp). Their sense of achievement has often mingled with disappointment, yet hope has kept them going. Today, public–private collaboration in the dialogue for nature sustainability is increasingly evaluated as a norm; and joint public–private management of visitors to Chek Jawa has already become a reality. Negotiations and compromise between development and preservation go on. Belinda Yuen, in her concluding remarks, briefly reviews recent developments about cities, physical environments and worldwide concerns in preserving and maintaining urban livability in the face of adverse impacts. She goes even beyond the urban aspect of sustainability by warning of climate change and global warming – an earth and holistic issue which encompasses cities as centres of consumerism, an issue that makes an importunate challenge to sustainable development.

References Antier G (2006) Les stratégies des grandes métropoles: Enjeux, pouvoirs et aménagement. Armand Colin, Paris Ascher F (1995) Métapolis ou l’avenir des villes. Odile Jacob, Paris Bonnet J (2000) Mondialisation, Métropolisation: L’effet de la taille sur les activités des grandes villes du monde. In: Dorier-Apprill E (ed). Les très grandes villes dans le monde. Editions du Temps, Paris, pp 49–75 Castells M (1996) The rise of the network society. Blackwell, Oxford Fainstein SS (2003) New directions in planning theory. In: Campbell S, Fainstein SS (eds) (2nd ed) Readings in planning theory. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 173–195 Flyvbjerg B (1998) Rationality and power: Democracy and practice. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL Ginsburg N, Koppel B, McGee TG (1991) The extended metropolis: Settlement transition in Asia. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu, HI Hugon P (2003) Mondialisation, métropolisation et effet de crise dans les éonomies en développement. In: Osmont A, Goldblum C (eds) Villes et citadins dans la mondialisation. Editions Karthala & Gemdev, Paris, pp 29–49 Land Transport Authority (LTA) (2007) Land transport policy. http://www.mot.gov.sg/landtransport/policy.htm, accessed 20 April 2007 Logan JR, Molotch HL (2002) The city as a growth machine. In: Fainstein SS, Campbell S (eds) (2nd ed) Readings in urban theory. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 199–238 McGee TG (1998) Five decades of urbanization in Southeast Asia: A personal encounter. In: Yeung Y-M (ed) Urban development in Asia: Retrospect and prospect. Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, pp. 55–91 Ministry of the Environment (2002) The Singapore Green Plan 2012: Beyond clean and green towards environmental sustainability. Singapore Ministry of Trade and Industry (2003) New challenges, fresh goals – Towards a dynamic global city. Report of the Economic Review Committee, Singapore Newman P, Thornley A (2002) Globalisation, world cities, and urban planning: Developing a conceptual framework. In: Thornley A, Rydin Y (eds) Planning in a global era. Ashgate, Aldershot, pp 13–26 Olds K (2001) Globalization and urban change: Capital, culture, and Pacific Rim mega-projects. Oxford University Press, Oxford Sassen S (1991) The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton University Press, Chichester

1 Sustainability Planning and Its Theory and Practice: An Introduction

13

Sassen S (2001) Spatialities and temporalities of the global: Elements for a theorization. In Appadurai A (ed) Globalization. Duke University Press, Durham, pp 260–278 Schumacher EF (1973) Small is beautiful. Blond & Briggs, London Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) (1995) Annual report, 1994/95. Singapore Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) (2001) Concept Plan 2001. Singapore Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) (2007). URA Website. http://www.ura.gov.sg, accessed 20 April 2007 Watson V (2002) Learning from planning practice? In: Thornley A, Rydin Y (eds) Planning in a global era. Ashgate, Aldershot, pp 143–162 Wheeler SM (2004) Planning for sustainability: Creating livable, equitable, and ecological communities. Routledge, London Wong T-C, Yap, Adriel L-H (2004) Four decades of transformation: Land use in Singapore, 1960–2000. Eastern University Press, Singapore World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) (1987) Our common future – Brundtland Commission. Oxford University Press, New York

This page intentionally blank

Part I

Global Development and Planning

Chapter 2

Planning the World Metropolis on an Island-City Scale: Urban Innovation as a Constraint and Tool for Global Change Charles Goldblum

Urban planning in Singapore occupies a quite unusual position in the city-state’s development, as an engine for most of the sectoral and strategic changes that occurred during the last four decades. This fact is well admitted by many professional planners and urban research scholars. What might have been less observed or analysed are the links between Singapore’s urban planning strategies and its integration in the world economy. The hypothesis developed in the present chapter is that these two dimensions, the territorial one and the transactional one, may be considered as two faces of a “global city” project. In this respect, Singapore’s current strong position in the global economy is not to be taken as the simple result of a process driven by external economic forces (e.g. transnational capital involved in industrial relocation and foreign direct investment), but rather as a result of a political will, taking advantage of the strategic location of Singapore as a major seaport in the Far-East and using its exceptional planning and anticipation capacities in order to cope with its vulnerability as a small island-state in a period that witnesses the rising of large independent nation-states. Therefore, this chapter aims to approach Singapore’s internationally recognized performance in urban planning not only as a tool in meeting the demands of the international economy or for protecting the national territory against adverse environmental and social impacts, but also as a means for the city-state to keep its competitive advantages through permanent urban and territorial adjustments and innovations.

2.1

Global City as a Project: Urban Basic Tools for a Modern City-State

Initial institutional involvement in urban planning took place during the transitional period from the end of the British colonial rule to Singapore’s independence as a nation-state. Apart from the Singapore Improvement Trust already established in

Institut Franc¸ais d’Urbanisme, Université de Paris VIII, 4 rue Nobel, 77420 Champs-sur-Marne, France, e-mail: [email protected]

T.-C. Wong et al. (eds.), Spatial Planning for a Sustainable Singapore, 17–29 © Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2008

18

C. Goldblum

the late 1920s, some of the British key urban planning tools were introduced in the 1950s (namely the 1958 statutory master plan, and planning concepts for new or satellite towns and green belt) according to the recommendations of the colonial government-appointed Housing Committee in 1947. Later on, during the 1960s, a decisive period of upheaval for Singapore, new “action programmes” were advanced by a United Nations (UN) experts team as part of comprehensive development which were to be integrated in the State and City Planning project preliminary studies for the 1971 Long Range Concept Plan. This marked the beginning of strategic planning in Singapore (Dale 1999: 71–115). With the Concept Plan the dimension and scope of physical planning completely changed at least in four aspects. Spatially, the planning was meant to cover the whole national territory. Functionally, it was no more limited to sectoral approaches such as housing, or industrial zoning, but integrated in a multidimensional territorial development. In terms of planning concept, the ring concept organizing new town development was an expression of this integrative approach. In terms of objectives, planning was no more dedicated to solving urban problems (in the sense of a corrective urbanism), but as a way to rationalize the city machinery itself, and to make it an efficient engine for nation-building and economic development. In this respect, the key elements of the first Concept Plan of 1971 were a perfect match with the economic strategy, mainly industrial, in response to the 1965 failure of Singapore’s merger into the Federation of Malaysia. The city-state henceforth adopted a prospective strategy open to the world – a unique position in Southeast Asia that Singapore was quite well prepared to assume as a major seaport benefiting from international connections established by entrepôt trade (Rodan 2001: 138–77; Cheng 1991: 182–215). This economic development project is unique in fulfilling Singapore’s anticipated role in the regional economy of Southeast Asia and its vision to link with the world market at a time when other newly independent states were seeking a domestic market for their pioneer industries. Partly inspired by the earlier recommendations of the UN mission led by Albert Winsemius, this strategy of survival encountered harsh competitions and nationalist conflicts with the neighbouring countries. Concomitantly, Singapore’s critical situation of employment was further accentuated by the announcement of withdrawal of the British military bases. This strategy which was successfully promoted under the name of “global city” by the then Minister for Foreign Affairs S. Rajaratnam, though focusing on geopolitics rather than on the territorial dimension, furnished some clues for understanding the meaning of the Concept Plan, which was launched in the same period, as part of the global city strategy. Thus, in his 1972 speech, S. Rajaratnam explained that new technology, such as electronic communications, giant tankers and modern economic and industrial organizations, compensates the city-state of Singapore for its lack of direct hinterland by taking the world as its hinterland for exports as well as for attracting industries and investment. According to S. Rajaratnam, this position gave an alternative

2 Planning the World Metropolis on an Island-City Scale

19

to the traditional image of Singapore like the “Change Alley”, which he elaborated thus (quoted by Leifer 2000: 36–39): If we view Singapore’s future not as a regional city but as a Global City, then the smallness of Singapore, the absence of a hinterland, or raw materials and a large domestic market are not fatal or insurmountable handicaps. It would explain why, since independence, we have been successful economically and, consequently, have ensured political and social stability.

In Terry McGee’s portrait of “Five decades of urbanization in Southeast Asia”, the 1970s were characterized by “new forms of integration into the global system” (McGee 1998: 55–91). One of the main features was the development of free trade zones arising from Japan’s industrial strategy designed to export labour intensive firms and low value-added activities (like electronics in Malaysia) while orientating its national industries towards the high-tech sector. Another feature related to this global integration process has been the development of central business districts (CBDs) with office and hotel buildings, shopping complexes, etc. These trends might have enhanced to an extent the market competition Singapore had to face in this period. But it also shed light on some elements which differentiate the city-state not in terms of geo-economy, but in terms of strategy. While the neighbouring countries were trying to respond to the internationalization process, Singapore developed an attractive strategy for foreign companies which was not based on incentives such as profit repatriation, but on the quality and efficiency of the infrastructure that the city-state was able to offer in catering for the multinational corporations (MNCs/TNCs), on the top of which the security provided through state intervention or involvement must also be accounted for. The general orientations adopted for urban planning since the beginning of the 1970s fit in totally the guidelines underlying Singapore’s economic development strategy. Tay Kheng Soon, one of Singapore’s leading architects and architectural thinkers, had well perceived the relation between these new economic directions of the “global city era” (1970–1980) and the new urban features brought about by the “international corporate style of architecture” associated with the new financial centre under construction along Shenton Way and the nearby streets – a CBD zone known as the Golden Shoe because of its shape and high land values within the Central Area. As a matter of fact, a significant number of the superblocks built in this area were precisely occupied (or to be occupied) by statutory boards and government-linked companies (GLCs) set up to follow closely the reorientation of the city-state development according to the standards of the international economy – notably in the realm of finance (Development Bank of Singapore – DBS), infrastructure (Public Utilities Board headquarters), communications (Telephone Exchange). Among these the Central Provident Fund (CPF) Building deserves a special mention for CPF’s key role in juggling between public housing policy and the expansion of the wages system, in line with the set objectives of industrial development and modernization of the tertiary sector (Trocki 2006: 172). These observations certainly breathe in a useful idea of the intertwining between economic and spatial renovation, and have demonstrated the key modernization role the Singapore’s

20

C. Goldblum

People’s Action Party (PAP) government has been playing and still plays in the form of state institutions and governmental administrative and economic organizations. However the specific urban and architectural properties cited above need to be replaced within the framework of the comprehensive physical planning strategy introduced in the 1970s. In confronting the global city vision, this strategy had given them their precise meaning beyond their functional or symbolic significance in terms of location and high-rise built form. Basically, the principles of spatial distribution guiding the Concept Plan and organizing the infrastructure and building projects on national and local scales are relatively simple to identify. The main elements comprise a ring of new towns developed around the water catchment reservoirs connected to the city centre (the node of tertiary activities), an expressway network complemented by a mass rapid transit system, and two major infrastructural entities also connected to the city centre: the Jurong Industrial Park to the southwest already under construction since the end of the 1960s and the new Changi International Airport to the east. But this spatial arrangement has first to be understood as a holistic and innovative machine; the main innovation being development itself as a system in which each single element finds its very meaning: in the comprehensive dimension of physical planning in terms of space and function, in the global city strategy in terms of function and dynamics, and in future outlook in terms of horizon and legitimacy. Therefore, innovation could be considered here in relation to functional change and spatial exclusion by means of modernization. It can also be understood as an “uprooting” process directed somehow against the compact Sino-colonial urban fabric; a development pattern characterized by mixed land use whose capacity had been brought to an end after over half a century of development in the 20th century. The process of course also means that all the innovative elements like public housing or industrial zoning were not decided in an isolated or sectoral manner when the 1971 Concept Plan was launched. The integration and coordination of these elements reinforced the strategic dimension of planning that the city-state was empowered to perform in consideration of the economic flows and objectives planned for. In this respect, the new approach that has been given to public housing in the new town development framework is a key element and a good example of relating the Concept Plan with the global city strategy. As soon as the PAP acceded to power in 1959, it launched a successful housing policy through five-year public housing programmes on a rental basis. Soon after in 1964, it began with the home ownership scheme, applying the ideals of property housing democracy, the success of which has relied since the late 1960s on the integration of the Central Provident Fund (CPF) compulsory savings system to finance public housing and amenities, as well as to facilitate access of wage earners to the housing delivery system. Since then, the home ownership scheme has acquired a new dimension associated with new employment opportunities, population redistribution, new facilities for commuting and mobility through infrastructure linkages between new towns and the rest of the island. This also meant availability of adjoining industrial estates with job opportunities for young women and easy access to employment centres in the Central Area.

2 Planning the World Metropolis on an Island-City Scale

21

In that sense, and even if the public housing success story is often presented as the social part of the PAP government’s action, public housing has never been intended as a welfare action, but rather as a vector for economic modernization and integration. Thus, public housing is a special kind of instrument facilitating the development of the formal activities, reducing pressure on wages by keeping the housing delivery system outside the free market. However, the development of an efficient workforce for the manufacturing or services industry was not the only objective. The public housing policy was part of social engineering for nationbuilding in an immigrant society, and at the same time an integral component of planning the future of the city-state through education, schools (a basic reference for neighbourhood planning in the new towns) and universities (with the principles of knowledge economy associated with the practice of English language). This also meant in a way cutting the traditional roots which linked the community based (formal and informal) economy with the ethnically distinctive social space. Consequently, the massive transfer of population from old urban districts and pseudo-rural kampongs to new town public housing has eventually been a means to destroy the central slums which used to house a third of Singapore’s population and make room for a new CBD in place of the old Chinatown. If the new town policy together with industrial zoning and public transportation facilities have been the main agents for expanding the global city to the whole national territory, which was a real challenge in a period of contested survival, and to construct a sense of belonging among the majority of Singapore citizens, they have created in accordance with the Concept Plan the conditions for transforming the Central Area into a real matrix of a global city. Urban renewal has in that sense been playing a coordinated part with new town development. Correspondingly, the first sales of sites programmes, managed on a tender system for leasehold, had met the objectives of modernization and internationalization of the tertiary sector within the “global city” strategy. The outcome has seen office buildings symbolic of a major financial centre in Asia – the Zurich of the East; international class hotels and shopping complexes for mass tourism attraction – namely on or off Orchard Road, then followed by mixed programmes integrating the residential dimension – with condominium developments on the reclaimed land of Marina Centre to accommodate the expatriates working for international firms.

2.2

New Challenges and Institutional Innovation: Planning for the Future

Considering the magnitude of planned changes that occurred from Singapore’s access to internal autonomy in 1959 up to the 1980s, in comparison with the slower evolution of neighbouring states within the ASEAN,1 this process of change seems 1 Association of Southeast Asian Nations, a cooperative organization of the countries belonging to the liberal market economy established in August 1967.

22

C. Goldblum

to belong to the realm of innovation rather than adaptation. Innovation covers a broad series of changes, affecting urban or project management and developments, their forms and products. All these are reflected in the implementation of Southeast Asia’s first large free-trade export processing zone in Jurong, with car restricted access to the central business area (Area Licensing Scheme), urban renewal by super-block development proposals in the Central Area under sale of sites, and the introduction of the condominium concept with limited access for wealthy foreigners, seen as an extension of real estate property accumulation. By micro-zoning rules, such implementations represent a system popular in large cities like Bangkok, though less sophisticated urban planning regulations are used. These few examples are often earmarked as Singapore’s performance in urban management and planning, strongly related to the global city dimension. Rodolphe De Koninck’s expression of “territorial revolution” gives a clear idea of the spatial impact of this process, the Concept Plan being the conductor of the sectoral changes and their translation in spatial terms (De Koninck 2006: 71–91). In these specific sectoral realms where public actions have taken place, the creation of new state institutions as statutory boards in charge of specific objectives have been a key factor of change and a form of change in itself (Quah 1987: 120– 45). As far as urban planning is concerned, the first institutional creation was the Housing and Development Board in charge of the public housing policy which replaced the Singapore Improvement Trust, and some functions of the former City Council. Within the 1971 Concept Plan framework, HDB’s responsibility expanded as it became the developer and manager of new towns, while one of its departments in charge of urban renewal, the Urban Renewal Department (URD), became in 1974 a powerful autonomous statutory board under the name of the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA), responsible for the CBD development. A third institution created in the late 1960s, the Jurong Town Corporation, initially in charge of the development of Jurong, was to play a major role within the Concept Plan framework, in managing new industrial zones including the Sembawang Shipyard, and industrial estates adjoining the new towns. The mix of adaptability and pragmatism the Singapore PAP government has proved to have in managing structural changes does not operate in dealing with external factors alone. It also concerns or affects the internal development dynamics, even in terms of institutional specialization. Economic integration in a mutable and often unpredictable world requires strong structural continuity affected by permanent changes. Indeed, political continuity is a major element for securing the logics, if not the nature, of long-term mega projects of national interest. This might partly explain the extent of commitment to intended transformations influencing spatial effects of economic change by emphasizing physical or social continuity. Thus, the task assigned to urban planning and specifically to the Concept Plan such as land reclamation for Marina East and South could be taken as a symbolic representation of this process. Another aspect of structural continuity is concerned with the control of production factors in terms of cost – land being the main factor and a key issue for mastering territorial development (Wong and Yap 2004). Partly a result of the

2 Planning the World Metropolis on an Island-City Scale

23

specific nature of British colonization and colonial rule in Singapore, partly because of the importance of military bases in the Settlement, the British legacy in dealing with extended public lands and their legal control has been instrumental for largescale transformations through land reclamation, eviction or compulsory acquisition and land-use conversion. But the legal framework needed an in-depth revision to cope with the magnitude of the spatial transformations which were undertaken. Three key texts produced before the Concept Plan’s inception were of major interest with regards to the comprehensive implementation and sectoral developments. First, the 1966 amended land acquisition act broadened the legal basis for compulsory public acquisition, a decisive apparatus for new town and industrial zone development. Then, the other two texts of major importance for organizing the changes in the Central Area: the 1967 property tax order and the 1968 controlled premises (special provisions) bill as incentives for urban renewal. Even amended or modified, these texts remained the reference for establishing the new centre-periphery system by virtue of the Long Range Concept Plan in its task of rationally preparing space for territorial fixation in international flows mobilized through the actions and incentives provided by the Economic Development Board (EDB).

2.3

Planning the Future of the World Metropolis: Innovation in the Concept Plan as a Response to Global–Regional Change

By the time Singapore had to review its 20-year Concept Plan in order to prepare its 1991 version, the international and regional context had deeply changed, giving a new perspective to its global city strategy. At global level, the “transactional revolution” varying from speed, space, and communication to virtual interaction and exchange has created new economic hierarchies in the world economy. In a fast urbanizing world, it gives privileges and edge to powerful and well-equipped metropolises to develop their financial centres to be qualified as global or world cities. It also shapes new spatial patterns such as urban corridor and growth triangles within the so-called “archipelago economy”, which is in an apparent position to renew and reinvent the dynamics of the city-state (Veltz 1996). Meanwhile, on the regional scale, the Asia–Pacific region is experiencing a fundamental change which would have a profound impact on Singapore’s position in the regional economy. This would have an effect on the revised Concept Plan too (Lo and Yeung (eds.) 1996–1999). First, after the end of the second Indochina war, the opening of the socialist countries, namely China and Vietnam and their reforms in the 1980s, was followed by the other former French Indochina countries. Under Vietnam’s influence, Laos and Cambodia took part in the regional integration, hence enlarging the economic cooperation structure of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations to include socialist countries. The enlargement has intensified the move towards an accelerated urbanization in the Pacific Asia sub-continent, as an adjustment effect in a region previously known as one of the less urbanized parts of the world.

24

C. Goldblum

Then, with the end of the regional conflicts in Indochina, and the rise of Southeast Asian economies, a new role was given to urban development as “a catalyst for growth”, as international organizations used to say – a role that has enhanced Singapore’s position. Even if there was a long-standing tradition of urban centres, related to sultanates and empires, in Southeast Asia, the city-state used to be looked upon as a foreign or external territorial entity by its regional neighbours; this is not only because of the Chinese origins of the majority of its population in a muslim-Malay world, but also because of its specific situation as an urban territory in a world that has remained largely founded on rural societies of rice-growing and fishing. These characteristics have been considered as the traditional norms of cultural authenticity. With these new trends the city-state has suddenly become at least a reference or even a model for the region’s future development. Such a reference point is shown by new mega-urban projects in the neighbouring metropolitan areas – Muang Thong Thani private new town near Bangkok, public and private new town development in the Jabotabek-Jakarta metropolitan region (Goldblum and Wong 2000: 29–37) and the Multimedia Super Corridor, a high-tech mega-project in the Kuala Lumpur metropolitan area (Bunnell 2004). In retrospect, Singapore’s present envied position as an urban planning model for new town and condominium developments in Asia draws us back to its beginning as a British trading post in the Malacca Straits in the early 19th century. It was the first example of a planned commercial emporium in Southeast Asia, not only in terms of spatial allocation but also in terms of codification of the shophouse complex. The combination of shophouses and the street network has produced the model of planned Chinatown, a reference for Bangkok and Phnom Penh urban development at the turn of the 20th century. This new context brought to Singapore new opportunities for exporting its Asian skills, knowledge and know-how, even in the field of urban planning and real estate, especially when Western industrialized countries were haunted by economic recession at the end of the 1980s. But opportunities also brought new challenges for Singapore to cope with: if there were some prospects in absorbing part of the foreign investments to Hong Kong after retrocession of the British Colony to China (this apparently did not happen), some new competitors were also appearing. If Singapore was prepared to take advantage of its advancement to become a kind of laboratory for emerging Asian economies, notably in urban planning and exporting it, there was a real need for the city-state to make such an advance as an experienced technical expert. In that sense, if there was some continuity in Singapore’s global city strategy by strengthening its regional integration (Leifer 2000: 36–7), it was clear that innovative policies were again needed to keep its attraction as a kind of new frontier in competition and cooperation with China and a sub-continental state, India. The importance of the integration issue and challenge appears clearly in the project management and implementation of the 1991 Concept Plan. Of course there were some forerunning actions at the end of the 1980s predicting these new trends in several directions, such as progressively opening the public housing programme and the new town services delivery to the private sector, establishing town councils as pilot projects (according to the 1988 Town Councils Act) in order to facilitate public participation in the management of new towns and to limit the extended

2 Planning the World Metropolis on an Island-City Scale

25

powers and responsibilities of the HDB. Also, changing the official position concerning sensitive issues such as population and birth control, the past ethnic dimension affecting social space and language use, was systematically translated into new policies. Measures encouraging higher population growth to 4.4, then 5.5 million inhabitants (including permanent residents) were put in place, in order to tackle the generational gap problems of dynamism affecting solidarity in an aging society. Active urban conservation policy measures were introduced and bilingualism with Chinese language as the second language or mother tongue for ethnic Chinese was reinforced in schools. In consolidating regional cooperation, industrial activities were initiated in the Indonesian Riau Islands and in Johor within the SIJORI2 growth triangle. Again, these elements were to gain their very meaning within the framework of the new concept plan. And even if, as mentioned, there are some continuity effects imbedded in URA’s slogan of the “Tropical City of Excellence”, the importance of change appears clearly when observing the institutional change in the elaboration of the Concept Plan. This task which was previously given to a department of the Ministry of National Development (MND), the Planning Department under the responsibility of the Chief Planner, was from now on given to the renewed Urban Redevelopment Authority (new URA), the head of which carries the portfolio of Chief Planner. One has an idea of the importance thus given to this statutory board, which earlier was only in charge of the Central Area. But the change of role of the URA has also raised new expectations vis-à-vis the revised 1991 Concept Plan, observing that these extended functions were attributed to the maître d’oeuvre of the new town planning policy, the former powerful chief executive officer of the Housing and Development Board: architect-planner Liu ThaiKer, a key personality of Singapore’s urban planning success story in the second half of the 20th century. Apart from the already mentioned forerunning elements which were integrated in the new concept plan, the main components and the major innovative elements have appeared clearly and quite simply in the scheme. However, they need explanatory notes to account for the new orientations and scope of urban planning, and the new perspective of Singapore in search of a global metropolis, which must be differentiated from the initial global city strategy.

2.4

Controversial Issues and New Challenges: Which Strategy for Singapore as a World Metropolis?

Though still organized on the principles of the ring concept, the Singapore 1991 Concept Plan and its 2001 revision deliver an urban and territorial image differing from the previous one. The general image is no more the “Fordist” expression of a

2 A growth triangle concept initiated by Singapore in 1989 which included Singapore, Southern Johor and the Riau Islands of Indonesia.

26

C. Goldblum

marked difference of concept and of management between the Singapore world of international finance, tourism and luxury consumption and the busy, somewhat Spartan world of local Singaporean wage earners, commuters and new town dwellers. It tends to evoke the world of an affluent society, a new urban hierarchy ranked by levels of population and intensity of commercial services. Considering the centre-periphery system, much attention is paid to facilitate mobility, accessibility and connectivity: the mass rapid transit (MRT) network is extended and supplemented by a light rail transit (LRT) system. Indeed, the MRT/LRT integration shows a less marked differentiation between the regional centres and the city centre, making it possible to transfer some high level tertiary activities in these new regional nodes (Tampines, Woodlands, Jurong East – initially including Seletar) designed for servicing a population of about 800,000 inhabitants as part of the Constellation Plan concept. New towns are recognized as the living environment for a large majority of the Singapore population, most of whom were benefiting from at least a 3-room apartment. With 55 development guide plans (DGPs) completed with detailed local plans covering the whole city-state, more attention is now paid on public space and its amenities, and new concepts are introduced in new town planning in relation to leisure activities. The integration of the leisure facet in waterfront cities, like the Punggol 21 new town project, notably through land reclamation, has met to an extent some expectations of the Singaporean population. Taking the expatriate or tourist living as an idealized reference, this residential development concept is seemingly reducing the separation line between the private condominium and walk-up apartments development concepts and some of the new public housing projects. In parallel, in response to greater demand for quality living-environment and transportation, waterfront living fits in well with the new economic orientation for high-tech research centres, universities and specialized engineering schools organized along high-tech corridors and international business parks. This development trend is also in line with the SIJORI growth triangle launched by Deputy Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong in the late 1980s. The regional geopolitical context has made it possible for Singapore to extend its industrial and some tourism activities outside its national territory to the Riau Islands of Batam and Bintan in Indonesia and to southern Johor at the south of Peninsular Malaysia. Furthermore, a second link was built in Tuas joining south-western Johor to ensure a better connection. Another aspect that needs to be addressed is the re-Asianization policy. As far as urban development is concerned, what takes place in the Central Area such as land reclamation for marina projects offers Singapore the possibility of reducing the pressure on prime land in the CBD. Re-Asianization also gives the possibility of extending the conservation or rehabilitation projects in the colonial civic centre as well as in the so-called ethnic districts, which supposedly represent the three major Asian cultural communities of Singapore (Chinese, Malay and Indian). For this purpose, parts of the old Chinatown, Kampong Glam and Little India, have been conserved. Though conservation is partly meant to promote tourism, it is also a way to foster the once contested image of “Instant Asia” at a time when ethnic origins and languages of ancestry may also serve to facilitate economic exchange

2 Planning the World Metropolis on an Island-City Scale

27

and diplomatic relations with Asian countries like China and India. It may be noticed that being able to deliver an acceptable discourse on Asian modernization without being a competitor with the large States in the regional power game, Singapore has been in the position of becoming the champion of (modern) “Asian values”. As far as urban planning is concerned, Singapore is already exporting its expertise as well as turnkey projects to neighbouring countries due to internationally recognized capacities in this realm (Wong and Goldblum 2000: 112–22). In making a new laboratory for urban planning project and concept export, it gives the city-state another dimension to redefine its Concept Plan. In that sense, regional centres in Singapore also figure some kind of regional (peripheral) development in miniature. There is a prospect that gives specific interest to urban conservation when Singapore deals with countries of long cultural history which often raise the question of heritage as an asset and development criteria of a new modern metropolis. Having said that, it is necessary to approach the question of urban environmental planning and urban sustainable development since it has provided a new set of criteria for assessing world metropolises of the 21st century. Since its inception in 1959, the PAP Government has shown a real concern about the question of environmental quality, fighting against pollution in all fronts with “clean and green” or “garden city” as slogans, tree planting campaigns (initiated by the National Parks Board of the Ministry of National Development in 1967), etc. Urban poverty, crowded dwelling slums and makeshift kampongs of the past partly explain this attitude which has proved to be very successful in the treatment of public space, development of parks and gardens, etc. Singapore is also an example for its early choice for public transportation (first in modernizing the bus service, then by developing MRT/LRT into very efficient systems), even though it seems difficult to refrain a more affluent population from its desire for cars. Environmental issues are from the start a major component of Singapore’s urban planning strategy. Based on a legal and institutional framework, national regulations and regional and international agreements such as waste management, a waste minimization department was set up in 1992 and a resolution was signed on waste management for the coastal areas of the ASEAN region, following an international conference held on this topic in Singapore in June 1991 (Ooi (ed.) 1995). The formalisation of a “green plan” only occurred in 1992 as an extension of the 1991 concept plan. Published in May 1992 as The Singapore Green Plan – Towards a Model Green City, the plan focused on public health (clean air, land, water and quality of living environment) and has gained international recognition when presented at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992, as Singapore’s national plan supporting Agenda 21. Specifically, the “green plan” as well as the “blue plan”, which was designed to protect and safeguard the Central Water Catchment area, have been integrated into the 1991 Concept Plan and the revised 2001 Concept Plan vision. In both the revised plans, an island-wide park connector system has been designed and integrated with leisure (recreational areas for jogging or cycling) and tourism (historical or natural theme parks). It is also integrated in Singapore’s exportable

28

C. Goldblum

model city concept in the form of a “Model Green city”, giving a new scope to the long-standing version of the garden city concept (Wong and Yap 2004: 120–40). Other planning choices nonetheless are more controversial, such as the high-rise energy consuming buildings or the development of a consumerist society. This also leads to the question of the relevant scale on which to approach such issues as how to deal with external environmental effects like forest fires in Sumatra, for instance, on how to understand externalization of pollution producing activities such as pig farming or heavy industries. What makes the environmental issue even more questionable in Singapore is that the new approach towards globalisation or its international concept conflicts with its original dynamics, with concepts or discourse like Agenda 21. Added to this dilemma would be especially questioning the social or political dimension of the public participation or involvement in the decision-making concerning urban development. Broadly speaking, one may wonder if sustainable development as expressed in a large set of criteria in the 21 local agenda is compatible with the functions and requirements of a world metropolis: tourist shopping, housing, mass transportation, seaports, international airports, etc. The paradoxical aspect of metropolitan development in this direction which has led to social disparities between regions and territories, is quite well documented as far as European countries are concerned (Laigle 2006). If sustainable development criteria are applied to the specific situation of Singapore, the issue affects the fundamental functions of the city-state. Can the survival question on the island scale be turned into the question of sustainable development? According to Liu Thai-Ker, the constellation plan principle in a form of a hierarchized satellite town network adopted in Singapore’s 1991 Concept Plan may figure as a possible answer, at least as a means to alleviate the burden of excessive concentration in the mega-cities. Accordingly, as Liu (1998: 3–26) explained: Given its small size, the sustainability of Singapore is the most important issue on the national agenda. A good deal of attention and effort has been put in to make the physical environment sustainable … The good physical environment contributes towards Singapore’s reputation in the region and internationally.

These reflections for the future lead to another related question for Singapore. Even if the nature of the city-state as belonging or not to a specific category of global city might be a matter of theoretical discussion (Olds and Yeung 2004: 489–521), a question still remains concerning its effective position as a model city (Ooi (ed.) 1999). That is, how does Singapore hold its status as a tropical city of excellence by keeping its advancement and innovative capacities and by largely exporting its skills and even its planning concepts, while new competitors (from Shanghai to Dubai) are emerging to deliver their own image of new world metropolises of the 21st century? And, how would Singapore argue its causes while new international criteria of sustainability may introduce some controversial aspects in the evaluation of the Singapore urban planning experience (Sassen 2001: 69–76). Let us accept that this is a new challenge, a new frontier for Singapore, in which the concept of sustainable urban development is also questioned. Till now, Singapore has proven its exceptional capability to respond to new challenges in such a way that they seem to be, or at least to serve, its raison d’être.

2 Planning the World Metropolis on an Island-City Scale

29

References Bunnell T (2004) Malaysia, modernity and the multimedia super corridor: A critical geography of intelligent landscapes. Routledge, London Cheng SH (1991) Economic change and industrialization. In: Chew Ernest CT, Lee E (eds.) A history of Singapore. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 182–215 Dale OJ (1999) Urban planning in Singapore: The transformation of a city. Oxford University Press, Oxford De Koninck R (2006) Singapour: La cité-Etat ambitieuse. Belin (Asie plurielle), Paris Goldblum C, Wong T-C (2000) Growth, crisis and spatial change: A study of haphazard urbanisation in Jakarta, Indonesia. Land Use Policy 17 (1): 29–37 Laigle L (2006) Métropolisation et développement durable, Pouvoirs locaux 70 (III): 33–36 Leifer M (2000) Singapore’s foreign policy: Coping with vulnerability. Routledge, London Liu T-K (1998) From megacity to constellation city: Towards sustainable Asian cities. In: To TS (ed.) Megacities, labour, communications. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore, pp 3–26 Lo F-c, Yeung Y-m (eds.) (1996–1999) Emerging world cities in Pacific Asia. United Nations University Press (in association with The Chinese University of Hong Kong), Tokyo McGee TG (1998) Five decades of urbanization in Southeast Asia: A personal encounter. In: Yeung Y-m (ed.) Urban development in Asia: Retrospect and prospect. The Chinese University of Hong Kong – Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies, Hong Kong, pp 55–91 Ooi GL (1995) (ed.) Environment and the city: Sharing Singapore’s experience and future challenges. Times Academic Press/The Institute of Policy Studies, Singapore Ooi GL (1999) (ed.) Model cities: Urban best practices, Vol. 1, Urban Redevelopment Authority/ The Institute of Policy Studies, Singapore Olds K, Yeung HWC (2004) Pathways to global city formation: A view from the developmental city-state of Singapore. Review of International Political Economy 11 (3): 489–521 Quah JST (1987) Statutory boards. In: Quah JST, Chan HC, Seah CM (eds.) Government and politics of Singapore. Oxford University Press, Singapore, pp 120–145 Rodan G (2001) Singapore: Globalisation and the politics of economic restructuring. In: Rodan G, Hewison K, Robinson R (eds.) Political economy of Southeast Asia: Conflicts, crises, and change. Oxford University Press, Melbourne, pp 138–177 Sassen S (2001) Politics of the global city: Claiming rights to urban spaces. In: United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (Habitat), Cities in a globalizing world. Global Report on Human Settlements 2001, Nairobi, pp 69–76 Trocki CA (2006) Singapore: Wealth, power and the culture of control. Routledge, London Veltz P (1996) Mondialisation, villes et territoires. L’économie d’archipel. Presses Universitaires de France, Paris Wong T-C, Goldblum C (2000) The China-Singapore Suzhou Industrial Park: A turnkey product of Singapore? Geographical Review 90 (1): 112–122 Wong T-C, Yap L-HA (2004) Four decades of transformation: Land use in Singapore 1960–2000. Eastern Universities Press by Marshall Cavendish, Singapore

Chapter 3

Sustainable City Centre Development: The Singapore City Centre in the Context of Sustainable Development Ole Johan Dale

3.1

Introduction

Sustainable development has two parts to it. The first is development; the core dimension is here economic growth, the generation of wealth against poverty. Then there is the second part, “sustainable”. How do we keep growing with what we have; the environmental challenge to economic development. What is a sustainable city? It is organized so as to enable all its citizens to meet their own needs and to enhance their well-being without damaging the natural world or endangering the living conditions of other people, now or in the future (Girardet 2001). This definition emphasizes the importance of people and their needs. These include good quality air, water, good housing, a good working environment, good and healthy food etc. They also include job opportunities; healthcare, quality education, culture, safety as well as equal opportunities and the needs of the elderly and the disabled must be adequately provided for. The key question to be asked in a sustainable city is: are all users able to satisfy their needs without damaging the host environment? This chapter looks at one small area, the Singapore City Centre – the very heartland and nerve centre of the nation’s sustainable economic planning and development. It conforms approximately to the “Central Area” used in the overall island planning, the Singapore Concept Plan. Its area has expanded since 1958 and it now covers an area of about 1,700 hectares (Fig. 3.1). It is perhaps small from a global perspective, yet it shows in a looking glass what can be achieved once there is a determined effort to reach certain goals. Singapore is through its location and economic structure an integrated component in economic globalization, involving not only the corporate economy and the transnational corporate culture but also the immigrant economies and work cultures evident in global cities (Sassen 2006). However, Singapore like Hong Kong is unique because the state/nation or territory is contained within a fully urbanized and territorially constrained unit.

Seberg 7, 6863, Leikanger, Norway, e-mail: [email protected]

T.-C. Wong et al. (eds.), Spatial Planning for a Sustainable Singapore, 31–57 © Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2008

This page intentionally blank

32

O.J. Dale

Fig. 3.1 Evolution of Singapore’s central area, 1958–2000

The city centre situated around the mouth of the Singapore River is, in terms of urban planning, an integrated part of the national planning framework. Historically, it is the core of Singapore’s development. Thomas Stamford Raffles planted the British flag on the banks of Singapore River in 1819 and the story of modern Singapore began there. The early settlement grew and became a major colonial town. All important administrative and economic activities were located there. It was the main population centre. The city centre represented once colonial Singapore. Like colonialism itself, it provided the setting for the encounter of races and civilizations – yet one that took place in a situation of structured inequality. It provided a market place for trade and exchange. Today it is still a place for trade and exchange but also a centre for international trade, finance, production as well as cultural services and entertainment. It is the context of the city centre’s specific development dimensions, which represents the image and aspirations of the present

3 Sustainable City Centre Development

33

Singapore, that this study examines. In connection with sustainable development, the focus is on the overall city aspects as well as selected sectors which illustrate the prevailing programmes.

3.2 3.2.1

City Centre Developments City Centre

To residents and visitors alike, Singapore city centre is the epitome of cleanliness and of a well managed city. It is difficult to understand that 40–50 years ago it was a very different city. The 1947 census revealed that 73 percent of the island population was concentrated in the Municipal Area, most of it in the city centre. The most densely populated area, part of what today is known as Chinatown conservation area had a density of more than 1,800 persons per hectare (Department of Social Welfare 1948). By 1957 more than 1.1 million people or 79 percent of the population were living in the Municipal Area. The population densities in some areas had risen to more than 2,500 persons per hectare (Ministry of National Development 1965). About 400,000 or almost one-third of the island population were squatters, of these 246,000 were living in the city. Social surveys gave a dismal picture of overcrowding, poverty and slum-like housing conditions throughout the centre of the city (Goh 1958). Two- or threestorey shophouses, originally, intended to house one or two families were subdivided into a maze of interior cubicles, the majority were without windows and in permanent semi-darkness. In such cubicles, on average less than 10 square metres – dark, confined, insanitary and without comfort –a family of seven to ten people could live. The 1958 Master Plan described the city as one of the worst slum areas in Asia. The transformation Singapore has gone through has not happened through coincidence. It is important to stress the extraordinary role played by government both as planner and entrepreneur (Dale 1999). From the earliest days of self-government it was recognized that the main resource Singapore had was its people. The development of this resource became paramount. With a very limited land area, land became another resource which had to be judiciously planned and managed so as to accommodate the range of activities. Combined with a self-reliance thinking that in the case of an emergency Singapore could not rely on its neighbours to supply water and other essential commodities, this had a major impact on retention and management of natural resources such as water. The physical environment was to be rebuilt, not only to eradicate old slum areas but also to give Singapore a modern face reflecting its aspirations. The early election platform focused on housing for the masses as one of its main targets. The renewal programme and the public housing programme therefore became key pillars in the implementation of government policies. There was tremendous pressure on the bureaucracy and the new statutory boards to achieve the targets. These

34

O.J. Dale

included almost all aspects of city life, from housing, clean water supply, transportation and commercial infrastructure, drainage schemes, improvement to the sewerage system, to public hygiene and control of street food hawkers. By today the economy has been completely restructured and vastly expanded. From one dependent on port-related trade and administration before 1960, the city economy is now largely based on employment in office work related to the growth and management of regional and local industries, an international orientated supply of banking, finance and general commercial services as well as supply of services catering to the local market. There has been some decentralization of office functions to other parts of the island. These are mostly local service industry jobs. The city has become more specialized, as a greater part of the jobs are in sectors serving an international and regional market. Retail shopping was an important city function before 1960. Its organization, technology, types of buildings and volume has, however, undergone a transformation. A very important customer in many shopping centres is the international tourist shopper, in particular in the Orchard Road/Marina Centre corridor. From a humble beginning tourism has become a major industry (90,000 visitors in 1960 to 9.7 million in 2006). Its impact on the city is foremost in accommodation, food and beverages, and shopping. About 90 percent of all hotel rooms are in the city centre. The multiplier effect of tourism is reflected in services such as travel agencies, airline offices, financing and convention activities as well as in the arts and culture which is becoming an important job generator. From the 1960s, new housing in the centre has largely been provided through public housing estates developed as part of an island comprehensive programme of new towns. Following slum clearance, the bulk of the residential population has largely moved out of the city centre, either because of resettlement or in tandem with the wider choice of housing elsewhere. The centre, together with the adjoining areas, now accommodates about 3 percent of the island population in a mix of public housing and private housing in the higher price brackets. In many cities, a traditional function has been recreation, culture and entertainment. In pre-1960 Singapore, culture and entertainment tended to be ethnic-based and closely integrated with economic service functions. By and large the various ethnic groups were compartmentalized and seldom interacted with each other except in the market place. The cultural interface was kept to a minimum. Behind the present Singapore consciousness and national identity are many diverse political and socio-economic forces. Foremost are government policies such as urban renewal and public housing, bilingualism and multiracialism, integrated schools, national service, community development, economic growth and meritocracy. Spatially the former ethnic and dialect concentrations have more or less disappeared. The economic restructuring and growth has largely removed the former ethnic and dialect occupational specialization and has also resulted in greater social mobility. Socially and culturally, the population is far more homogeneous than before.

3 Sustainable City Centre Development

35

From the mid-1980s, a new dimension to cultural activities was created through more support for the arts and the provision of more and better facilities for orchestral music, theatres and the arts in general. The museum precinct started to become a reality. The massive centre for the performing arts at the Marina Centre moved in the mid-1990s from the planning stage to implementation. There was therefore a gradual transition within the city centre, from an ethnic-based culture towards a non-communal centre serving the nation as a whole. The aim for the new Marina Centre performing arts centre, named Esplanade-the Theatres on the Bay, was more ambitious, and planned as a contribution to establishing Singapore as an international hub for international services, culture and the arts. A new urban fabric has been established for the built environment. From an early emphasis on infrastructure, housing as well as commercial activities, the emphasis has shifted and is directed towards office buildings, upper-income residences and specialized consumption activities. The consumption activities are focused on shopping, specialized goods and cultural activities aimed in particular at the interests of the middle and upper classes and the international visitors. The growth of tourism as a leading urban industry combines production and consumption in a novel way. Besides investment in buildings the producers, the tourist industry and government have invested on a large scale in the production of aesthetically appealing districts. Rehabilitation of conservation areas is in fact also rehabilitation for service production or consumption. From the early start onwards the renewal or redevelopment of the city followed overall planning guidelines that controlled the development. While the updated 1958 Master Plan was used as a guide in the early years, the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA), set up in 1974 specially to take charge of the Central Area, followed up the 1971 Islandwide Concept Plan priorities with detailed concept plans for the Central Area. These plans formed the basis of development from the mind-1970s. These were far more than ordinary land use and design guidelines. The concept plans were accompanied by action programmes for large areas. These incorporated land amalgamation including compulsory acquisition, resettlement, land clearance and management. People and businesses affected by clearance had the right to resettlement facilities. Construction of suitable housing, shops, industrial premises as well as education and health facilities therefore had to be completed and be ready well ahead of clearance initiation. The land use and design component of the concept plans included detailed schemes for land parcels which would be sold for private development. Due to lack of suitable private land the URA sale of sites to the private sector became the main vehicle to ensure sufficient space for offices, shops, hotels etc. The sites were sold through well publicized public tenders and with planning guidelines giving type of development permitted and the plot ratio. The design guidelines gave aspects such as height control and streetscape. The sites were sold vacant and free from any encumbrances; potential purchasers were furthermore informed about any technical conditions such as sewerage and drainage requirements. Since it would take about five years from the planning stage until a project on a site sold would be completed, research into future demand was necessary so as to provide

36

O.J. Dale

space based on anticipated marked demand. This required rolling development programmes, both long-term and year by year.

3.2.2

Garden City Concept to National Green Plan

Of great importance was the emphasis given to tree planting and well maintained green spaces aimed at softening the harshness of the urban fabric and a subtle way of convincing investors in the early years that Singapore was an efficient and effective place and therefore a good place for business. A good example of the latter is the construction of the expressway from the city to Changi International Airport which was planned and built in the second half of the 1970s. Planners were instructed to ensure that the expressway including tree planting was completed ahead of the airport. When the first visitors arrived in 1981 they could drive to the city on a scenic expressway lined with mature trees. Their first impression was to be: Singapore as the well organized garden city. The vision was a Singapore where the streets would be lined with trees. For all new streets and roads, tree planting became part of the standard design and construction; there was the carriageway, the pedestrian pavement or walkway and the tree planting strip. Much of the old streetscapes in the city centre were devoid of greenery. The first task of the Parks and Recreation Department formed in 1976 under the Ministry of National Development (MND) was to focus on the greening of Singapore. A detailed planting plan for the old existing streets was prepared by the Public Works Department which coordinated and upgraded all streets in the city area. This included new drainage channels dimensioned to absorb heavy monsoon rainfall, new pavements and tree planting. The garden city concept strategies were further developed and greatly expanded as part of the Singapore Green Plan under the Ministry of the Environment (1992). The target was to transform Singapore into a model environment city and the regional centre for environmental technology by the year 2000. The latest plan, The Singapore Green Plan 2012 was launched in 2002 and updated in 2006 (Ministry of Environment 2006). It is a ten-year blueprint towards national environmental sustainability. Six focus areas are covered: air and climate change, water, waste management, nature, public health and international environment.

3.2.3

Impacts of the Concept Plan on the City Centre

Singapore’s limited land resources (660 sq km) have necessitated a thorough and yet sufficiently flexible overall island planning. The first island comprehensive development plan or Concept Plan had been completed in 1971 largely by UN sponsored consultants. Until 1989, responsibility for land use planning and design for the city centre had been under the purview of URA. In 1989, URA became the national planning authority. The 1991 Singapore Concept Plan which built on the

3 Sustainable City Centre Development

37

1971 plan introduced a new and much more open dialogue with the general public. The 1991 plan amalgamated the various plans, including the URA Concept Plans for the city area into one, in so doing the government also opened for the first time for fairly extensive consultations with the public, in particular professional organizations such as the Singapore Institute of Architects. The Concept Plan is a longterm structure plan or a big picture plan. It is therefore supplemented by area plans, now termed “Master Plans” which give more detailed land use and urban design guidelines. A key feature of the 1991 plan was to sustain economic growth and the land use and development strategy had this as a main aim. An important aspect was to cater for the higher aspirations of the population through what was termed “providing a good quality of life”. The Concept Plan is revised at regular intervals and the last revision was in 2001 (URA 2001). Much planning and design has been conceived to transform the central business district, including the reclaimed land, the Marina South, Marina East into a new financial district in line with the city-state’s goal to attain global city status, and as a global financial hub (see URA 2001). The latest revision of the Concept Plan (2001) for the city centre has provided a frame to make it more dynamic and lively in the night time by introducing varied uses, such as residential. In the city centre, development to very high residential densities has been a necessity. It is anticipated that many office workers will be working in the near future in proximity to their downtown homes. The city centre is envisioned in the long-term to have about 7 percent of the total population as against 3 percent in 2001. In 2006 the total population was 4.4 million of which 3.6 million were registered as Singapore citizens and permanent residents (Department of Statistics 2007a). The long-term population parameters were recently revised to 6.5 million. It is not a target figure, but a scenario which takes into account current demographic trends and population policy (Mah 2007).

3.2.4

Singapore River

To sustain life – sustainable development – requires effort, it requires a vision and planning to achieve it and it requires the will and ability to implement it. A major feature in the urban landscape is Singapore River – the original trading centre and anchorage for Singapore town. Today it is an important and attractive part of the city and it has the potential to become even more so. Thirty years ago it was more like a garbage dump. By the 1960s the life cycle of the river as a port and port-related commercial centre was over. Some tongkangs still used the quaysides along the river for unloading goods but the volume was negligible. Operators used the river for mooring of their boats and rubbish was dumped into the river. The warehouses were no longer used for distribution of goods. The buildings which once bustled with life were half empty and poorly maintained. The river banks were dilapidated. The river itself was increasingly becoming more like a polluted drain or a sewer. It was blackish, foul smelling and devoid of aquatic life.

38

O.J. Dale

A new life cycle commenced in the late 1970s. URA had by then started preparing a Concept Plan with the aim of bringing the river and adjoining areas back to become an important and attractive part of the economic and social fabric of the city. The actual cleaning up and revitalization of Singapore River started with the prime minister Lee Kuan Yew in February 1977 throwing a challenge to the implementation agencies. “It should be a way of life to keep the water clean, to keep every stream, culvert and rivulet free from pollution. In ten years let us have fishing in the Singapore River and Kallang River. It can be done” (Lee 1977). By October 1977 the Ministry of the Environment had prepared a detailed action plan for the cleaning up of both Singapore and Kallang River. The plan which was approved by the government the same year meant a massive planning, construction and management operation. The catchment area of the two rivers covered about one fifth of the total land area of Singapore. Some statistics indicate the scale of the problem. Area surveys showed that there were 27,000 families, approximately 100,000 persons living as squatters in temporary structures without basic facilities such as proper water supply, drainage and sewer access. All these had to be given appropriate affordable new housing. More than 21,000 premises, almost all in the city area were without connection to sewer. Discharge from these premises went into the street or roadside drains where it was mixed with rain and surface water, and from there into the rivers. The surveys also show that there were 3,600 cottage type backyard industries, 610 pig farms, 480 duck farms, 4,900 street hawkers (most of these operating in the city area), 390 fruit and vegetable wholesalers (almost all operating their business from makeshift markets without basic hygienic conditions). More than 60 small boatyards for ship repairs were located along the upper parts of the two rivers: the location meant that they were no longer viable businesses but they added considerably to the pollution. About 770 lighters or tongkangs used the rivers for mooring. The project was coordinated by the Drainage Department under the Ministry of the Environment which set up a special working group where all the key agencies such as HDB, URA, PWD, PPD (Primary Production Department) and PSA (Port of Singapore Authority) had important functions. Besides government agencies, the project also included grass-root and civic organizations and the business community. Public housing accommodation, resettlement shops, markets and food or hawker centres had to be provided first. New locations had to be found for pig and duck farms. At the same time the farmers had to be trained in new methods of highly intensive, non-pollutive farming. A new centralized wholesale market for fruits and vegetables was built at Pasir Panjang. The street hawkers were relocated into food centres where they could operate their purpose-designed stalls in premises with water, public sewer and waste disposal facilities. The close to 800 or so lighters provided a picturesque view for visitors but at the same time were a major source of pollution. New mooring facilities were now constructed at Pasir Panjang and all lighters were relocated in 1983. Once the sources of pollution were removed, work started on the physical appearance of the rivers. This included dredging, demolitions, removal of deposits

3 Sustainable City Centre Development

39

and rubbish, repairs of the steps along the quays and the walkways along Singapore River were tiled and planted. The cost of the entire project amounted to about S$200 million and it was completed in 1987. The Singapore River and Kallang Basin project took ten years to complete (1977–1987). The foremost result is a cleaner environment, cleaner water and the return of aquatic life. The key factor in making it possible is no doubt the political will of the government. It is also a project which can be used as a model for many rapidly developing cities exemplifying of the many complex issues – social, economic and environmental – which have to be solved. Management and control of pollution is an ongoing task. Because of the high level of urbanization, problems such as littering and sullage water discharge still remain. To keep the rivers clean, engineering measures are used to minimize the pollution. Enforcement of the legislation is thorough. Regular inspections are conducted to ensure that wastewater is discharged into the sewerage system and that treatment facilities installed by industries are properly operated and maintained. There are frequent programmes which educate the public against littering and the discharge of waste into the rivers. Ten years after the project started, by the end of the 1980s, there were once again fish swimming in Singapore River, and they could be eaten. However, more work was needed to make the river fully functional and attractive. The next step was to reconstruct the century old river walls into strong embankment structures on deepseated foundations. The work started in 1992 and was completed in 1998 at a cost of S$140 million. Simultaneously the river walks were completed inclusive of paving, planting, lighting and street furniture. The land use, design and development guide plans for the river were prepared parallel with the engineering and cleaning up works. The first step was the land use aspect: substantial areas along the upper parts of Singapore River had been zoned for warehousing and industrial use. These uses were no longer permitted and new land use plans with development guides were released to the public. Buildings with architectural value had to be retained and the guidelines stipulated control aspects such as a four-storey height along the river and a maximum of ten storeys further behind. The shophouses along Boat Quay and adjoining areas had been designated for conservation and retention. Specific guidelines for usage and architectural upgrading were now issued. To further encourage private owners to upgrade and repair the buildings, the old rent control was liberalized and finally lifted, not only for the Boat Quay area but also for other areas designated for conservation. At the same time the individual building owners were encouraged to bring in new activities such as retail shops and restaurants. The public areas such as the river banks were rebuilt by public funds as part of the general upgrading. These became pedestrian spaces for walking, outdoor dining and recreation. To facilitate river traffic, boarding spaces for boats were provided at selected points along the river. Tour operators and associations were now encouraged to use the river for cruises and festivals such as dragon boat races. About 30 years or so after the first life cycle ended the river was again alive.

40

O.J. Dale

The river and its adjoining areas as we see today is therefore the result of a long and planned implementation process. The first step was a vision of what it could become; then specific target plans and implementation of these through public action; then conservation and development guide plans which private property owners as well as public agencies had to adhere to; then gradual renewal based on these plans and in tandem with the property market demand for uses such as housing, hotels and retail space.

3.2.5

City Traffic

In June 1975 the Area Licensing Scheme (ALS) was introduced as the first step to control access of private vehicles into the city centre. The ALS required that private cars possess and display a license to gain access (between 7.30 and 10.15 am) into a defined Restricted Zone which covered 620 hectares of the most built-up parts of the city. The scheme was later extended to include an evening period. To encourage car pooling, vehicles carrying four or more persons were at first exempted from paying the fee. Total car traffic into the city during morning peak hours was halved immediately. Despite the large increase in city jobs during the subsequent ten years, the 1985 total city-bound traffic was still 20 percent less than the pre-ALS figure. The ALS became part of a two-pronged approach to enforce traffic restraint – restraint on car ownership and on the use of the car. A deliberate policy of private car ownership restraint was implemented through fiscal measures, in the form of import duties, the VQS (Vehicle Quota System), registration fees and annual road taxes. Perhaps the most efficient measure is the quota system. To own a car, a person needs a Certificate of Entitlement (COE) which is valid for ten years. Anyone who intends to purchase a vehicle must first obtain a COE through an open bidding system. The quota of the number of COE to be issued every month is set by the transport authority which allows the government to have full control of the growth of the vehicle population. Since its introduction in 1990 the government through the quota system has set the cap for the annual vehicle growth rate to about 3 percent. An important side effect is cars with better fuel economy and reduced pollution. The VQS has resulted in a very young car population. Most cars are taken off the road after ten years. If it is deregistered the owner gets part of the COE payment back, if an extended COE is purchased this refund is forfeited. Since new cars have better fuel economy and are cleaner with less emissions the pollution level is reduced in tandem with the renewal of the car population. A reward system is now in place to encourage the use of cars with low emission levels. Green vehicle rebates are offered for electric, hybrid and compressed natural gas vehicles. The ALS was replaced by the Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) from 1998 onwards. The main principle behind this is that motorists should pay for the specific road use, related to the congestion caused. Restraint on city bound traffic is still the main function and motorists here pay according to the time of the day they travel. As the system is being developed, more and more sectors of the road network are included.

3 Sustainable City Centre Development

41

It is envisaged that gradually there will be a shift from the upfront cost of buying a car to a usage cost: usage of the car during peak hours on the most congested roads in the most congested sectors will give the highest road use bills. Pricing and the quota system have controlled the growth of the number of vehicles and measures such as ALS and its replacement, the ERP, have kept the number of vehicles entering the city area to a level that does not cause congestion. One component of the policies pertaining to private cars is the compulsory provision of car parks in all new developments. Office buildings, shopping centres and other developments in the city area are therefore well provided with car-parks. The rationale behind this seeming inconsistency of imposing car-park requirement as a planning condition whilst restricting traffic is that it should be made expensive for a motorist to drive into an area where he can cause congestion: but once the car is there it should be taken off the street quickly. Furthermore, car parks are viewed as an economic necessity but congestion and pollution must be minimized. The backbone of the transportation system is, however, public transport, consisting of MRT (mass rapid transit), LRT (light rapid transit), buses and also taxis. About 52 percent of Singapore residents go to work using public transport (Singapore Census of Population 2000). Forty-two percent use private transport such as cars (23 percent), motorcycles (5 percent); and the remaining use group travel such as chartered van and lorry. About 6 percent do not require any form of transport (Department of Statistics 2000). The public transport facilities have been rapidly expanded during the past few decades and the government policies have focussed on developing a high class public transport system whilst restricting ownership and usage of private cars, yet at the same time facilitating easy car movement by construction of a good quality road network. Despite the general trend whereby increased incomes frequently favour use of private transport it is envisaged that by further improvements to the public transport system its share of total commuting can increase. The expressed overall aim is therefore to increase the number of people who commute via public transport to 75 percent of all trips (LTA 1996; 2006). Since completion of the first Concept Plan in 1971 and the subsequent updating, land had been safeguarded for possible MRT stations and the line routes. New buildings constructed in the vicinity of the stations had furthermore been approved with conditions that in case of MRT the owners would provide access to the underground station concourse. When a decision was taken in 1984 to build the system, this therefore did not lead to any major planning problems. The project was scheduled to be completed in 1992 and would cost S$5 billion. The official opening was in March 1988 and the last stages were completed in 1990, two years ahead of schedule. Land acquisition as governed by the Land Acquisition Act has been instrumental in transforming the physical landscape (Khublall 1984). It has facilitated extensive accumulation of land by the state where the main beneficiaries have been the buyers of public housing flats. Within the city area the traditional land ownership pattern was one of a very large number of individual small lots making new developments very difficult. To achieve renewal objectives substantial areas were acquired.

42

O.J. Dale

The decision to commence the MRT project necessitated acquisition of land for the stations within the city area. However, the government went one step further in the acquisition objectives. It was envisaged that the MRT would lead to a very high enhancement of land values around the stations. It was therefore decided that this enhancement should benefit Singapore society through the state since it was a result of public infrastructure investment. It could therefore be used to pay for the construction of the MRT. Acquisition furthermore facilitated amalgamation of the small individual lots and made it possible to re-parcel the land to maximize its development potential for subsequent integrated station developments. Land within a given distance from the stations was therefore compulsorily acquired, except for land with recently completed buildings and land with valid planning approval. The acquired land was amalgamated and held in a land bank by the state, administered by the Land Office. It is subsequently offered for sale through URA’s public tender system and according to new detailed area plans. The public transport system now consists of several well integrated components which again are integrated with land use and town planning: the MRT which has been extended and new lines added serve the heavy transit corridors. The city centre in particular is entirely dependent on the MRT as the main means of commuting. The LRT lines serve as feeders to MRT as well as suburban travel. Buses continue to serve the less heavy network corridors to complement MRT-LRT networks. There are also premier bus facilities which provide higher grade of bus service. In addition, taxis provide a car-like services. Pedestrian movement within sheltered conditions is often forgotten in traffic planning. One aspect learnt from the early shophouse architecture was to use covered walkways along the building frontage, a very important aspect especially in a hot tropical climate with frequent heavy rainfall. This concept was extended to new developments. The provision of a public accessible covered walkway became a planning condition and together with a roadside pavement this provides a safe pedestrian environment. Access for the disabled is another aspect. Twenty-five to 30 years ago a person in a wheelchair could hardly move within the city. A wheelchair user could not even cross the streets because the wheelchair could not climb from carriage level to the higher pavement level. Gradually access to all public spaces as well as to buildings has been secured. There are now spayed edges or ramped access for wheelchair users at all pedestrian crossings; the pavements must be barrier free. From 1989 the building control regulations stipulate that all buildings must have barrier free access: the owners must provide the necessary ramps, elevators and toilets. In most cities the demand for transport has been translated into an extensive use of motorized vehicles with an adverse effect on the environment. The dependence on fossil fuels makes these a main culprit in releasing emissions into the atmosphere. In Singapore the original primary objective for the restrictions on usage of private vehicles was congestion reduction, in particular within and into the city. The positive side effects were pollution control. Singapore has by now developed one of the best managed transportation systems in the world. It is, however, important to stress that the type of restrictions imposed

3 Sustainable City Centre Development

43

on private vehicles would not have been possible in a society with such high income levels without a corresponding high level of public transport service. Several cities have utilized the Singapore experience: none, however, have implemented the entire package. Why did it work in Singapore? Integrated planning between land use, town and transport planning the key. All the measures have become part of a comprehensive strategy and are coordinated very closely. Most important is the political will to think forward, make pragmatic decisions and implement these. There are, however, signs that the transport system may face increasing problems in the future. Despite the cap of 3 percent on the annual growth of private vehicles this growth will be pushing the vehicle population to about 1.2 million by 2020 as against 800,000 in 2006 (Lim 2007a). A more serious problem is the increased travel demand resulting from a population and employment growth which is substantially higher than the transport network planned for (LTA 1996). The current network is planned according to the parameters of the 1990s when Singapore had a very restrictive immigration policy. With low birth rates a very moderate population increase was expected. Already now the population envisaged in the long-term future has almost been reached. Today the population is close to 4.5 million. The long-term population planning parameters is now revised to 6.5 million. To solve the transportation part of this increase without undermining the quality of the environment will require bold solutions. A comprehensive review is now being carried out by LTA/Ministry of Transport. One expressed aim is to increase the proportion of trips taken on public transport during morning peak hours from 63 percent to at least 70 percent over the next 10–15 years (Mah 2007). To achieve this, very large investments will go into the public transport infrastructure. The new Circle Line will open from 2010 and will link all existing MRT lines running into the city and thus greatly enhance connectivity between suburban lines. The LTA is completing feasibility studies for a new 33-station City line which will link both the eastern and north-western parts of the island to the City Marina Bay area. It is expected that the current rail network will be more than doubled (Lim 2007b). The most critical part of the network will be the movement of people to and from the city centre. It is today the main employment location and will retain this position in the future but with substantial increase in employment and it will thus test the capabilities of the planners and political decision makers.

3.2.6

Conservation and Cultural Sustainability

Today the traditional Singapore shophouse street is recognized as an important part of the cultural and historical heritage of the nation but it was not like that some years back. The shophouse, 2–3 storeys in height, a continuous covered walkway along the front, a narrow frontage of about 6 metres, about 25 metres deep lots – the architectural styles reflect different time periods and are a mix of the European and Chinese influences which again reflect the dynamism of early Singapore’s economic growth.

44

O.J. Dale

Singapore’s first conservation efforts focussed on the monumental buildings. These included civic buildings, churches, temples, mosques etc. A selected number of buildings were protected under the Preservation of Monuments Act and the preservation order supervised by the Preservation of Monuments Board. Until the mid-1980s very little was done to retain the valuable shophouse environments. Substantial city districts such as the present Chinatown and Little India were safeguarded against demolition as they were defined as conservation areas. However, the houses were falling into disrepair and year by year the building condition deteriorated. The main reason for this was the rent control (Control of Rent Act 1970) together with uncertainty about the future of these areas. The rent act was designed to protect tenants from unscrupulous landlords by freezing all rents of properties completed before September 1947. Under the act the landlord of rent controlled properties could not legally evict tenants or sub-tenants, but could pay them compensation to vacate the premises, if they agreed to leave on their own accord. The general view of the value of retaining districts with traditional shophouses was one of ambivalence. Conservation of these was looked upon by most people, including many leading politicians as something Singapore could hardly afford. In their view the land could be redeveloped into new, modern commercial high yielding capital investments – besides removing what was considered leftover slums. Those advocating conservation of the historical areas argued and stressed their historical and cultural value, as well as the architectural and urban design contribution of these to the city (SIP, Forum on Conservation 1983). In the mid-1980s the tourist industry was facing extensive problems. The rapid growth had stopped and there were signs that it could go into decline. Several studies by international consultants followed. All strongly recommended conservation of historical and cultural features, focus should be on attractions which would bring to life the historical and cultural heritage of Singapore (Pannell, Kerr, Foster 1986). Conservation of the historic areas now got a new economic value, the future of tourism depended upon these. In October 1986, the then first Deputy Prime Minister, Goh Chok Tong, announced that Singapore, in order to attract more tourists would spend about S$1 billion over the next five years on tourist infrastructure. Of this S$187 million1 would be spent on building, preservation and restoration projects; S$260 million would be spent on upgrading historical areas and landmarks (Ministry of Trade and Industry 1986). The breakthrough in perception was the value of conservation areas and buildings for the tourist industry. Without this at a very critical point in time it would have been difficult to get political decisions to integrate such fairly large conservation areas in the city into the overall planning process. Once the process started, more and more people realized the value of the traditional buildings and their

1

As at August 2007, one United States dollar was equivalent to 1.52 Singapore dollars (S$).

3 Sustainable City Centre Development

45

importance to the heritage of the nation. Today the question is no longer “Why keep these buildings?” but rather, Why did we not save more? Rent control was relaxed and finally lifted in 1988 so as to facilitate upgrading of private-owned premises. A Master Plan for conservation was made public in 1989. It included not only areas within the city but also areas and districts as well as individual buildings on a national basis. Detailed guidelines were issued. Owners of private properties were encouraged to upgrade and to improve the maintenance. Management of state-owned properties became better and URA initiated the sale through public tender of land parcels with shophouses for conservation. The purchasers had to complete conservation work according to guidelines and within a given time frame. The success of the sales and the changing perceptions of the traditional buildings made these also into financial successes. The shophouse streets were no longer “slums” but valuable property investments. By the 1990s a total of about 5,600 buildings were under conservation protection. Conservation of the urban fabric has increasingly been included as an important part of strategic planning. A new focus on place identity was highlighted in the 2001 review of the Concept Plan. The local stakeholders and communities became involved in a more interactive dialogue with government agencies so as to share ideas and possibilities. Conservation of the built environment has come a long way. The traditional shophouses and shophouse street environment together with individual buildings and the selected major buildings protected under the Preservation of Monuments Board are cherished as important parts of the heritage of the nation. Their uniqueness also gives a special identity to a place as well as being important elements in the overall urban design of that area. The importance given to identity is an international trend. The globalization of cultures and ideas have reinforced the appreciation and strengthening of national cultural identity. The built environment is the most noticeable part of this. It has further strengthened the conservation efforts, seen as an important part of the identity of being Singaporean. The URA states that in order to ensure conservation itself is sustainable it takes a balanced approach. Owners are allowed to adapt conservation buildings to serve contemporary functions as well as to meet modern needs. Experience shows that with economically viable use the buildings are properly maintained and their useful lifespan extended. By 2004, these were approprietely 6,400 buildings in 67 areas all over Singapore with conservation status (URA 2004). The conservation effort is now integrated with overall planning in a unique comprehensive package which includes a legal framework for conserving buildings, inviting private development, encouraging good restoration practices, private and public sector consultations and promoting conservation of the built environment through education. The interdependence of culture, identity and commercial tourism is international. This aspect was already strongly stressed in the 1980s. The tourism product today is probably even more dependent on this than ever before. For Singapore, the ethnic-related historic areas such as Chinatown and Little India, together with a

46

O.J. Dale

range of individual buildings and a mix of shophouse retention integrated with new modern developments, are vital components in the tourism package. The museum precinct with museums and Fort Canning Park and Singapore River are other important components in this package. Within the city area most of the building occupiers are recent tenants. The management have therefore largely become orientated towards the consumers they serve, in particular the different groups of visitors. The Singapore Tourism Board (STB) has also played a very active role both as adviser, organizer and promoter. The cultural heritage, in particular within the city is therefore expressed foremost in the buildings and the overall street ambience. The activities and the inside of the buildings represent the business needs of today. It is the market mechanism at work. Yet, it creates environments which are unique and are popular among visitors and locals alike. Combined, all give a place uniqueness and special attraction; a sense of being in a history book, yet working, dining, shopping and experiencing a culture trip in a pleasant business environment (STB 2006).

3.3 3.3.1

Singapore City Centre and the World External Impacts on Singapore

The economy of Singapore at the time of independence revolved around its entrepôt trade with related services and the British military complex. Raw materials of the region were shipped to Singapore, reprocessed, packaged and then exported. Manufactured goods were imported and redistributed from Singapore to the countries in the region. The trade was dominated by British companies together with Chinese middlemen who conducted the regional part of this trade. The financial services of banking and insurance, shipping, and warehousing were supplied by both British and local Chinese banks and enterprises. The bulk of commercial activities took place within the city centre shophouses. The relatively well-developed entrepôt and service sector coexisted with small-scale manufacturing of consumer goods for the domestic markets of Singapore and Malaysia. With a large, growing population and unemployment, the creation of employment opportunities became the overriding objective of the newly elected government once Singapore attained self-government in 1959. From the onset, the viability of Singapore as a nation was questioned. It seemed to be too small, it had no natural resources, it had no room to expand. The separation from Malaysia in 1965 did not dispel the feeling of gloom. To solve the mounting problems the government adopted a policy of rapid industrialization based, in large measure, on the attraction of foreign investments into an export-orientated labour intensive industry. Singapore was fortunate in that multinational corporations at this time were shifting production out of their homebase. Singapore gave these corporations a good base for their money by providing a

3 Sustainable City Centre Development

47

competitive environment. The growth of manufacturing acted as a catalyst for the growth of services, which as time passed became a growth sector in it own right. Singapore also became an increasingly popular tourist destination. By the late 1960s Singapore had proven that despite its size it both could and would prosper on its own. During the years since the multiplier effects of several growth sectors such as manufacturing, entrepôt trade, banking, financial and general commercial services and tourism have created a dynamic and fast growing economy. The overall national economic changes and growth are reflected in the gross domestic product (GDP). In 1960 the GDP at market prices was S$2,149.6 million, in 2006 it was S$209,990.9 million. This gives a per capita figure of S$1,306 in 1960 and S$46,832 or US$29,474 in 2006 (Department of Statistics 2007b). The key to Singapore’s success is probably the pragmatic use of the wide range of social and economic policies and their implementation. Singling out individual factors such as leadership or favourable geography is not sufficient. Even if one goes into the inner cultural workings of society, it is not enough to single out political stability, or teamwork or choice of a particular economic strategy. It is probably the successful combination of all these that has made Singapore’s economic growth so rapid (Schein 1996). A most important component is the sustained expansion in skills and knowledge. An example is the educational system. From humble beginnings, the National University of Singapore and Nanyang Technological University, despite being public universities are today ranked among the top hundred in the world (The Times 2006). They represent the thinking that all levels in the educational system must be top rated, from manual skills and vocational training to university – that the Singapore population must be able to provide better skills and services than neighbouring countries and perceived competition from further away. I may add that academic services have been targeted as a growth sector in its own right with several top American and European universities offering courses jointly with local colleges or with mini-campuses in Singapore. Singapore’s progress has never been entirely smooth. There have been crises, both economic and political, but each time there has been a pragmatic and visionary evaluation of problems and a determination to find solutions, and to anticipate problems before they become big problems. For example, around 2000 problemsignals were emerging. The impact of the Asian financial crisis in 1997 and the emergence of China and India as Asia’s new economic powerhouses had relegated Southeast Asia to a second choice destination for many foreign investors. Only about 10 percent of foreign investment in Asia (2000) went here as against 60 percent in the early 1990s. The lessons from both Singapore’s regionalization programme and internal developments indicated a central weakness of the Singapore economy, a lack of “entrepreneurial talent”. An Economic Review Committee was given the task in 2001 of drawing up a blueprint. Simultaneously a “Remaking Singapore” Committee was formed to explore the social and political changes deemed necessary. The vision proposed was that Singapore must become a leading global city, a hub of talent, enterprise and innovation. Singapore will become the most open and cosmopolitan city in Asia and one of the best places to live and work. In another decade and a half,

48

O.J. Dale

Singapore will connect China, India and Southeast Asia and beyond. We will become an Asian centre of choice for global talent, attracting skilled technicians, managers, entrepreneurs and creative people from all over the world. We will be a creative and innovative society, always eager to try out new ideas and change for the better, with a culture that respects achievements in the sciences and arts. (Ministry of Trade and Industry 2003) Over the years Singapore society has been orientated towards a global market; at the same time the regional ties have been strengthened and developed. However, it is a competitive environment where Singapore cannot take economic progress and sustainability for granted. The rapid economic transformation has provided the capital for real estate investments, consumers with increasingly more money to spend; the demand for space (offices, shops, hotels, recreation facilities, etc.). It is a cumulative circular process where each component effects the growth of the others. Since the 1980s, major transformations in the composition of the world economy, including the sharp increase in specialized services for firms and finance, have renewed the importance of major cities for producing strategic global inputs (Brenner and Keil 2006). This combination of the global dispersal of factories, offices and service outlets, and global information integration has contributed to a strategic role for certain major cities or global cities (Sassen 2001; 2006). These new geographies of centrality bind together the major international financial and business centres such as New York, London, Tokyo, and Amsterdam. It now also includes cities such as Singapore. The intensity of transactions among these cities, particularly through financial markets has increased sharply and so have the orders of magnitude. One can argue that today’s global cities are command points in the organization of the world economy, key locations for the leading industries – finance and specialized services and major sites for production. Modern Singapore has greatly benefited from the globalization of manufacturing, trade and services. It started its economic growth path as a production platform for international corporations as they relocated to low-cost manufacturing areas. Over the years it has changed from a low-cost production centre to a high-technology society. Already in the 1980s corporations were actively encouraged to locate their regional and international headquarters to Singapore. Another arm of a national development policy started in the 1990s through the government’s regionalization strategy. Rising labour and land costs started to make Singapore less attractive for labourintensive manufacturing activities. Instead of doing nothing and seeing foreign corporations move far away without any further linkage, the new strategy encouraged them to locate production in Singapore’s developed industrial parks and in selected cities across the Asia Pacific region (Pereira 2005). Of particular importance were production bases in neighbouring countries. These could still provide Singapore with a good source of income when they made use of Singapore as a service hub to meet their needs for transportation, finance and other headquarter services and facilities (Toh 2006). The governments of Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia agreed to establish a sub-regional cooperative framework known as the Indonesia–Malaysia–Singapore

3 Sustainable City Centre Development

49

Growth Triangle, and which included the Riau Islands in Indonesia and Johor state in Malaysia. It involved political decisions to reduce barriers to trade and investment as well as tax and financial incentives. In terms of an internal hierarchy Singapore has focussed on becoming the regional finance, business and high-technology centre, while unskilled and semi-skilled, labour-intensive industries move to Johor and the Riau islands of Batam and Bintan. While regional cooperation including trade agreements through ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) as well as bilateral agreements has ensured that the Southeast Asian countries have a stable and cordial good relationship to each other there has always been some competitive tension, in particular between Malaysia and Singapore. Malaysia’s “multimedia super corridor” is an example of a deliberate global city formation project. Massive public resources have been poured into developing and promoting show-case projects. The aim is both to establish Kuala Lumpur as part of the global city network and to challenge Singapore’s leading regional position. As mentioned, the Singapore government has actively promoted Singapore as a major player in the global economic and social network. Its limited and confined land area was turned to its advantage. The city and the nation was one and could be planned and managed accordingly. The city centre is the main stage for international and local business, finance, tourism, culture, arts and recreation. It is supported by and integrated with a well planned system of residential areas, new towns, areas for business, manufacturing, recreation etc. An important element in the development is that government has refrained from direct investment in prestige projects. Its policy has been to be a planner/manager and provider of infrastructure as well as active promoter of selective objectives. Even infrastructure investments must comply with cost/benefit targets. The exceptions are social infrastructure and public housing. Investment and construction of commercial buildings and private housing is up to the private sector, which must ensure that its investments are financially sound. A comparison of Singapore city centre with central areas in other major Asian cities shows many similarities in terms of the dynamics of development. Multinational and transnational corporations of all sizes play a significant role both through their own cross-national activities and through their relations with local firms in host cities. There are similarities in city centre role as the primary cultural, entertainment and recreational locations. Yet, there are major differences. Singapore has no large population reservoir: new entrants from elsewhere to the Singapore labour market must go through immigration controls. Only those with the desired qualifications are given permanent residence, an employment pass or work permit. Urban scale is another major difference. Singapore is relatively small. In a comparison the population in the major Asian cities is not only larger, but also growing at a faster rate. For example; Shanghai (14.5 million), Beijing (10.7 million), Guangzhou (8.4 million), Mumbai (18.2 million), Delhi (15.0 million), Seoul (9.6 million), Tokyo (35.2 million), Osaka (11.2 million); Bangkok (6.5 million), Hong Kong (7.0 million) (United Nations 2005). There is a major difference in land use structure in that through deliberate planning policies combined with landownership and control policies, and purpose

50

O.J. Dale

planned new towns, Singapore has a far more defined city centre compared to other cities where it tends to be fused with the surrounding sprawling city areas. The process of economic restructuring in global cities as diverse as London, New York and Shanghai generating a large growth in demand for low-wage workers and jobs that offer few advancement possibilities is present but there is not a big floating population ready to take jobs. The confined land area and a government committed to a fair distribution of development benefits have meant that planning and management of land resources has been a national priority task. Herein lies the main difference between Singapore and most other large Asian cities: planning of the city based on long-term vision, and determined plan implementation and management together with the advantage a nation/city boundary gives.

3.3.2

Energy, Pollution and Regional Cooperation

Regional cooperation is largely structured through ASEAN. While the organization is an excellent vehicle for trade agreements, mutual understanding and general political decisions, the member countries deliberately avoid what may be called interference or strong criticism of other members. One example is the environmental disaster caused by illegal logging of the Indonesian tropical jungle. Each year during the dry season large parts of Malaysia and Singapore, inclusive the city centre are for periods covered in haze produced by forest fires in Indonesia. The fires are largely a result of illegal logging and forest clearing. For more than a decade ASEAN environment ministers have had regular meetings to discuss ways to tackle the trans-boundary haze pollution in the region. Yet very little has happened. There have been a lot of committees. The haze is an example of a regional environmental problem but the solution lies with specific countries. If these lack the political will, and do not have the full administrative abilities, there is little recipient countries can do by direct involvement besides contributing to a haze fund. On paper it should be straightforward: less meetings, focus on the logging and the haze, develop the work plan and start implementing things on the ground. The Singapore industrial parks on Batam and Bintan were envisaged as selfcontained projects with minimal dependency on the surrounding environments, and with their communication and business linkages through Singapore rather than through Indonesia (Yeoh et al. 2003). These were initiated as a well-planned and efficient Singapore-styled business environment in emerging economies for local companies and Singapore-based MNCs. However, Batam, in particular; soon achieved a “boomtown” reputation which overwhelmed it. Almost half the population, which had more than tripled from 1990 to 2000 consisted of new migrants living in illegal squatter houses. Other industrial parks have been rapidly developing, many are backed by prominent Indonesian politicians, and serious environmental considerations are frequently lacking. Economically Batam seems to be a success. In 1989, prior to the creation of the Batam Industrial Park the total employment was about 11,000, mainly in local

3 Sustainable City Centre Development

51

services, tourism and oil-related firms using the island as a base (Yeoh et al. 2003). In 2004 the economic activities provided employment for more than 260,000 workers. It reportedly generated about 14 percent of Indonesia’s export income other than oil (Toh 2006). However, the need for environmental sustainability was clearly underestimated from the beginning. It highlights the problems of initiating projects with specific objectives, and then facing rapid development in an area with only very basic infrastructure, a “soft” administration, a huge increase in immigrant population over a short time, and location of large numbers of manufacturing firms with a wide range of requirements and outputs. Singapore and Hong Kong or highly urbanized countries need to import resources to meet their needs. Measured in ecological footprint they use far more resources than is consonant with their area capacity (Wackernagel 2001). In general, cities and industrial regions are dependent on a vast and increasingly global hinterland of ecologically productive areas. The industrialized countries appropriate the ecological output and life support functions of distant regions all over the world through commercial trade and the natural biogeochemical cycles of energy and material (Rees 1996). Even more dependent on imported ecological capacity from a global marketplace is a city-state such as Singapore. Singapore therefore has to rely on imported ecological capacity. Like Hong Kong it will have a more dispersed footprint which will have a substantial transportation overhead. However, it may be increasingly difficult to maintain competitiveness as the global deficit increases and resources become scarcer. Neighbouring countries such as Indonesia with a rapid growing population are already exceeding their capacity. Reduced ecological deficit to decrease risk exposure and secure future well-being is becoming increasingly important. A critical part of the sustainability relates to the production and use of energy. The production of energy is the Achilles heel in the Singapore energy sustainability programme. Another major problem is energy consumption and emissions such as carbon dioxide. Singapore is currently entirely dependent on imports for primary energy consumption. Crude oil constitutes about 80 percent and natural gas piped from Malaysia and Indonesia about 20 percent. To meet future demand and ease its dependence on natural gas there are plans to diversify the gas supplies by importing and processing liquefied natural gas. Future sources may include solar energy, biomass energy and wind-powered electricity but there are no immediate plans for such. Singapore has a very high energy consumption related to its population size. The reason for this seeming inconsistency when we know that the country has some of the most stringent energy use and conservation requirements is because of the industrial users. Singapore is one of the top three oil trading and refining hubs in the world. Visitors may not notice the size of these facilities as they are mainly localized on Jurong Island and Jurong industrial estates. The energy intensive petrochemical industries and Singapore’s role as the major oil products exporter result in energy consumption figures which in overall international statistics give Singapore very high comparative energy consumption rates per population and to GDP. Oil and gas are used as fuel for most industrial activities. Reduction in the carbon dioxide or CO2 emissions from the energy sector is therefore critical. A series of measures adopted as part of the Singapore Green Plan 2012 are tailored to reduce

52

O.J. Dale

CO2 emissions per GDP dollar by 25 percent from the 1990 level by 2012. A further step was taken in 2006 as Singapore committed itself to the Kyoto Protocol and would reduce emissions of CO2 and other heat trapping gases to about 5 percent below the 1990 level (Ibrahim 2006). Natural gas use is now rising rapidly as the government promotes policies aimed at reducing carbon dioxide and sulphur emissions. In 2002 it set a target of 60 percent of the country’s electricity to be generated from natural gas by 2012. The Energy Market Authority (EMA) reported that already in 2005 about 80 percent of the electricity supply came from natural gas. The newest power stations consist solely of natural gas-fired combined cycle gas turbines (EMA 2006). The import of natural gas requires extensive regional cooperation. Pipelines are costly to build; they need to be constructed over substantial distances; and require constant maintenance. The supply lines must be reliable since the recipient cannot easily switch supplier. So far pipelines have been constructed from Johor in Malaysia to Singapore as well as from separate fields in Indonesia. Despite the range of energy saving measures the demand for energy is projected to grow. APEC forecasts indicate an annual growth rate of 3.7 percent based on current trends. It is thus projected that by 2030 total energy demand will be 33 Mtoe as against 12 Mtoe in 2002. The industry sector will maintain the largest share with 55 percent, followed by transport (30 percent), commercial (10 percent) and residential (5 percent) (APEC Energy Review 2006). The implications are that the large consumers – in particular industry and transport – must completely revamp their operations and energy consumption patterns. If the current trends continue then the transport and commercial sectors are both expected to grow at about 4 percent annually. The primary reason for the high growth in transport is the projected demand for fuel in the air transport business centred on Changi Internationl Airport. Despite the constraints on ownership and use of passenger vehicles the demand for road transport fuel is expected to grow at 2 percent annually, the main reason being the increasing number of commercial vehicles. Besides the transport usage the main demand for energy within the city area is from the commercial sector as well as residential and institutional buildings. The main source of energy in residential buildings is electricity (90 percent) and gas. Electricity is the only energy source utilized in the commercial sector. The production of electricity is oil and gas dependent. By 2030 it is envisaged that at least 90 percent of the fuel will be natural or liquefied gas and more efficient power generation technology will be in use. Due to the tropical heat close to 60 percent of electricity used in commercial buildings such as offices and shopping centres is for air-conditioning of the buildings. Whether these are high-rise or low makes little difference in air-conditioning usage. Air-conditioning has become a necessity and has probably been a prerequisite for Singapore’s development success. Despite average outdoor temperatures of above 30 degrees Celsius and high humidity the controlled indoor environment has made living in a hot and humid tropical country pleasant. Efforts to improve energy efficiency started long ago. Energy conservation standards were introduced and included in the building code in 1979 prescribing the

3 Sustainable City Centre Development

53

maximum overall thermal transfer value (OTTV). The standards which over time have been updated gave permissible efficiency standards and guidelines both pertaining to the building envelope as well as internal conservation measures (Building and Construction Authority 2004; Singapore (SS) 530, 2007). In 2004 a more stringent and comprehensive set of regulations were introduced. Buildings had to comply with a stipulated thermal transfer value (ETTV). A green building rating system was also in place from the same year. The purpose was to reward and enhance the construction of buildings which incorporate environment-friendly design and construction practices. One feature was the inclusion of green landscaping and roof-top gardens together with site conservation and restoration criteria. In January 2007 the revised Singapore Standard 530 on Energy Efficiency for Building Services and Equipment was launched (SS 530, 2007). The new standard is operational from July 2007. SS530 provides the minimum energy efficiency standard of building equipment such as air-conditioning, heat rejection, water heaters, electric motors and lightings (SS 530, 2007). On average it is expected that implementation of the new standard will lead to energy savings of about 30 percent. It is also important to highlight other factors which contribute to sustainability levels. Besides building design and planning standards, all buildings must comply with stringent requirements pertaining to fire safety, drainage and sewerage, ventilation and general building codes. The majority of existing office buildings, shopping centres etc. were built in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s and constructed using old building codes and technology. By today’s standards they consume too much energy and are ripe for retrofitting. So far this process is moving at a slow pace. Perhaps one positive effect of the increasingly high energy costs is that it becomes more profitable to retrofit older buildings and thus achieve a dual objective:owners collect higher retals after retrofitting from tenants who would save energy expenses, and a subtantial overall energy saving and pollution reduction is attained. The question is, is this enough? Should the performance standards be higher? Should there be high penalties for building owners who retain low-performing equipment? Environmental awareness among the real estate and construction sector is still in its early stage. There is a conflict between what is desirable and business competitiveness. It is a difficult balance. If Singapore stipulates substantially higher requirements than those in competing business cities, then it adds onto other cost and regulatory factors which may make the cost of doing business too high. Yet, lower consumption and cleaner energy is a necessity.

3.4

Conclusion

A theme which has been running through all debates on future directions from the 1960s until the present is “we cannot stand still”. There is a continuous strive towards a higher level of activity which has been sustaining the development of Singapore, the nation, and so clearly reflected in the city centre environments.

54

O.J. Dale

Investments in the tourist industry are a good example of the drive for Singapore to reinvent itself (STB 2006). Singapore had been losing ground relative to other destinations. New initiatives for the tourist industry were made public in 2005. The government would spend S$2 billion in an effort to double the number of overseas visitors from 8.9 million in 2005 to 17 million by 2015 and create 100,000 new tourism-related jobs. The focus would be on three key areas: enhancing Singapore’s position as one of Asia’s most popular convention and exhibition centres; developing its attractiveness as a holiday destination; and promoting the country as a hub for services such as healthcare and education (Lim 2005). Central here is the decision to award a 12.2 hectare site at Marina Bay to Las Vegas Sands for an integrated resort. The key component in the project, named Marina Bay Sands is a casino. The idea of building a casino in Singapore has been mooted several times before and rejected. Social, political and religious organizations voiced opposition, even within government there were substantial doubts. Besides fears over the possible social fallouts another aspect is that Singapore may be moving too fast and it would be difficult to sustain such growth. The counterargument is that without the type of project the integrated resort represented Singapore would stagnate and not reach its ambitious goals. It is therefore necessary in order to sustain the long-term well-being of the hospitality sector. The project cost to the developer is more than S$5 billion and the project has a total floor area of 570,000 square metres of which the casino amounts to less than 5 percent. It is scheduled to be completed by 2010. Together with existing facilities and another integrated resort on Sentosa it will make Singapore a hub for tourism, business and conventions. The Marina Bay Sands will employ more than 10,000 people. The spin-off throughout the economy is expected to include 30,000 new jobs in the hospitality sector and an initial S$2.7 billion contribution to GDP. The government has put the stakes high. The project is part of its plan to push Singapore to a higher level in seeking to become a “global city, attracting talent from around the world, lively, vibrant, and fun to live in – a cosmopolitan hub of the region” (Lee 2005). There is now a radical shift in perceptions. In the debate in Parliament about the integrated resort Lee Kuan Yew stressed that the new Singapore cannot remain the same as old Singapore, a neat and tidy place with no chewing gum, no this, no that – not a fun place. The old model was to create a first world city in a third world region – clean, green, efficient, a pleasant healthy and wholesome society, safe and secure for everyone. These virtues are no longer considered sufficient. Now it must be an economically vibrant and exciting city to visit, with top class symphony orchestras, concerts, drama, plays, artists and singers and popular entertainment. These are the lifestyles international professionals and executives seek (Lee 2005). Therefore Singapore has to reposition itself. The underlying concept which has been generally accepted by the political leadership is that economic globalization is leading to a hierarchy of cities, dominated by the notion of enhanced competitiveness. The globalization is seen as creating a new role for cities. This again means that the global economic forces require cities to respond competitively with strategies adapted so as to attract new economic investments.

3 Sustainable City Centre Development

55

Singapore has from the early beginning had to position itself within the framework of international politics, capital and technology. However, as it seeks to embrace the economy as a global city, a talent hub and a centre for innovation and enterprise it will increasingly have to play even closer by the rules of a global marketplace. The Marina Bay development is at the centre as Singapore also tries to reinvent the urban landscape image. It is part of the repositioning of the Singapore brand or uniqueness. About 25 years ago most of the reclamation of the 340 hectare land called Marina South had been completed. The final part of the reclamation and the embankments along the bay was completed in the 1990s. Marina Bay is the name now given to the current city expansion. Together with the earlier completed Marina Centre the reclaimed land has given Singapore city a unique land reserve for future long-term expansion. Hardly any major city has such land bank opportunities available adjacent to the traditional city centre and existing CBD. The development concept reflects Singapore’s ambition to be a global city. The vision as outlined by the Minister for National Development is that “it is to be a place for thriving business, gracious living and endless entertainment, as well as a place of creativity, arts and culture, architectural excellence, world class recreation, global commerce and modern city life rolled into one” (Mah 2005). Marina Bay is envisaged to become the new heart of the city. It comprises the existing CBD at Raffles Place and Shenton Way, the hotel and convention concentration at Marina Centre, and the new developments around the bay. In 2007 the Marina Barrage will be completed and the water body within Marina Bay will together with Singapore River and Kallang Basin form a controlled water basin. The fit ones can then take a 12-kilometres walk around the entire bay area. The aim is to create a waterfront city in a garden. The overall planning concepts include a series of distinctive districts, clustered around major public open spaces and signature streets. A common services tunnel provides uninterrupted space for the network of underground electricity cables, pipes for water supply, cooling systems etc. A district cooling system is planned to alleviate individual building air-conditioning. The plans emphasize environmentally friendly design solutions. Within this framework an international design competition was recently completed (2006) for the 54hectare central park. The winning design by a UK-based team highlights the application of sustainable energy systems and environmental education. What will the future be like? Can Singapore sustain the growth levels people have got used to? For the next 20–30 years the main economic forces are generally considered favourable. The economy is closely linked to the three big economic centres, USA, EU and Japan. In addition China and India together with Australia are pulling at the economies of not only Singapore but also some of the adjoining countries. It is generally accepted that Singapore will have a significant role. However, some analysts would add that Singapore is a small, open economy. It is therefore highly vulnerable to international events outside its own control. It is pertinent to relate the sustainability of Singapore to the overall environmental problems in Asia, due in particular to the magnitude and scale of the development projects in China and India. Does this generate a fear for the future? Generally

56

O.J. Dale

speaking there is a growing understanding of the need to readjust policies. The view that international environmental problems are mostly created by the industrialized countries, in particular, the USA, is becoming obsolete, and instead there is a realization that Asian countries must urgently take action to avoid huge problems and thus expenditure in the near future. For example, China has now the world’s most ambitious national renewable energy targets (WWF 2005). Much can be learned from existing initiatives. Japan’s economy is already almost three times as energy efficient as that of the USA. There is also an optimistic attitude that problems can be solved. The rapid economic development and the transformation of the social structure have induced a positive view that there are always solutions. Singapore’s environmental challenges are about environmental quality, reconciling environmental and economic needs and dealing with rising expectations. Within the regional political framework it has to take a more pro-active role in stimulating and assisting in the implementation of more sustainable development directions. The overriding problems of energy supply, consumption and emissions are danger factors, not so much for the city centre but for Singapore’s overall energy sustainability levels. This means an urgency to accelerate the introduction of clean technologies, resource-efficient buildings and the deployment of new energy saving and greenhouse reducing technologies. Singapore city has come a long way; it is an example of what can be achieved when there is political will to set goals and to achieve these. Increasingly higher social and economic targets have been met. The city centre is exemplary and is clean, green and vibrant. With judicious adaptation of environment-friendly solutions it has the potential to present itself as a textbook example of a good sustainable city environment.

References Asia Pacific Energy Research Centre (2006) APEC energy review, energy demand and supply outlook (Singapore). Tokyo/Singapore Brenner Neil, Keil Roger (2006) The global cities reader. Routledge, London Building and Construction Authority (2004) Guidelines on envelope thermal transfer value. Singapore Dale Ole Johan (1999) Urban planning in Singapore: The transformation of a city. Oxford University Press, Shah Alam, Malaysia Department of Social Welfare (1948) Report of the social survey of Singapore, 1947. Singapore Department of Statistics (2006) Singapore census of population 2000, Yearbook of Statistics. Singapore. Department of Statistics (2007a) Singapore population estimates, Singapore. http://www.singstat. gov.sg Department of Statistics (2007b) Annual GDP at Current Market Prices, Singapore. http://www. singstat.gov.sg Energy Market Authority (EMA) (2006) Annual report 2005/2006. Singapore Foster, Pannell, Kerr et al. (1986) Tourism Product Development Plan for Singapore. Singapore Tourist Promotion Board Girardet Herbert (2001) Creating sustainable cities: the green books for the Schumacher Society, Devon Goh Keng Swee (1958) Urban incomes and housing – a report on the social survey of Singapore, 1953–54, Singapore

3 Sustainable City Centre Development

57

Khublall N (1984) Law of compulsory purchase and compensation-Singapore and Malaysia. Butterworths, Singapore Land Transport Authority (1996) A world class land transport system – White Paper, Singapore Land Transport Authority (LTA) (2006) http://www.lta.gov.sg accessed January 2007 Lee Hsien Loong (2005) Prime Minister’s speech in Parliament on the casino decision. Channel News Asia, 18 April 2005 Lee Kuan Yew (1977) Prime Minister’s speech at opening of Upper Pierce Reservoir, 27 February 1977 Lee Kuan Yew (2005) Minister mentor’s speech in Parliament, 19 April 2005, Singapore, Government Press release Lim Hng Kiang (2005) Unveiling tourism plan 2015. Asian Economic News, Minister for Trade and Industry, 18 January 2005 Lim Raymond (2007a) Transport Minister, Channel News Asia, 9 March 2007 Lim Raymond (2007b) Transport Minister, Business Times, 10 March 2007 Mah Bow Tan (2005) Speech at ULI international waterfront conference. Minister for National Development, Singapore, 3 October 2005 Mah Bow Tan (2007) URA corporate seminar, 9 February 2007. Minister for National Development, Singapore Ministry of National Development (1965) Master Plan – First review. Singapore, Planning Department Ministry of the Environment (1992) Green Plan – Towards a Model Green City – A Tropical City of Excellence, Singapore Ministry of the Environment (2006) Singapore Green Plan 2012. Singapore Ministry of Trade and Industry (1986) The Tourism Product Development Plan, Singapore Ministry of Trade and Industry (2003) Report of the Economic Review Committee, Singapore Pereira Alexius (2005) Singapore’s regionalization strategy. Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, Vol. 10, August 2005 Planews (1983) SIP Forum on Conservation 1. Singapore Institute of Planners, Singapore Rees William (1996) Revisiting carrying capacity: Area-based indicators of sustainability, population and environment. A Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, Vol. 17, January 1996 Sassen Saskia (2001) The global city: New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton University Press, New York Sassen Saskia (2006) Cities in a world economy. Pine Forge Press, Thousand Oaks, CA Schein Edgar (1996) Strategic pragmatism: The culture of Singapore’s Economic Development Board. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Singapore (SS) 530 (2007) Energy efficiency standard for building services and equipment, SPRING Singapore Singapore Tourism Board (2006) Beyond words: The next phase of uniquely Singapore brand campaign, Singapore Times (The) (2006) World university rankings, The Times higher education supplement, 6 October 2006 Toh Mun Heng (2006) Development in the Indonesia–Malaysia–Singapore Growth Triangle. SCAPE Working Paper no. 2006/06, National University of Singapore, Singapore United Nations (2005) The 2005 Revision Population Database. http://esa.un.org accessed December 2006 Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) (2001) Concept Plan 2001. Singapore Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) (2004) Skyline, March/April 2004, Singapore Wackernagel Mathis (2001) Advancing sustainable resource management, using ecological footprint for problem formulation. Policy Development and Communication, DG Environment, European Commission, 27 February 2001 World Wildlife Fund (WWF) (2005) The ecological footprint and natural wealth. Asia- Pacific, 2005 Yaacob Ibrahim (2006) MEWR news release, Minister for the Environment and Water Resources, 7 March 2006 Yeoh Caroline, Cai Charmaine, Wee Julian (2003) Transborder industrialization and Singapore’s industrial parks in Indonesia and China. Singapore Management University, Singapore

Chapter 4

Integrated Resort in the Central Business District of Singapore: The Land Use Planning and Sustainability Issues Tai-Chee Wong

4.1

Introduction

Placing land use planning in the same basket with sustainable development is a relatively new issue in the domain of modern urban development. Sustainability planning, if it is to be perceived as a new agenda of planning, has yet to overcome hurdles put forward by politicians, economists and the general public (see Wheeler 2004: 32). By the very nature of planning, whether in terms of land use, economic, social or environmental, its purpose is to achieve in a systematic and organized approach the set medium- or long-term objectives and goals. Land use planning therefore is an instrument per se or an organized profession for those practicing it that would have to adapt to changing circumstances associated with the set goals. For example, when sustainable urban development is a set goal that aims to achieve an environmentally pleasant city, the planning criteria deployed would then be based on a “visionary garden city”. Logically, in the real world, as decision-makers’ priorities change from one stage to another, land use planners are often in no position to undertake a holistic approach to planning of the urban environment. In practice, they habitually have to ignore the realities of political and economic power that have effected land use change, and have to facilitate its change orientated towards those set by decision-makers for one reason or another. Digital technology, rising global city competition and changing functions of the central business districts (CBD) have resulted in dynamic and rapid evolution of the city core functions today. Classical and conventional categorization of the 1950s is largely invalid for defining the contemporary functions of key world cities. Even in the large American cities during the 1950s, CBD structure and outlines were changing and difficult to define. Pictures of the CBD would reflect its continual response to prevailing economic conditions that would lead to a forecast of the future (see Murphy et al. 1955: 41–42; Gottmann 1961). Over the last 50 years, in North America

National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, 1 Nanyang Walk, 637616, Singapore, Republic of Singapore, e-mail: [email protected]

T.-C. Wong et al. (eds.), Spatial Planning for a Sustainable Singapore, 59–78 © Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2008

This page intentionally blank

60

T.-C. Wong

massive suburbanization has created new sub-core centres in extended metropolitan regions, diluting the values of the originally dominating CBD core to a series of sub-cores of challengeable functions in some cases (Kaplan et al. 2004). More significantly, and specifically during the last two decades, urban services growth and expansion of global tourism have injected new life into the conventional functions characterized by advanced and financial services. Furthermore, cultural and entertainment businesses have played an increasing role in the central city restructuring to regenerate dynamism with an aim to make the downtown core lively after office hours. Thus, an “innovative” planning response has begun. The CBD feature has changed from conventional emphasis on land values and land use intensity, to values of production of high-order services, whatever their nature. Under the impact of intensifying globalization and global city competition, the emphasis has equally shifted towards international digital flows of information and human traffic – the latter being notably business and higher-end tourists. In Singapore, a new urban form is being created downtown by global market forces as the city-state advances into a post-industrialist and post-modernist production system characteristic of an increasingly flexible specialization of urban services. Against this backdrop of development, ideas of sustainable urban development are a crucial element to counter the adverse effects of intensifying global business competition as a means of safeguarding rapid urban transformation. The encounter of CBD transformation with policy measures in favour of sustainable development has brought forth an intriguing issue to be discussed in this chapter. This chapter aims to examine the changing and expanding functions of the CBD, how financial and leisure services might merge to become a new integrated function. To understand how such a merger is taking place, the first part of the study investigates the rationale of Singapore’s integrated resort (IR) in association with its aim to expand tourism and knowledge-intensive industry – both are high-end revenue generators (Wong et al. 2006; Fagence 1995). The second part of the study analyses the land use planning and the characteristics of the Las Vegas Sands Proposal, highlighting how it takes Singapore’s aspirations forward to a global city. Finally, the sustainable development issue is addressed as to how sustainable economic development is justified against the controversial sustainable social development issue, the casino issue.

4.2

Changing Functions of the Central Business District

The definition of the Central Business District has changed in context over time. But the centrality, high index of accessibility and economic dynamism of such a district have remained crucial conditions to qualify for such a classification. Take the case of New York CBD. It had evolved from a port CBD in the 18th century as a port break-ofbulk site where European freight was unloaded and immigrants landed to a specialfunction CBD requiring financial and banking services. Its service area was restricted to a localized agricultural hinterland in the 19th century but went on to achieve national and global influence in the 20th century (see Kaplan et al. 2004).

4 Integrated Resort in the Central Business District of Singapore

61

Population density profiles in a spontaneously developed CBD in a vast country such as the USA might have followed the successive stages of city development outlined by Newling (1969) that demonstrated a staged pattern of density change from young, early maturity, late maturity and finally to old age. From a small CBD, its rapid growth bolstered high population density in the centre, to gradually shift from the centre to further away at the late maturity and old age stages. Such an evolution might be symbolic of some identified American cities but it could differ dramatically from Western Europe, Japan, Latin America and Southeast Asia (Scargill 1979: 43–46). Decline of the CBDs in the US began in the 1960s, as central city retail and financial services shifted to the suburban zones in the decentralization process. By the early 2000s, only an average of three percent of retail sales took place in the metropolitan area, with the bulk of business transferred to suburban centres and edge cities (Kaplan et al 2004). The experience of a colonial port city such as Singapore, Hong Kong, Jakarta or Manila had been very different from that of New York due to their functions preset by their colonial authorities, as well as their post-independence development path and economic strategies. Evolution of the Singapore CBD has been dramatic since its independence in 1965.

4.2.1

Evolution of the Singapore CBD and Inclusion of Integrated Resort in Marina Bay

The city-state of Singapore has a well-defined coastal boundary without a hinterland and its land development has been predetermined by a centralized land use planning system and a highly economic-biased policy. Having gone successfully through the modernist process of urban renewal and rational comprehensive planning of the Central Area during the 1960s–1970s (see Dale 1999; Wong and Yap 2004), the persistent pursuit for sustained economic growth by the People’s Action Party (PAP) government has tended to reorient Singapore’s CBD development towards the “entrepreneurial CBD package”. If downtown revitalization schemes in the US have been put in place in an attempt to bring back dynamism and prosperity to the once-powerful CBD, Singapore has initiated identical “growth machine” efforts but in different forms based on the business potential of the various schemes. As a symbol of the most advanced capitalist society, post-modern development of the American contemporary metropolitan centres is manifested in the massive suburban malls in a dispersed pattern, revitalized downtowns and festival market places (Knox and Pinch 2000; Gottdiener 1997). Concomitantly, new spaces of post-modern consumerist culture are being constructed in Singapore through the theming of Chinatown, the Singapore River and the creation of new entertainment commodities (Huang and Chang 2003). Against the backdrop of the old paradigms of economic growth, more and more researchers are broadening their scope of study from “land, labour, capital and management” to the new frontier of the “new economy” in the contemporary globalization era.

62

T.-C. Wong

Recreational planning in Singapore, with no exception, has also changed from the straight-jacket open and green spaces provision, recreational provision such as a bowling alley, squash courts and other outdoor facilities (see Koh and Tan 1976; Weiskopf 1982) to more intensive and sophisticated entertainment businesses. Increasingly, culture, amenities (notably tourism) and entertainment are seen as a consumption-based good, an important development tool to drive economic growth (Clark 2004; Ergazakis et al 2006). Whether leading and being led in the globally competitive world, the most significant and common goal of both the US and Singapore is to attract tourists to their new developments. If the American cities focus on winning the suburbanites back to downtown, the Singapore model’s purpose is to capture an international clientele. Over the last 15 years, many strategies have been used to render the downtown area more attractive, with the objective to sustain economic growth, and cultural and social viability. Like the United States, a number of downtown development strategies have been deployed in Singapore such as historic conservation and architectural preservation (inclusive of Chinatown, Little India, Kampong Glam), downtown and waterfront housing (gentrification for revitalization, see Wong 2006), cultural attractions (Esplanade’s Arts Centre), new office constructions, a convention centre (Suntec City), creation of underground pedestrian spaces. The latest and most current are the two integrated resorts in Marina Bay and Sentosa Island. This study focuses on the integrated resort at Marina Bay which is a planned merger of conventional CBD with the tourist-oriented business district, also known as tourism business district, a characteristic of the merger of functions.

4.2.2

A Merger of Financial and Leisure Services in Downtown Singapore

4.2.2.1

The Case of an Integrated Resort at Marina Bay

Integrated resorts create a themed environment that today forms a strong basis of modern tourism operations. A themed environment satisfies the search for leisure and happiness by means of production of desire made effective through marketing, advertising and the provision of related services and infrastructure. It is therefore a commercial venue that has potential for realizing substantial profit that justifies the use of a prime and centralized site, characterized supposedly by intensive commercial usage. An urban tourism business district, by definition, does not always rely on natural resources but has an all-year orientation in services, using a concentrated form, cultural images and purpose-built structures to woo visitors. In an increasingly mobile business world, the tourism business district is also interpreted as an inevitable supplement in after-hour vitality and recreational nightlife for major CBDs currently suffering from deserted streets after dark (see Getz 1993, Zhang and Shang 2006). The integrated resort as a tourism business district in the making at the

4 Integrated Resort in the Central Business District of Singapore

63

Marina Bay is adjacent to the existing CBD; both engage high intensity of land use, high-value activities and are highly accessible. They are mutually dependent, given that the former depends on the intensity of business travel in relation to the CBD financial and professional/specialized services of foreign multinationals and local international firms. Differentiated by separate functions, they share the Marina Bay as the common waterfront; the CBD’s morphological feature is characterized by skyscrapers as a built skyline landscape complemented by the integrated resort’s recreational significance of sea, beach, water sports and other leisure services. Matching up with the need to capture entertainment as a key source of growth, the Singapore downtown reserve – Marina South has modified its land use functions. Marina Bay, which is situated at the north of Marina South, was planned for local shopping (low- to medium-density commercial use) in the 1991 revised Concept Plan. With rapid global change since then, and as Singapore intensifies its tertialization process towards a knowledge-intensive economy, themed and commodified cultural activities have overshadowed conventional land use considerations. A new and growing concern of optimizing the prime central city lands takes priority from the early period of the decade 2000s. This time, it is a distinct segment of tourist market for higher-end leisure consumers found to be desirable next to Singapore’s existing CBD – the making of an integrated resort.

4.3 4.3.1

Rationale of Singapore’s Integrated Resorts Tourism: Global Trend

Since the 1980s, increasing tertialization of the global economy has been remarkably reflected in the tourism industry – the world’s largest service industry. It is anticipated that by 2010 the industry will contribute to 11.6 percent of global GDP, and 9 percent of global employment. International tourists across the globe would increase from 673 million in 2000 to 1,602 million in 2020, involving more than US$2 trillion spending in different categories of hospitality services. Comparable rates of growth are also projected for East Asia and the Pacific which will surpass the Americas to become the second most important recipient region after Europe. Real income growth, demographic and social changes, new tourism products as well as technological and trading developments are, interalia, factors that have bolstered tourism in the Asia Pacific as the fastest expanding region in international tourism arrivals. Major cities as gateways are expected to benefit from the MICE sector (meetings, incentives, conventions and exhibitions) more than adjacent regions or natural resort areas. Multiplier effects and job creation impacts are greater in gateways than non-gateways (Mistilis and Dwyer 1999; Singapore Tourism Board 2002). Whether Singapore will be one of the focal points would very much depend on its ways and means in attracting such huge tourist flows.

64

T.-C. Wong

The rise in global tourism has simultaneously undergone dramatic change and internal restructuring over the last two decades as globalization further intensifies. No longer are middle class travelers satisfied with homogeneous packages, known as mass tourism, which are “perceived to be characterless, unfashionable and low in quality”. Customer expectations for product differentiation and quality have turned to be priorities where money is increasingly spent (Morgan 1998: 317). Morgan (1998) has identified a number of factors that had contributed to the decline of conventional tourism. First, it is the “variety-seeking behaviour” of tourists as consumers. This mindset makes new destination offers more appealing. Second, with the general rise of purchasing power for those who could afford to travel, a new recreational lifestyle offering relaxation, and an opportunity to forget about the competitive routine working life, often an office-bound repetitive working cycle, capture greater interest. New market and new product needs are transforming the tourism landscape.

4.3.2

Local Singapore Tourism

A number of restrictions have limited growth of Singapore’s conventional tourism industry. Weaknesses include the lack of historic sites, lack of richness in features of cultural identity for a city-state emerging from a newly independent status. Though known to some extent as a food paradise, there is limited success given its being an isolated tourism spot in a small island of only 720 square kilometres, separated from neighbouring places for connecting pleasure seekers. Tourism and infrastructural links with Batam, Karimun, Southern Johor are relatively poor. Falling tourist numbers and income over the last decade has spoken for itself. During 1993–2002, tourism in Singapore had lagged behind other sectors in the national economy. Its contribution dropped from 6.1 percent in 1993 to 3 percent in 2002. The slow or rather stagnant growth in numbers of tourists to the city-state has added to the worry of top decision-makers that Singapore, as a young nation, is handicapped by a lack in “spectacular wildlife, historical relics or world heritage sites, [and] seasonal variations” vital in attracting tourists (Lim 2005). As Table 4.1 shows, business and business cum holiday tourists who have a higher spending power have not increased to any significant extent from the mid-1990s. The business cum holiday category has indeed started to decline from then onwards. More importantly, Singapore’s market share in the fast expanding tourism industry in the Asia-Pacific region has declined over the last few years (Department of Statistics 2005). The globalization of capitalism has posed a threat to Singapore’s pursuit of sustained economic growth, and has spread a sense of insecurity. In contemplating remedial measures, an integrated resort was seen as worthy to be integrated in the central area given its high accessibility from the Changi Airport. A new product, for countries where there is none, is the gaming industry. A casino or gaming is a kind of market segmentation that leads to the segregation of users – those who are encouraged to use it and those who are not encouraged or forbidden

2000

TOTAL 7,049.8 7,350.0 6,755.5 6,207.4 5,493.6 6,033.3 6,292.6 Americas 357.0 308.2 344.3 357.7 389.4 355.5 404.1 Asia 5,584.2 5,914.2 5,365.6 4,770.7 3,929.6 4,599.2 4,768.7 Southeast Asia 2,521.3 2,829.2 2,419.3 2,144.7 1,485.0 1,756.4 2,158.4 Europe 714.0 713.3 677.0 693.9 753.7 636.9 698.0 Oceania 293.1 323.8 295.3 323.1 349.1 375.9 357.7 Africa 101.4 90.5 73.2 62.1 71.7 65.8 64.1 Source: (Compiled from Singapore Tourism Board 2006: Total Expenditure of Visitors, Ministry of Trade and stb.com.sg/asp/tou/tou0201.asp, accessed 25 September 2006.)

Table 4.1 Total expenditure of visitors in Singapore by region, 1994–2003 (S$ million) Year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

2002

2003

5,699.3 5,425.8 4,315.6 361.4 347.6 256.3 4,103.8 3,905.1 3,161.7 1,980.1 1,854.7 1,671.7 746.5 714.6 571.5 407.6 405.5 286.3 80.1 53.1 39.7 Industry, Singapore. Available at: http://app.

2001

4 Integrated Resort in the Central Business District of Singapore 65

66

T.-C. Wong

to use it. In the Singapore context, there are two layers of segregation. First, the religious taboo of Islam that forbids Muslims to gamble. The second is the need to segregate the local ethnic Chinese who have little fortune to lose in the gambling business; and this restriction is thought to be necessary to mitigate social problems of gambling addiction and potential family conflict. As such, the objective of the marketing orientation is to increase the market publicity to keep up the proportion of overseas tourists in the gaming business. Proliferation of the themed environment and the inclusion of a gaming component in the integrated resort serve therefore the purpose of realization of capital to a greater potential and meeting the goal of production of desire (see Gottdiener 1997; Braun 2005).

4.3.3

Towards Knowledge-Intensive Economy

After four decades of close integration with the OECD developed economies, there are some similarities between Singapore and their development trends. First, there is a contraction of production capacity and workforce in basic industries, those characterized by Fordist mass-production manufacturing. The processes in lowerordered industrial decline have been followed up by more new industries of flexible specialization and technology-intensive in character. For both OECD and Singapore in general, service sector growth has been a key feature of economic restructuring towards a post-Fordist production system and deregulation of financial and other service industries. Like other cities of quite identical ranking in the Asia-Pacific Rim such as Shanghai, Fukuoka, Hong Kong, and Vancouver, Singapore constitutes one of the emerging service poles competing for global service investment, global trade markets and global city networks (see Daniels 1998; Hutton 2003). According to Hutton’s (2003: 30–31) classification and ranking by hierarchy, Singapore, together with Hong Kong, Seoul, Osaka, San Francisco and Sydney are second-order global cities in the Asia-Pacific region. They are ranked after the first-order global cities Tokyo and Los Angeles which are dominant corporate control centres with downtown complexes and headquarters of international banking and finance. More significantly, Tokyo and Los Angeles, on top of being core to major universities of international standing, are also “global centres of cultural production and dissemination, media concentration, and applied design and creative industries”. Despite the identical trend in the search for market orientation and production linkages, urban service centres in the Asia-Pacific and the OECD regions are unlikely to be heading for similar urban morphology, identity or image representative of them. Even the CBD form is likely to show some basic features of functional differentiation, each in response to its own needs, competitive advantages and strengths, or sometimes probably in compliance with the level of political acceptability of certain policy measures. City rank-order has little direct correlation with level of service specialization. Flexibility of core activities in the CBD in assisting

4 Integrated Resort in the Central Business District of Singapore

67

major cities to achieve success in global business competition leads us to examine the latest development in Singapore’s downtown core where integration of different sectors in finance, services, retailing, leisure and entertainment is being used to create a new dynamic CBD. The CBD comprises specialized and high-value financial services which are critical in maintaining Singapore’s international competitiveness. As part of the globally advanced economy, Singapore’s strategy, as highlighted in 2000 by the Singapore Productivity and Standard Board (2000), is to develop itself into: An advanced and globally competitive knowledge economy within the next decade [before 2010]. At the same time, Singapore should strive to become a premier services hub in Asia with a global orientation by growing [its] existing hub services and developing new high growth services.

In 2003, this strategic statement was translated by the Economic Review Committee into a land use planning and design in the city centre area. Bigger pieces of land for integrated phased development, including an integrated Business Financial Centre (BFC), were to be allowed for the first time in Singapore planning history after its independence in 1965. Following this planning intention, the Report of the Economic Review Committee, in an attempt to promote and strengthen Singapore’s position as a financial hub, recommends thus (MTI 2003: 110): A master developer of such a centre should be given the flexibility to plan, design and phase the development of the project to match rapidly changing global needs. In addition, the Government can facilitate the development of the BFC by making the payment scheme as flexible as possible. Commitment from several suitable anchor tenants should also be sought before it is developed.

This preemptive notion set the prerequisite for a merger of financial and leisure services in Singapore’s new CBD.

4.4

Planning of the Integrated Resort at Marina Bay

When Marina South was reclaimed from the sea in the late 1970s, it was aimed at providing additional prime land adjacent to the central business district, with Raffles Square and Shenton Way as its core. The planning intention at that time focused on strengthening Singapore’s international financial position and status, using specialized financial and other services to bolster growth. No notion and norm of sustainable economic development as understood in the present day was ever associated with it, except that for a green and clean garden city. During the revision of the Singapore Concept Plan in the late 1980s, planning options were built fundamentally in pursuit of sustained economic growth, landscaped greenery aesthetics and quality housing. A mix of office and commercial buildings, parks, medium- to highdensity housing and open spaces along the waterfront edges was put into the design. Medium- to high-density housing was incorporated as part of the downtown revitalization and gentrification effort to revive the Central Area (Wong 2006).

68

T.-C. Wong

The Revised Concept Plan was approved by the Singapore Cabinet in 1991, but implementation was slow and response from the private sector in the 1990s was cool, in particular in the wake of the financial crisis in 1997. On 13 March 2004, a state-led initiative changed the prospects for the inactive Marina Bay waterfront when an integrated resort was publicly announced – a S$300 million initial outlay would be spent in key infrastructure and facilities in the Marina Bay to prepare for massive public and private investments (Low 2004). This included building a 3.35 km waterfront promenade around Marina Bay overlooking the Fullerton Hotel across the bay. In December 2004, public bids were invited following a nine-month debate whether Singapore should overturn its long-standing ban on casinos. On 19 April 2005, Minister Mentor Mr Lee Kuan Yew spoke in the Singapore Parliament, urging Singaporeans to rethink in the interest of the nation’s future whether it should reject an integrated resort on the grounds that it would have a casino. Aspiring to reposition Singapore and making it more cosmopolitan on a par with leading global cities such as London, Paris, New York, San Francisco, Sydney, he asserted that Singapore had a special role in the economic renaissance of Asia and as a business centre for leisure and entertainment. He also reassured that Singapore would have the determination and capability to manage social problems which might arise from casino gambling (Lee 2005). In February 2006, amidst unsettled controversies and worries about the adverse consequences of gambling, the Singapore Parliament passed the Casino Control Act to set up a Casino Regulatory Authority to monitor and regulate gaming business. Three months later in May, the successful bidder was announced from out of four world-class entertainment firms or consortiums: Las Vegas Sands, MGM-CapitaLand, Harrah’s Entertainment and Genting International. And the winner went to the US-based Las Vegas Sands.

4.4.1

Planning of Marina Bay’s Integrated Resort: Land Use Plan

4.4.1.1

Characteristics of the Las Vegas Sands Proposal

In response to the ambitions of the Singapore Tourism Board1 (STB), Las Vegas Sands, the world’s largest casino company by market value, has proposed a grand and comprehensive resort plan to meet Singapore’s economic and tourism objectives. The plan has highlighted five elements that pleased the selection panel consisting of five cabinet ministers. These five elements were the MICE (meetings, incentive travel, conventions and exhibitions), entertainment (branded symbol of a global-scale entertainment business with tourist appealing varieties), attractions (financial, professional

1 The Singapore Tourism Board hoped to increase the number of tourists from less than 9 million in 2005 to 17 million by 2015, to generate 100,000 jobs and to triple the tourism revenues to S$30 billion during this period (Straits Times, 27 May 2006: H4).

4 Integrated Resort in the Central Business District of Singapore

69

and specialized services), retail and dining experience (globally appealing shopping offers, floating pavilion restaurants with top chefs), and the gaming business offer (Straits Times 27 May 2006: H4). Accordingly, the panel, which was supported by several design specialists, remarked that the land use design had tied in well as an extended new downtown of the Central Area where 110,000 square-metre convention space was planned. Another decisive factor could be the prominent feature in the design of a one-hectare sky park situated on the top of three 50-storey hotel towers overlooking the waterfront in all directions (see Fig. 4.1). Capturing international attention in the resort industry, the Marina Bay integrated resort, as proposed by Las Vegas Sands, has incorporated key features well described by Goh Kim-Chai (2006: 9), who wrote for URA’s periodical Skyline thus: Sands’ design also responds well to the existing and future developments in Marina Bay and the overall planning intention to create a layered, three-dimensional skyline. Three soaring, 50-storey hotel blocks are located between Bayfront Avenue and Sheares Avenue, with three lower-rise components housing the MICE facilities, casino and theatres fronting the Bay. This makes the development relate well to the waterfront promenade … The facades of the hotel towers facing Garden at Marina South have fully landscaped balconies, extending the greenery vertically up the building and across the roof terraces reinforcing Singapore’s image as ‘City-in-a-Garden’.

On the top of S$1.2 billion of land cost, Las Vegas Sands has a plan to invest S$3.85 billion in the resort, totalling more than S$5 billion. Targeted to be fully completed by 2009, the resort covers 20.6 ha and is offered a lease of 60 years. Paralleling the launch of the integrated resort, STB has also drawn from its S$2 billion development fund to put forward a strategy over the next 5 years to:

Fig. 4.1 Proposed Marina Bay Sands Integrated Resort Source: Urban Redevelopment Authority (2006) Skyline. July-August Issue, p.9

70

T.-C. Wong

(a) Woo international organizations to establish regional offices in Singapore with financial assistance provided by STB; and (b) Assist event organizers including international firms with no local registered office to draw in mega-events. Apart from STB, other government agencies and the private sector would also have incentives to promote Singapore as a global business hub (Straits Times 4 August 2006: 1).

4.4.2

Planning Singapore’s Aspirations for Ascent Towards a Global City?

The Marina Bay integrated resort is integral of Singapore’s aspirations to build itself into a tourism and financial services hub in Asia as its economy moves in a knowledge-intensive globalization era. From introduction of the garden city concept as the fundamental land use logic in the 1960s, planning in Singapore has since evolved slowly but steadily along its economic-biased development path and space management processes. Adopting a pragmatic and forward looking approach, the city centre went through an effective urban renewal and slum clearance, at the end of which a modern central business district came into being in the late 1970s. This modernist procedure set the footing for an economic premise of sustained growth. With the “garden city” concept initiated earlier, land use planning set a bipolar ruling of sustainable economic cum environmental development, giving relatively little attention to the social equity issue. Key actors in Singapore’s land use planning process have been: (a) the state, through its planning agencies such as the Urban Redevelopment authority, the Housing and Development Board, the Jurong Town Corporation, the Land Transport Authority, the Singapore Land Authority; (b) the professionals in both public and private sectors (planners, architects and developers/contractors); (c) the interest groups (private land owners, to an extent environmentalists, clan association/community representatives; and (d) general stakeholders (the business groups and citizenry). The overwhelming dominance of the state manifests itself on behalf of public interest, towards which professional planners also have a committed role. On behalf of the government, planners regulate land use allocations, sales of public land for property development, and are responsible for protecting the environment Determination to make the integrated resort a success has been alimented with water sports. Situated between the designated integrated resort and the existing CBD is Marina Bay (Fig. 4.2). In supplementing the new development of the CBD at the Marina area, the Bay has been planned for a motorized and non-motorized water sports zone. Here, water sports such as canoeing, dragon boating and kayaking will be set in motion, with water taxis cruising around the bay area. Merging with the waters of the Marina Channel, the Singapore River and Kallang Basin, Marina Bay is scheduled to become a Greater Marina Bay to “provide an enlarged stage for activities and events …[including] international events” to highlight Singapore’s downtown skyline (URA 2006: 12–13). Also, the area around the Marina Bay between Collyer Quay and the integrated resort will

Fig. 4.2 The Existing Central Business District Source: URA (1995) Downtown core (part) planning area. Planning report. Singapore

Fig. 4.3 Proposed Marina Bay Financial Centre Source: URA (2007) Skyline Jan/Feb 2007 issue, Singapore

72

T.-C. Wong

be designated a Marina Bay Financial Centre (MBFC) (see Fig. 4.3). By 2010, this centre is expected to provide 244,000 square metres of gross floor area (61 percent office space and 39 percent of luxurious apartments), doubling consequently the existing office space of Singapore. Recovery of the property market and national economy in 2006 has furnished positive signals in head-starting the launch towards the end of the year2 (Straits Times 06 Oct 2006: 1).

4.5

Sustainable Economic Development versus Sustainable Social Development

To most people, sustainable economic development carries a much pragmatic meaning of continued business success or, at the national or local government level, a sustained achievement of high economic growth rates. At a more in-depth level, nevertheless, economic development will not be sustainable if its operations are not executed on par with sustainable social and ecological development pursuits (Macnaghten and Pinfield 1999). Broadly speaking, an economic system, whatever its scale, cannot be claimed to be sustainable without effective linkage to the triangular relationship of economic with social/cultural and ecological/environmental requirements. For instance, economic growth jacked up by tourism pays the price of high consumption of fossil fuel which is ecologically unsustainable. Furthermore, where economic growth thus produced could lead to polarizing incomes, such an outcome is socially unsustainable. Consequently, “free trade” if conducted at the expense of and unmatched by social and ecological goals, has a tendency to support corporate dominance and competition, and cannot be perceived a fair “free trade”. Economic outcome cannot be an end in itself but should be employed as a means to serve social interests and communal harmony. Ideally, corporate interests should share their social and ecological responsibility with non-profit organizations dedicated to a common sustainable future of the community. It is therefore the concept termed as “humanizing economic relations” that is of utmost importance when businesses, public or private, should be held accountable in their own way for social and ecological responsibility (see Green Party 2004). Many neo-classical and Keynesian economists have difficulty in recognizing sustainability associated with ecology and social equity as a professional issue because this concept is incompatible with conventional theory of economics. More often than not, such an extra-economic association beyond conventional economic logic could be cited as a source of “market failures” (Ikerd 1997). This is argued on

2

A first phase launch of luxurious apartments at the Marina Bay Financial Centre in early December 2006 witnessed a success, recording a high-price of S$2,700 per square foot. All 422 units of the 99-year lease property were booked soon after launch (Straits Times 14 December 2006:H26). Among the buyers, 40 percent were estimated to be from, inter-alia, Indonesia, Hong Kong, India, the Middle-East and China.

4 Integrated Resort in the Central Business District of Singapore

73

the basis that short-term maximization of profits and satisfaction of consumption desire will eventually deplete natural and social resources on which the survival of the human species relies. Accordingly, some principles should be used to guide economists towards a sufficiently broad sustainable economic development that could build up a basis for long-run human progress. The conventional economic approach, which has a rooted belief in profit maximization and that growth has no limits, is in no position to lead us towards sustaining long-run human progress.

4.5.1

Tourism and Sustainable Development

In his speech at Parliament House on 18 April 2005, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong admitted that the primary aim of the integrated resorts proposal was to boost the tourism industry. The casino component of the integrated resorts was debated for a while in 2004 in the local Singapore media and Parliament before it was adopted. Adoption was made on the basis that the casino would attract large crowds from neighbouring countries, and is a positive factor for competition (see Lee 2005). The basis of the argument is linked with the assumption that social or environmental problems could be managed without objecting to the current broad advanced capitalist system that has guided global development of high-value production systems. The argument rests on the belief that sustained economic growth should be driven by market forces which could be the key towards improving welfare for the citizens in the long-term (see Knox and Pinch 2000). In an attempt to diversify its service-based economy which is also fast expanding, an integrated resort in the CBD is interpreted as a newly reinvented development scheme that global cities such as New York, London and Paris are currently doing. For the Singapore government, the challenge is to have the city-state catch up with world leading cities and not to let it fall into the backwater of global city competition. After all, as was explained by Premier Lee in Parliament, the casino is only a small component (3–5 percent of total allowable floor area) of the whole integrated resort programme which would include development of grand hotels, shopping malls, convention and exhibition buildings, museums and theatres. In a broader context, the integrated resort is to complement other major projects that aim to breathe new air into the new downtown area: the Esplanade, the new Sports Hub in Kallang and the Marina Barrage. Besides the 35,000 jobs that the two IRs (Marina Bayfront and Sentosa Island) would generate, the whole multiplier effect was estimated to be substantial. After portraying the adverse effects of the gambling element, the Prime Minister’s decision was to proceed with the IRs on the basis of Singapore’s long term national interest and its vision to be a “vibrant and dynamic city in Asia” (see Lee 2005). As the aim of the integrated resort is to attract large numbers of international tourists, the problem therefore is how to minimize adverse impacts on the quality of the air, water and other natural elements in order to sustain the ecosystem’s overall integrity. Environmental management is a means through which sustainable

74

T.-C. Wong

economic development and environmental protection must be made mutually supporting and not mutually exclusive (see Murphy 1998: 176; Wong 2006). Given that economic resources or financial revenues are crucial for protecting and preserving the physical environment, business objectives can be made compatible with inducements to the tourism industry. The issue, however, is the carrying capacity. What is the upper limit of tourist volume that is acceptable to justify for a sustainable tourism development? It is an issue that is obviously difficult to define and even more difficult to measure in terms of the extent of environmental or social stress. Furthermore, this notion presets an “existence of fixed and determinable limits to development” or “limits to acceptable change” which, by right, is a dilemma per se. More specifically, the business concern is normally based more on the conditions that the selected area could generate revenues rather than on the level of tolerance an area can bear (Murphy 1998: 180–181). As raised in the early part of this study, the integrated resort has been deployed to help sustain economic growth in Singapore, as a result of falling incomes from tourism, and by creating new “knowledge-intensive” spaces in the extended CBD – the Marina Bay. The environmental impact of the integrated resort is mirrored in land use intensification, and the making of a world-class site for entertainment, finance and other high-end services. A greater intensification implies higher consumption of fuel and use of water resources. Both fuel and water are imported commodities that require revenues generated from the integrated resort to acquire them. Nevertheless, the environmental impact is expected to be manageable and is unlikely to be noticeable to the surrounding environment. Within the notion of economic sustainability, whilst the environmental impact is seen as manageable and the cultural impact is speculative at this stage, the social effect is perceived to be at the highest stake of the IR.

4.5.2

Social Impact: Casino as a Planned Entertainment Machine

Before examining the social impact, it is useful to look briefly at the current development in Singapore – the widening gap between its social strata. While its minimal welfare oriented policy has been ideologically supported by neo-liberalism that has swept through heavy-burdened welfare-states in Europe since the 1980s, Singapore’s push for a sustained growth in the globalization era is believed to have had polarization effects with low-income earners as losers. A new “dual economy” has become more noticeable (see Tay 2007). Questions have arisen as to the validity of Singapore’s responsiveness to the market-driven entertainment business as a source of sustaining economic growth. In response to the divergent income patterns, public measures such as increasing goods and services taxes to seven percent to generate more revenues for lower income groups, provision of workfare bonuses and skills retraining are being undertaken. Gambling has historically been perceived by the ethnic Chinese community as a cultural tradition in Singapore. It is generally seen as something amoral but tolerated

4 Integrated Resort in the Central Business District of Singapore

75

if it is not excessive such that it results in family problems and financial ruin. More often than not, gambling is operated “underground” or disguised in different forms. Having inherited the British colonial policy, the Singapore government has laid down regulations to tax gambling such as horse racing, “Toto” and the four-digit draws. All other unregistered gaming exercises are deemed illegal. Besides taxation that generates state revenues, legitimization of casino in Singapore may be argued for on the basis that “underground” and disguised gambling practices could be mitigated, regulated and managed in a more secured manner. Gambling taxation, derived presumably from voluntary participants, may be used or redirected for other social, educational and welfare needs, as is the case of a casino set up in an Indian community reserve in Canada. However, though casino gambling could serve as a means of state accumulation, the potential costs that were observed in the Indian reserve such as gambling addiction, alcoholism and rising domestic violence were a trade-off that could not be overlooked (see Skea 1997). In the United States and Australia, adverse effects cited include the rise in pathological gamblers and social problems in the proximity of casinos (see Low 2005), which is seen as a countering factor to social sustainability. What then is social sustainability in an urban context? Yiftachel and Hedgcock (1993: 140) define urban social sustainability as having: the continuing ability of a city to function as a long-term viable setting for human interaction, communication and cultural development. It is not necessarily related to the environmental and economic sustainability of a city, although the links often exist between the three areas … Such a city is characterized by a lack of overt or violent intergroup conflict, conspicuous spatial segregation, or chronic political instability. In short, urban social sustainability is about the long term survival of a viable urban social unit.

Many researchers have furnished evidence that gaming affects productivity, and that gaming is seen as a second-class leisure activity linked to irrational motivation, but casino gaming is doubtlessly a good source of public revenues (Smeral 1998; Choi 1997). Smeral’s study of Austria shows that casinos are a major recreational attraction for local and regional tourists; and their services are an important component of the regions’ qualitative competitiveness. It is hard to imagine that the casino in Singapore could lead in future to urban violence or political instability, other than the “moral degeneracy” debate in 2004. No public infringements in Macau, except perhaps money laundering, could be hitherto effectively associated with its many casinos. As to the maintenance of crime control and law enforcement, in the study on the impact of casino gambling to the local Canadian community, in Windsor, Ontario, Albanese (1997) used a prediction model to address three crime-related concerns. These concerns were: a) the integrity of the games themselves; b) organized crime infiltration; and c) the impact on street crime in and around the casino. Control of the gaming integrity of the casino governance rests with the police. In the case of Singapore, responsibility is likely that of the Commercial Crime Department which will have to ensure fair play and honesty in the games. Casinos, at least in theory, are a potential hotbed of organized crime because of huge cash turnovers of winners and losers. Consequently, street-level crimes are likely to rise, putting increased pressure on police resources.

76

4.6

T.-C. Wong

Conclusions

For a small island-state which has transformed itself from a largely rural area to a highly urbanized city-state over a span of 40 years, Singapore’s CBD was created out of a dualistic town centre of the early 1960s to that of a western-modeled financial district in the 1990s. Faced with new challenges in the global city competition, the modernist CBD moves a step further towards a post-modern dimension, diversifying and broadening its functions to include, among others, entertainment culture as one of the core elements of high-value service activities. Economic priority considerations have been the determining factor in adopting an integrated resort or tourism business district including a casino in the Marina Bay, the extended zone of the current CBD. The casino will be subject to rules and regulations as to who would use it and who could afford it. Global cities operate as a producer and as a consumer; both factors contribute towards the gross domestic product (Glaeser et al 2004). In cities acting as gateways for international business travellers, the leisure industry, if successful, can be made into a growth machine given their higher-value activities and multiplier effects. This industry in the post-modern Singapore has become a core national planning project in search of sustained economic growth. In land use planning terms, the integrated resort has turned itself into part of the commodified and contested space in the midst of globally competitive businesses in which Singapore has opted to be an active player. The IR industry is creating a new Singapore identity in a venue of strategic importance designated for a deepened and new accumulation of wealth of in particular international origin. This new place identity supported by leisure and recreational services, beaches, waterbodies, greenery is in the making and is targeted to be a centre of globalised high-end consumerism. The resort is also a symbolically new organization of urban space and imaging on the waterfront. The conventional paradigm that profits and growth are conditions of victory and success in the game of global city competition has borne evidence of an endangered future if we believe a sustainable urban development is our future. The sustainability paradigm, albeit vague hitherto, needs to be established and consolidated on the basis of a “dynamic balance among inseparable ecological, social and economics dimensions of quality of life” (see Ikerd 1997). If the decision-making process of the integrated resort is purely economical, a reflection worthy of further contemplation in planning is that economic outcome cannot be an end in itself but should be employed as a means to serve social interests and communal harmony. Ideally, corporate interests should share their social and ecological responsibility with non-profit organizations that are dedicated to the common sustainable future of their communities. The concept termed as “humanizing economic relations” is of utmost importance and businesses, public or private, should be accountable for the way they meet their social and ecological responsibilities.

4 Integrated Resort in the Central Business District of Singapore

77

References Albanese JS (1997) Predicting the impact of casino gambling on crime and law enforcement in Windsor, Ontario. In: Eadington WR, Cornelius JA (eds) Public policies and the social sciences. Institute for the Study of Gambling and Commercial Gaming, University of Nevada, Reno, USA, pp 351–366 Braun B (2005) Environmental issues: writing a more-than-human urban geography. Progress in Human Geography 29(5):635–650 Choi Hak (1997) Gambling in Hong Kong. Journal of Travel Research Fall issue: 23–28 Clark TN (2004) Introduction: Taking entertainment seriously. In Clark T. Nichols (ed). The city as an entertainment machine. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 1–18 Dale JD (1999) Urban planning in Singapore: the transformation of a city. Oxford University Press, Shah Alam (Malaysia) Daniels PW (1998) Economic development and producer services growth: the APEC experience. Asia Pacific Viewpoint 39(2):145–160 Ergazakis K, Metaxiotis K, Psarras J (2006) An emerging pattern of successful knowledge cities’ main features. In: Carrillo FJ (ed) Knowledge cities: approaches, experiences, and perspectives. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 3–15 Fagence M (1995) City waterfront redevelopment for leisure, recreation, and tourism: some common themes. In: Craig-Smith SJ, Fagence M (eds) Recreation and tourism as a catalyst for urban waterfront redevelopment: an international survey. Praeger, Westport (USA), pp 135–156 Getz D (1993) Planning for tourism business districts. Annals of Tourism Research 20: 583–600 Glaeser EL, Kolka J, Saiz A (2004) Consumers and cities. In Clark T. Nichols (ed). The city as an entertainment machine. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 177–183 Goh Kim-Chai (2006) Sand fits the bay. Skyline July/August issue, 8–9 Gottdiener M (1997) The theming of America: dreams, visions and commercial spaces. Westview Press, Boulder, CO Gottmann IJ (1961) Megalopolis: the urbanized Northeastern Seaboard of the United States. Twentieth Century, New York Green Party (2004) Economic sustainability. Http://www.gp.org/platform/2004/economics.html, accessed 21 September 2006 Huang S, Chang TC (2003) Selective disclosure: romanicing the Singapore River. In: Goh RBH, Yeoh BSA (eds) Theorizing the Southeast Asian city as text. World Scientific, Hackensack, New Jersey, pp 77–108 Hutton AH (2003) Service industries, globalization, and urban restructuring within the AsiaPacific: new development trajectories and planning responses. Progress in Planning 61(1):1–74 Ikerd J (1997) Toward an economics of sustainability. http://www.ssu.missouri.edu/faculty/jikert/ papers/econ-sus.htm retrieved on 21 September 2006 Kaplan DH, Wheeler JO, Holloway SR (2004) Urban geography. Hoboken (NJ) Knox P, Pinch S (2000) 4th ed. Urban social geography: an introduction. Pearson Education, Harlow, UK Koh Gee Kum, Tan Tsu Huang (1976) Planning and recreation – the Singapore context. Singapore Institute of Planners Journal 5(1):11–20 Lee Hsien Loong (2005) Proposal to develop integrated resorts. Singapore Government Press Release, http://app.sprinter.gov.sg/data/pr/2005041803.htm, retrieved on 27 September 2006 Lim Hng Kiang (2005) Casino decision. Statement by Minister for Trade and Industry on Integrated Resort. http://www.channelnewsasia.com/casino/text_limhk.htm, accessed 06 Nov 2006 Low Bernadette (2004) $300 million to kick off downtown at Marina Bay. Skyline Mar/Apr issue Low Thia Khiang (2005) Casinos in integrated resorts. The Workers’ Party of Singapore website, retrieved on 19 August 2005

78

T.-C. Wong

Macnaghten P, Pinfield G (1999) Planning and sustainable development: prospects for social change. In: Allmendinger P, Chapman M (eds) Planning beyond 2000. John Wiley, Chichester, UK, pp 17–32 Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) (2003) New challenges, fresh goals – towards a dynamic global city. Report of the Economic Review Committee, Singapore Mistilis N, Dwyer l (1999) Tourism gateways and regional economies: the distributional impacts of MICE. International Journal of Tourism Research 1:441–457 Morgan M (1998) Homogenous products: the future of established resorts. In Theobald William F. (ed) 2nd ed. Global Tourism. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, pp 317–336 Murphy PE (1998) Tourism and sustainable development. In: Theobald William F. (ed) 2nd ed. Global Tourism. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, pp 173–190 Murphy RE, Vance JE, Epstein BJ (1955) Internal structure of the CBD. Economic Geography 31:21–46 Newling BE (1969) The spatial variation of urban population densities. Geographical Review 59:242–252 Scargill DI (1979) The form of cities. Bell & Hyman, London Singapore Productivity and Standard Board (2000) Competitiveness of the economy. Http://203.116.36.232/statistics_faq/statistics/competitiveness.html, accessed 17 January 2000 Singapore Tourism Board (2002) Travel & tourism’s economic impact. Http://www.stb.com.sg/ t21, accessed 04 October 2002 Skea WH (1997) The rationale of state gambling policy: the case of on-reserve casinos in Canada. In: Eadington WR, Cornelius JA (eds) Public policies and the social sciences. Institute for the Study of Gambling and Commercial Gaming, University of Nevada, Reno, USA, pp 255–265 Smeral E (1998) Economic aspects of casino gaming in Austria. Journal of Travel Research 36 Spring:33–39 Straits Times (The) Singapore local newspaper, various issues Tay Erica (2007) Economists discuss downside of fast growth. The Straits Times, 12 January 2007:4 Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) (2006) Skyline July/August issue. Singapore Weiskopf DC (1982 2nd Ed) Recreation and leisure: improving the quality of life. Allyn and Bacon, Boston Wheeler SM (2004) Planning for sustainability: creating livable, equitable and ecological communities. Routledge, London Wong CYL, Choi Chong-Ju, Millar CCJM. (2006) The case of Singapore as a knowledge-based city. In: Carrillo FJ (ed) Knowledge cities: approaches, experiences, and perspectives. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 87–96 Wong Tai-Chee, Yap ALH (2004) Four decades of transformation: land use in Singapore 1960– 2000. Eastern University Press, Singapore Wong Tai-Chee (2006) Revitalising Singapore’s central city through gentrification: the role of waterfront housing. Urban Policy and Research 24(2):181–199 Yiftachel O, Hedgcock D (1993) Urban social sustainability: the planning of an Australian city. Cities, 10(2):139–157 Zhang Juan, Shang Zhu-nan (2006) The distinction between CBD and RBD and the expansion of their functions. Tourism Tribune 21(12): 77–80 (in Chinese)

Chapter 5

Singapore River: Six Strategies for Sustainability Chwee Lye Low

5.1 5.1.1

Introduction The Water Margin

The water’s edge has always exerted a pull for mankind to sink roots there (Hoyle and Pinder 1992; Breen and Rigby 1994). Countless villages, towns and cities have arisen from such places of elemental intersection – be they on sea coasts, river confluences or around oases, where the easy availability of life-giving water was a prime consideration for setting up home. Soon, these settlements became focal points of not just the trade in goods and services, but also of ideas and information. Waterfront settlements have thus evolved to become the centres of social and intellectual life in their respective countries and cultures. But these nurturing factors that help create such waterfront settlements are no guarantee for urban immortality, as is exemplified by numerous waterfront districts that have seen better days (Hoyle et al. 1988; Dovey 2005). Still, as has happened in waterfront cities such as Boston, Seattle and San Francisco in the United States 40 years ago, waves of renewal are possible, sparking intense redevelopment of run-down areas near the water margin. As a result, derelict waterfront areas have been transformed into vibrant commercial and recreational areas. Likewise, English and European cities have also witnessed similar revitalisation of their waterfront areas (Malone 1996; Marshall 2001). The British examples would include London’s South Bank and Bristol’s Harbourside. With its seaport history, the fortunes of Singapore’s waterfront areas have mirrored this global trend. Tanjong Rhu, for instance, once a shipyard and graveyard of derelict schooners and junks, has been spruced up and redeveloped into a prime housing and recreation enclave smack between the city centre and the future Sports Hub, and with the entire East Coast Park as its recreational “hinterland”. In examining the topic of sustainable urban waterfront development, this chapter will focus, however, on the revitalisation of the Singapore River. Former Head, Urban Studies Unit, Urban Redevelopment Authority, Singapore, e-mail: [email protected] T.-C. Wong et al. (eds.), Spatial Planning for a Sustainable Singapore, 79–92 © All Rights Reserved

80

5.1.2

C.L. Low

River Reborn

River estuaries, in particular, have always been attractive as places for human habitation. They afford not just geographical fixity in a pre-Global Positioning Systems era, but also shelter from the open ocean and ease of access to the unseen ports of opportunity beyond the horizon. At the same time, the rivers are a lifeline to the hinterland, whose condition often has an inverse relationship with its success as a lifeline. The more development its banks enjoy, the worse the rivers’ environmental status, degenerating into mere conduits of congested riverine traffic with all the life choked out of it due to man’s polluting ways. This history of pollution and ecological destruction of rivers that serve conurbations is by no means a preserve of the great rivers or megacities of the world. Singapore is a prime example of how even a tiny island city-state, founded on the banks of a river running a mere 3 km, is not immune to this inverse relationship between urban development and deteriorating river environs. In the following sections we will examine how the Singapore River fell into a sorry state, how it was revived after a 10-year clean-up process, and the sustainable strategies that were employed to ensure that the River remains an urban asset and not a liability.

5.2

A Victim of Her Own Success

Even before Sir Thomas Stamford Raffles landed on the banks of the Singapore River in 1819, there was reportedly, already an Orang Laut (sea people) settlement at the mouth of the river. The economic mainstay of the day included unsavoury activities such as piracy; and accounts describe the scene at the mouth of the Singapore River around the time about the occasional skull sightings at low tide. But Raffles’ brilliant vision in banking on Singapore as a strategic trading post sitting astride the shipping threshold between east and west was to forcibly change this unsavoury occupation for another – trade. Singapore’s meteoric success on the back of free trade, however, brought its own unsavoury results, no thanks to the unchecked and unsustainable predatory practices of trade and business. As a measure of its success, by the 1870s, three quarters of the shipping business was done at the Boat Quay at the river mouth. Thus, within the span of a century, the Singapore River was transformed from a pirate’s lair to a seaport of repute and a natural magnet for human habitation. After all, the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869 had already helped to strengthen Singapore’s claim to be one of the world’s great ports. However, the rapid influx of people to this emerging regional port powerhouse was too much for the rudimentary waste disposal system and the Singapore River was turned into a veritable cesspool for the exponentially-expanding urban population.

5 Singapore River: Six Strategies for Sustainability

81

By the 1970s, the Singapore River had become a manifestly unsightly and smelly urban problem. While the Singapore River supported vessels bearing the very fibre of Singapore’s economic muscle, the water itself was completely bereft of all life. On 27 February 1977, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, then Singapore’s Prime Minister, recognising the central place that the Singapore River occupied, not only in Singapore’s history, but also its physical setting, challenged the nation to transform it from the liability it had become, to an asset, within 10 years (Sunday Times 1977). Singaporeans rose to the challenge and by September 1987, the Singapore River was once again flowing clean and clear of debris and flotsam. A million fishes – sea bass and red tilapia – and prawns were released in the River. Ten years on, the river was indeed, unrecognisable from the urban cesspool that it had been. Its rebirth has become an enduring legacy of the collaborative effort of numerous private, public and people sector stakeholders, working together to realise the central vision that Singapore’s first Prime Minister had painted. Singapore had learned, the hard way, that sustainable development was the way to ensure that this key and central piece of real estate in the city will be an urban asset that would help propel it to the league of the world’s great cities. The following sections detail the various aspects of sustainability that contributed to this urban waterfront’s success story.

5.3

Six Pistons

The lessons on sustainable development with regard to the Singapore River can be summarised as six “pistons”, working in tandem to produce the desired end-result. These six pistons are: a b c d e f

Visionary leadership and far-sighted planning Leveraging on the private–public–people sector synergies Restoring and maintaining water quality Restoration of the historic fabric as a character-giving asset Encouraging mixed use Providing for easy public access

5.3.1

Visionary Leadership and Far-Sighted Planning

Vision and opportunity make for an incendiary mix. However, visionary ideas may be no more real than a mirage without the necessary confluence of circumstances to make its conception a reality. One such historic moment of the confluence of vision and opportunity took place in 1977 when, the then-Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew threw the gauntlet to his compatriots to transform the Singapore River from the gutter that it was then to the crown jewel of its historic civic and business district.

82

C.L. Low

The vision was crystal clear. And this went a long way in aligning and galvanizing the efforts of the multitude of stakeholder agencies from both the private and public sectors involved in this mammoth and complicated 10-year undertaking to achieve its desired goal of a clean and thriving Singapore River. Nevertheless, no matter how visionary, a goal cannot achieve manifest reality if not for the supporting circumstances to nurture its conception. In the Singapore River’s case, a key favourable circumstance was the contemporaneous advent of container shipping. This development eventually led to the relocation of Singapore’s sea trading activities from the Singapore River to Keppel Harbour on Singapore’s southern coastline and provided the opportunity to redevelop the river. This paved the way for the redevelopment of the Singapore River itself and the opening of a new chapter of its long association as the nexus of development of Singapore, from a 19th century trading outpost to an international port of call. Thus, Mr Lee’s clarion call to clean up the Singapore River in 1977 could not have come at a more opportune moment. The call had made it patently clear to these stakeholders that, no matter the hardships of physical displacement of the riverrelated trades in shipping, warehousing and ancillary livelihoods, the clock was ticking towards the time when the River would turn from an urban liability into Singapore’s peerless, signature asset for the greater, long term good of the country. Having painted the vision for the Singapore River, it was then up to the government agencies to hatch far-sighted planning to realize the vision in collaboration with the private sector stakeholders. The planning and development machinery was thus kick started, beginning with a government taskforce spearheaded by the Ministry of the Environment which was in charge of the mammoth “Great river clean-up”. Planning for the sustainable development of the Singapore River’s environs began in tandem. Two years before the clean-up was completed, the Urban Redevelopment Authority published its vision for the Singapore River in its Singapore River Concept Plan of May 1985 (URA 1985). This Singapore River Concept Plan benefited from the lessons of successful river revitalization studies that URA had conducted – on the Seine in Paris and Paseo del Rio in San Antonio, Texas. Even as the river clean-up was being completed, URA undertook the comprehensive improvement work on the derelict infrastructure along the River’s banks. These included a new river wall and a 6 km long promenade that line both banks of the Singapore River. In URA’s plan, three development zones were identified for the Singapore River – Boat Quay, Clarke Quay and Robertson Quay. These zones, straddling both banks of the River, were to be linked continuously by an up to 15 m-wide promenade along the riverbanks. The tripartite division of the Singapore River offered different focal themes for the development of these zones as distinct areas for living, working and playing, using as a lever the selective conservation of historic fabric found in each of the zones. Appropriate urban design guidelines were laid down to further enhance these attributes while guidelines aimed at achieving land use optimization and establishment of appropriate riverine activities were put in place.

5 Singapore River: Six Strategies for Sustainability

83

The URA’s 1991 Concept Plan for Singapore as a whole also recognized the importance of the Singapore River as a commercial corridor that is linked to the established Orchard Road corridor. This intent influenced the development guidelines for Clarke Quay and Robertson Quay, where local commercial use was planned complete with a local residential population that would offer the base support. These macro plans were further complemented by a detailed Development Guide Plan (DGP), published in 1994 (URA 1994), that provided for integrated conservation and adaptive reuse of historic fabric to contemporary uses like retail, entertainment, and food and beverage provisions. In these ways, the distinct architectural and urban design attributes of each zone was capitalized upon to guide the development of the distinctive waterfront precincts. These coordinated efforts, orchestrated by the initial vision of a clean Singapore River coursing through the downtown of a great tropical metropolis, was deemed worthy of a place among the top-100 of the UN-Habitat’s Dubai International Awards for Best Practices in Improving the Living Environment in 2000. But this vision is not cast in concrete. Nor is it the end of the sustainable planning story of the Singapore River. In the next stage of its transformation, the Singapore River will be turned into a freshwater reservoir.

5.3.2

Leveraging on Private–Public–People Sector Synergies

A key principle of sustainable development is to leverage on the respective strengths of the private, public and people sectors in achieving its desired aims. The government agencies’ role is to ensure that a high standard of design and supply infrastructure is implemented through transparent public policies, strategies and development mechanisms. Private sector stakeholders are involved early on in this process so as to ensure active interest and successful collaboration in speedily realizing the development aims for the area. Through mechanisms such as upfront exhibitions and forums, public consultation can also be effected in the interest of the proposed development. In these ways, the public, private and people sectors can all partake in the process of implementing sustainable developments. These strategies are relevant not just at the onset of the development, but throughout its entire lifespan, as cyclical and constant renewal and place-making figure as a standard practice of sustainable development in order to ensure the development’s long-term economic and social success. One of the things that constantly amaze planners who visit Singapore is how plans that are made are actually implemented on the ground. This is unusual because in many countries what is actually implemented may vary tremendously from the original planning intent, if they are implemented at all. Singapore’s miniscule size, compared to most countries, certainly helps to make this a fact rather than fantasy. Public consultation has some history in Singapore’s planning history. In August 1992, a public exhibition was held at the Raffles City atrium where the government’s

84

C.L. Low

plans for three development precincts in the Central Area – the new Downtown Core, Portview and the Singapore River – were featured. Public feedback was canvassed on the preliminary ideas that were put forth in the exhibition that attracted some 60,000 people. A follow-up public dialogue was later organized to involve the public and professional sectors to expand and further develop some of the ideas and feedback received at the exhibition. The Development Guide Plans for these areas that were eventually published in 1994 were, thus, the fruit of the public engagement exercise conducted two years before. Such public consultation continues throughout the life of the districts – thus helping to ensure that the government’s development proposals remain in tune with the needs of the times. In the Singapore River precinct, such consultation has, for instance, resulted in the extension of al fresco dining areas along Circular Road, taking over the space formerly occupied by surface parking lots (URA 1998). The project cost S$500,000 and managed to extend 300 m of sidewalk al fresco areas along Circular Road to complement similar and highly popular outdoor dining areas along Boat Quay. With the loss of surface car park lots along Circular Road, drivers now park their cars at the new and larger surface carparks in Carpenter Street, or those at UOB Plaza and One, George Street. This initiative was welcomed by the local shopowners and their customers alike, with more than 30 pubs and restaurants extending their business outdoors, thus lending a bustling atmosphere along what was a quiet street before. A key planning mechanism that allowed the structural redevelopment of inner city precincts and unlocked the development potential of the prime real estate it represented, is the Government Land Sales programme (URA 1995). The year 1993 saw the first Government Land Sale (GLS) of a site in the Singapore River area. This was quickly followed by the redevelopment of both private and public sector-owned sites in the area over the next seven years. In such ways, entire precincts in places along the Singapore River such as in Clarke Quay and Robertson Quay experienced either conservation of historic fabric, redevelopment, or a combination of the two. Aside from playing the role of the government’s agent for the administration of the GLS, the URA also guided and facilitated the public–private partnership in the implementation of river infrastructural and enhancement works. This role entailed detailed coordination with numerous public and private sector stakeholders and covered the entire spectrum of development – from the macro to the micromanagement of details, such as deciding what kind and number of trees to plant on the promenade. Working with National Parks Board, URA guides developers to ensure the harmonious planting of trees on both banks. Such guidelines for tree-planting to developers include the type and spacing of trees to be planted along the water edge, as well as on the landward edge of the promenade. Likewise, URA collaborates with the Singapore Tourism Board (STB) to coordinate the provision of night lighting along the Singapore River’s banks. These guidelines help enhance the overall harmony of the lighting schemes for the

5 Singapore River: Six Strategies for Sustainability

85

promenades and bridges of the Singapore River by indicating the lamp post designs, colour and brightness of the lamp lights. Another collaboration with STB and the National Heritage Board was to encourage the installation of art in outdoor public areas. Such public-access sculptures continue to delight pedestrians using the Singapore River’s 6 km continuous river promenade and lend a sense of identity to different nodes there. Over the years, such popular sculpture installations as those of the kucinta cats and the boys jumping into the river never fail to evoke a smile on the faces of passers-by. Thus, through such involvements with the private and people sectors, the public sector can effectively lead in creating vibrant precincts in the city – as exemplified today by the Singapore River – that are sustainable from the economic, as well as the social and even ecological fronts.

5.3.3

Restoring and Maintaining Water Quality

Waterfront developments that are designed to capitalize on their sitting next to a body of water can really be very special places. But no masterpiece of urban and architectural design would stand a chance of realizing its full potential, or even its most perfunctory purposes, if it were sited on the bank of a fetid, open sewer. A fundamental prerequisite of successful and sustainable waterfront developments is a good quality of water. Multiply this lost potential to the scale of an entire river and immediately, the need to improve and maintain water quality becomes abundantly clear – be it on China’s longest river, the Yangtze, which runs through 186 cities including Shanghai on its way to the sea, or the 3 km long Singapore River, running past Singapore’s CBD. Around the world, the task of implementing sustainable programmes of water quality management has become or will soon become staple preoccupations for municipal authorities. The example of one of the world’s greatest river systems – that of the Yangtze – is instructional for its water quality problems (Reuters 2006). The city of Shanghai, China’s largest city and one of the world’s most flamboyant metropolises of our time, is literally choking on its water – for which it relies on the great Yangtze to supply. On May 30, 2006, China’s official Xinhua News Agency reported an expert from East China Normal University, Lu Jianjian, as saying: “As the river is the only source of drinking water in Shanghai, it has been a great challenge for Shanghai to get clean water.” “(Yet) [m]any officials think the pollution is nothing for the Yangtze. The pollution is actually very serious,” a professor from the China University of Geosciences Yuan Aiguo was quoted as saying. The same is true for the other cities lying on the banks of the world’s third longest river after the Nile and the Amazon – including such giants as Chongqing, Wuhan and Nanjing.

86

C.L. Low

The reason: as the conduit for 40 percent of China’s waste water, of which 80 percent is untreated, the Yangtze is heavily polluted. The situation is so dire that China’s experts have declared the Yangtze to be “cancerous”, as a result of the dumping of industrial wastes and sewage, agricultural pollution and shipping discharges. The Singapore and Kallang River systems may be miniscule compared to the Yangtze, but anyone who has lived through the 1960s and 1970s can instantly recollect the stink that emanated from its pitch black waters before Mr Lee Kuan Yew set in motion the great river clean-up campaign. The painstaking efforts and millions of dollars spent on sealing effluent discharge conduits into the river and repairing and maintaining the more-than-a-century-old river walls can be better appreciated if such memories can be evoked from time to time. Moving forward, the maintenance of the quality of the water remains a key priority, especially now that the Singapore River and Kallang River basins are to be enclosed as an urban reservoir.

5.3.4

Restoration of the Historic Fabric as a Character-Giving Asset

In a globalized world, one element that distinguishes one modern precinct or city from another is its historic character. These built environments of the pre-globalized era are always a source of identity, and their conservation and integration into the general environment are always a boon to its distinctiveness, a key element in the long-term sustainability of the place. The Singapore River Concept Plan identified three distinct zones of the Singapore River. These zones are demarcated, not just by the bridges that cross the River, and the original street names of these zones, but also by the distinct architectural differences between these zones. These differences are the natural result of differing uses of the different segments of the Singapore River, as well as their different times of development. Between 1991 and 1992, the conservation project of Boat Quay and Clarke Quay took off successfully.

5.3.4.1

Conservation at Boat Quay

Hence we find that the north bank of Boat Quay, near the mouth of the River, has a civic, neo-European feel – the result of early zoning under the Jackson Plan, dated in the early 1820s, to reserve this site as the centre for the settlement’s colonial administration. The south bank, in stark contrast, has low-rise warehouses in the form of shophouses. And these shophouses opened to a broad quay, with steps that led right into

5 Singapore River: Six Strategies for Sustainability

87

the water to facilitate the loading and unloading of goods from lighters that used to land here. In 1989, Boat Quay was the first area along the banks of the Singapore River to be gazetted for conservation. By July 1991, about 110 privately-owned shophouses fronting Boat Quay and Circular Road had been restored, encouraged by waivers of development and car park deficiency charges. Hence new uses were allowed and instead of storing rubber and rice, these shophouses are today a food and beverage attraction, offering an international smorgasbord of cuisines which visitors can enjoy while sitting under the stars, right next to the waters of the Singapore River lapping on the quay steps. The sheer contrast between the scales of the conserved shophouses of Boat Quay and the 280 m tall skyscrapers of Raffles Place just across the street, has become a charming signature image for Singapore – lending a charming contrast to both locals and visitors alike who can find themselves in the intimately-scaled quay within minutes of leaving the bustling, corporate environs of Raffles Place.

5.3.4.2

Conservation at Clarke Quay

Further up the river, past the Elgin Bridge, we arrive at Clarke Quay. The historic fabric of Clarke Quay is distinctly different from that of Boat Quay. The more than 50 larger “godowns” or warehouses offer greater flexibility for adaptive reuse. As a result, pubs, restaurants, and other larger scale entertainment outlets could find sufficiently large accommodation here for their businesses. Clarke Quay’s developments have always enjoyed an intimate relationship with the water, thanks to the fact that the area sits astride a sharp meander of the Singapore River where it is narrower than at Boat Quay. The quaint scale of the district was first realized when the prominent 19th century entrepreneurs Hoo Ah Kay and Lim Teck Lee built their godowns in the area. By the 1980s, after all warehousing activities had left the Singapore River due to modern containerization, the area had fallen into disrepair – a virtual ghost town. Nevertheless, its potential to be a vibrant “festival village” was identified by URA in its 1985 Singapore River Concept Plan. And to realize this vision, URA launched the sale of sites for five parcels of land here in July 1989. The brief by URA to developers was to transform the site into a traffic-free waterside village, leveraging on the historic charm of the 50 godowns on site. This was realized in 1993, when a restored Clarke Quay was unveiled, featuring former godowns that are now stylish food and beverage and entertainment outlets, with the pedestrianized roads turned into al-fresVo dining areas. One project in Clarke Quay, in particular, anchors the area’s architectural and social history – the River House. Built in the 1880s, this Southern Chinese style mansion is the oldest building in Clarke Quay and its grandest. Once used as a

88

C.L. Low

residence, as well as a godown for gambier, biscuits and other commodities, the courtyard house was meticulously restored in 1993 and was awarded the URA’s Architectural Heritage Award in 1995. Today, its reinstated elegance charms visitors to the food and beverage outlets that it houses. Local character is enhanced, not just through physical restoration of the historic fabric, but, as Clarke Quay has illustrated with its colourful recent history – through recreating appropriate district themes through “software” or programmatic management. In an early chapter of its rejuvenation, Clarke Quay wore the mantle of the 1930s. On 14 October, 1989, URA announced the winner of the Clarke Quay tender – by Real Estate Holdings – on the basis of its competitive tender bid, superior design and business concept of the proposal. Clarke Quay’s revitalization centred on bringing back the Singapore of the 1930s. The river promenade was lined with restaurants and illuminated with gas lights in the evening. Inland, a grand pedestrian esplanade had outdoor seating that extended the dining areas of the adjacent restaurants, cafés and nightclubs. Covered walkways along building facades and arcades displayed museum-quality artifacts in protective cases, creating a “museum walk”. Clarke Street, on the other hand, had a park-like feel, with large palm trees, floral displays and resting places where acrobatic and juggling acts and thematic festivals entertained. Bargains and souvenirs could be found at the popular open Handicraft Market that recalled “tent markets” of old. The 1930s feel pervaded the entire Clarke Quay precinct through the thematization of the design of the landscape and architectural elements, including seats, lighting and paving. More than a decade after this first revitalization exercise for Clarke Quay, it has again undergone another reincarnation. This year sees the enhancement of the pedestrian streets and riverside malls with the playful designs of British architect Will Alsop, who has transplanted giant “lily pads”, “blue bells” and “angels” which feature environmental moderation mechanisms to help cool the streets that they cover.

5.3.4.3

Conservation at Robertson Quay

Occupying the uppermost reaches of the Singapore River, Robertson Quay was a quiet backwater that housed industries like boat repair yards, rice mills and sawmills. In stark contrast to neighbouring Clarke Quay, Robertson Quay is, today, an arts hub. It is the home of such institutions as the Singapore Tyler Print Institute (STPI) and the Singapore Repertory Theatre (SRT). The SRT is housed in the DBS Arts Centre, a warehouse refurbished into a 380-seat theatre. Likewise, the STPI is also housed in a restored 19th century warehouse that has been refurbished to accommodate an art workshop, paper mill and gallery. These updated historic facilities are complemented by the sculptural Alkaff Bridge and the hip Gallery Hotel that reinforce Robertson Quay’s cool arts-inspired ambience.

5 Singapore River: Six Strategies for Sustainability

5.3.5

89

Encouraging Mixed Use

A hallmark of sustainable waterfront development areas is their celebration of the proximity of water through the offering of a diversity of cultural, commercial and housing uses. Typically, those uses that require access to water are accorded due priority. Along the Singapore River, ground floor uses that promote and sustain buzz are encouraged. While this would already be factored into the business plans of the building owners and tenants of these prime properties, it is nevertheless important to oversee and lay out the general direction that is applicable to the entire district. Hence, for instance, al fresco dining is encouraged along the river’s promenade as this will positively impact on the streetlife there. Likewise, uses that will generate traffic on the ground floor such as retail shops and eating facilities are encouraged on the first storey of buildings fronting the promenades to attract good pedestrian flow. By the same token, uses that do not contribute to the ground level buzz are discouraged, such as office use on the first storey. The proposed development mix is 80 percent commercial and 20 percent residential – similar to that which has made Orchard Road so successful. Like Orchard Road, it will be a place where people live and work, and others visit, shop, eat at restaurants or enjoy nightspots – all in a river setting. This mix of activities – and people – is designed to ensure the area has a real and sustained pulse, day and night. As for a good mix of land uses, the Singapore River Development Guide Plan included a hotel corridor in the Merchant Road, Robertson Quay and Kim Seng areas. A resident population to help extend the precinct’s buzz into the evenings was also encouraged with the development of about 400 waterfront homes at Riverside Village, Robertson Quay and Pulau Saigon, many with views of the water. Much of the existing development intensities, i.e. gross plot ratios, were retained to ensure that the area retains its character, particularly at the Clarke and Robertson Quays. Commercial gross plot ratios for the local Development Guide Plan was generally kept between 1.68 to 4.2 gross, while the residential gross plot ratio is 2.8. Thus, over 270,000 square metres of new commercial space, up to 1,800 more hotel rooms and about 600 new housing units in different phases were envisaged in the Singapore River Draft Development Guide Plan (DGP), a detailed plan that translated the goals of the Concept Plan into the planning vision and objectives for this particular area. In terms of building massing, blocks fronting the river and next to the river promenade are limited to four storeys, while those set back from the water will be allowed to go to 10 storeys. In addition to these building usage guidelines, other transient uses, such as festivals and other large-scale signature events are encouraged to lend and develop a sense of identity for the River and its environs. Hence, signature events like the annual canoe-polo championships and the ever-popular charity duck race are encouraged.

90

5.3.6

C.L. Low

Providing for Easy Public Access

To ensure social sustainability, waterfronts should be accessible to locals and tourists of all ages and incomes, both physically and visually. Public spaces and amenities should also be capable of supporting intensive use. Public access in the form of roads, bridges, underpasses and walkways are often deemed the government’s job to provide. Indeed, having painted the vision for the Singapore River, it was up to the public sector agencies to catalyze, and in many instances, implement such projects. But the sustainability of these important infrastructural amenities can only come with the committed support of the people and private sectors too. Hence, in the plans for the Singapore River, these two segments have also been encouraged to play their role in realizing the vision for Singapore River. Soon after the Singapore River was cleaned up, the government demonstrated its continuing commitment to the river’s rehabilitation by constructing a granite-paved promenade along the entire length of historic Boat Quay, part of the government’s S$43 million commitment to improve and rejuvenate the Singapore River. Completed in October 1986, the promenade featured heavy, hand-hewn granite slabs imported from Fujian in Southern China, laid in a pattern inspired by classical Chinese gardens. These, to reinforce the historic roots of the place that had grown from swampy ground that was designated by Raffles to be the place for Teochew and Hokkien Chinese, who hailed from Southern China, to settle. To offer variety, and also a unique sense of place for each zone of the River, URA put in place guidelines to encourage private developers to suitably landscape the stretches of promenade fronting their developments in different ways. Promenading pleasure is enhanced in Singapore’s tropical weather through the careful planting of trees along the river banks. A walk along the promenade is enhanced by the careful placement of public art all along the river banks. It is the memory of such enjoyable walks along the banks that help assure the continued success of the River as a sustainable development zone. Cross-river traffic was also enhanced to ensure effective and easy pedestrian circulation across the banks of the river. Three new pedestrian bridges were constructed across the Singapore River in the Robertson Quay area to improve connectivity. Planned by the URA and implemented by the then-Public Works Department (PWD), these new bridges were envisioned as “jewels” that are modern in design, to contrast with the restored historic godowns and complement the new infill developments there. Two historic bridges in Robertson Quay – the Read Bridge and Ord Bridge – were also restored at a cost of S$2.8 million. Ord Bridge was raised 1 m above its old level so as to allow boats to travel upstream to Kim Seng Road, where no boats had gone before. In addition to pedestrian and vehicular access, both along and across the Singapore River, traffic on the water was also enhanced. River boat landing points were constructed as the Singapore River’s historic river walls were reinforced and

5 Singapore River: Six Strategies for Sustainability

91

restored. The actual reconstruction work on the river wall began in 1992. This involved damming and dredging the waterbed, as well as piling works for the new river walls. By early 1999, the entire wall had been constructed or repaired and the dredging of waterbed completed. Ten million dollars worth of river wall building work later, river taxis and tour craft peacefully ply the Singapore River, with passengers embarking and disembarking safely to enjoy more closely the waters of the Singapore River.

5.4

Conclusion

The evolution of the Singapore River from pirates’ lair to traders’ haven; from municipal embarrassment and liability to urban gem, has been a relatively short but dramatic one. It is a good case study of how the combination of far-sighted political will, administrative support and the collaboration of the private, public and people sectors can effect such a positive urban transformation in a relatively short time. These lessons of sustainable waterfront development continue to be learned, over and over, as new visions are hatched for the further enhancement of the precinct in tandem with rising global and local expectations and demands. At this juncture in its development, however, one might ponder over the Singapore River’s pivotal historic role in the founding of Singapore itself. Standing, perhaps, like the statue of his likeness, on the northern bank of the Singapore River, Stamford Raffles was reported to have said, after inking his agreement with the Temenggong1 to establish a British colonial presence here on January 30, 1819: This place possesses an excellent harbour and everything that can be desired for a British port … we have commanded an intercourse with all the ships passing through the Straits of Singapore. In short, Singapore is everything we could desire, and I may consider myself most fortunate in its selection; it will soon rise into importance.

Of course, history has proven Raffles right. Yet, one wonders if even he could have envisaged how the Singapore River would evolve into a model of successful urban waterfront development past its period as a harbour that, in the 1860s, attracted three-quarters of all shipping business in Singapore. Or of how the glittering steel and glass towers would rise skyward from the swampy south bank. And how both locals and tourists from all over the world would be able to enjoy a pleasant urban environment offering a unique mix of historic and contemporary ambiences and experiences along the Singapore River’s length. No doubt, sustainable waterfront development practices that have been responsible for the Singapore River’s successful transformation to date will continue to influence her future evolution as one of the world’s unique urban places.

1

Local Malay chief appointed by the Sultan of Johor to govern Singapore on his behalf.

92

C.L. Low

References Breen A, Rigby D (1994) Urban waterfronts: Cities reclaim their edge. McGraw-Hill, New York Dovey K (2005) Fluid city: Transforming Melbourne’s urban waterfront, Sydney, Routledge Hoyle BS, Pinder DA (1992) (ed) European port cities in transition. Belhaven Press, London Hoyle BS, Pinder DA, Husain MS (1988) (ed) Revitalising the waterfront: International dimensions of Dockland redevelopment. Belhaven Press, London Malone P (1996) (ed) City, capital and water. Routledge, London Marshall R (2001) (ed) Waterfronts in post-industrial cities. Spon Press, London Reuters (2006) China’s longest river ‘cancerous’ with pollution, 30 May 2006 Sunday Times (1977) Singapore, 27 February 1977, p 18 Urban Redevelopment Authority URA (1985) Report on Singapore River Concept Plan. Singapore Urban Redevelopment Authority URA (1994) Singapore River Planning Area: Planning report. Singapore Urban Redevelopment Authority URA (1995) Changing the face of Singapore through the URA sale of sites. Singapore Urban Redevelopment Authority URA (1998), “URA paves the way for outdoor dining at Circular Road”, Press Release, Singapore, 30 Mar 1998

Part II Transport, Industrial, Housing and Nature Planning

This page intentionally blank

Chapter 6

Singapore’s Urban Transport: Sustainability by Design or Necessity? Paul A. Barter

6.1

Introduction

Singapore has been held up as an exemplar of sustainable urban transport policies (Ang 1993a; Newman and Kenworthy 1999; Schwaab and Thielmann 2002) or as a “sustainable transit metropolis” (Cervero 1998). This chapter first examines the meaning of sustainability or sustainable development as applied to urban transport and briefly evaluates Singapore’s system in light of these ideas. It finds a measure of broad similarity between Singapore transport policies and relevant sustainable transport ideas. However, there are also some significant deviations. This raises questions, such as why have Singapore’s urban transport policies resembled purported sustainable ones? Was this an accidental alignment? Or are there underlying connections between the idea of sustainable transport and the particular imperatives that prompted Singapore’s policies? And how can we account for the deviations? This chapter therefore examines the motivations behind the policies that established Singapore’s reputation. A review of these reveals a range of rationales, some familiar, some slightly surprising. Locally focused, mainly non-environmental imperatives are revealed as dominant, with no obvious connection with motivations usually associated with sustainable development. However, there are some less obvious resonances between sustainable development and Singapore’s approach to transport. Furthermore, the limits of these provide insight on the reasons for the deviations from policies that would usually be expected if sustainability were a key motivation. These findings prompt some final reflections on the prospects for pursuing sustainable transport policies elsewhere.

Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore, 469C Bukit Timah Road, 259772, Singapore, Republic of Singapore, e-mail: [email protected]

T.-C. Wong et al. (eds.), Spatial Planning for a Sustainable Singapore, 95–112 © Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2008

96

6.2 6.2.1

P.A. Barter

Sustainable Development and Urban Transport Defining Sustainable Development

“Sustainable development” has proven challenging to define precisely, but some authors, such as Dryzek (1997) and Meadowcroft (2000) among others, embrace this ambiguity in seeing the term as a useful meta-concept or aspiration rather than a specific operational objective. As Dryzek comments, ideas such as god, democracy or justice can be compelling and spur action despite being difficult to pin down precisely. A number of prominent themes run through the notion of sustainable development. A key one is the marrying of contemporary equity and inter-generational equity by the Brundtland Commission (WCED 1987). Another is the pursuit of balance between three vital dimensions of development – social, economic and environmental – as has been adopted as the reference point for this book. Similar to this is the idea that sustainability demands a holistic vision of developmental success in which we need to attend to multiple dimensions simultaneously. The sustainable development literature also often emphasises attention to multiple scales in both time and space. These various notions can be combined to express sustainable development as the aspiration for success simultaneously in all three vital dimensions in both the short-term and long-term, and at every scale from local to global. By contrast with these rather complex expressions, a heuristic perspective for those emphasizing ecologically sustainable development is to see it as simply requiring us to do better with less. This neglects some important dimensions of the notion but does capture the idea of containing impacts while also achieving success in development. Later in this chapter I will examine which, if any, of these sustainable development themes find an echo in Singapore’s urban transport planning.

6.2.2

Sustainable Transport as Low-impact Transport?

Moving now to the arena of transport, it is clear that urban transport systems often involve significant environmental effects that are harmful on various scales. Those most often emphasized involve fossil fuel-related pollution. This narrow focus sometimes prompts a narrow policy effort, focused primarily on “tailpipes” or on reducing these impacts per vehicle kilometre, neglecting a wide range of diverse impacts, many of which correlate with the amount of vehicular traffic rather than the characteristics of vehicles or fuels (Litman 2005). A slightly more sophisticated approach is expressed by the ASIF formula, which points to the potential for improvements through: lower impacts per unit of fuel used (F); less intensive use of fuel per vehicle kilometre (I); structural changes to increase the role of transport modes with lower impacts per passenger kilometre, such as high-occupancy public transport or non-motorised transport (S); and reducing the overall level of transport activity (A) (Schipper et al. 2000).

6 Singapore’s Urban Transport

6.2.3

97

Dimensions of Success in Defining Sustainable Urban Transport

It should be obvious, however, that a narrow focus on fossil fuel impacts is incomplete and neglects the wider dimensions of the idea of sustainable development. To begin with, it neglects the full range of impacts, such as economic impacts (congestion, crash costs, infrastructure costs, etc.), social (equity, health, community impacts, etc.), and wider environmental impacts (including noise, habitat and water cycle effects) (Litman 2005). It also begs the more difficult question of what positive contributions of urban transport should be kept or increased even as we tackle the impacts. If reducing impacts comes at too great a cost to general well-being then we would struggle to label such policies as sustainable development. Which movement-related indicators best correlate with success? This is not as obvious as might be assumed. In fact, it has been the focus of an important ongoing debate (Cervero 1996; Handy 1993; Levine and Garb 2002; Salomon and Mokhtarian 1998). For example, as explained by Litman (2003), transport planning often slips into assuming a “traffic focus” in which success is seen purely in terms of vehicle movement. This can be seen as confusing ends with means. A “mobility focus” does better by concentrating on moving people and goods in space-efficient and resource-efficient ways. This prompts an emphasis on public transport. Going further, it can be argued that even movement is not fundamental. Instead it is reaching the purposes of trips that is really important. This leads to an “access focus” which prompts efforts to make movement less necessary through, for example, planning for proximity and a focus on short trips. Both access-focused and mobility-focused thinking resonate with the idea of sustainable development by pointing towards ways to do better (moving people and goods or reaching things) with less (movement). A shift in our movement-related notions of success from a traffic focus to mobility and then towards access, can be seen as a shift towards a more sustainable approach. This involves priorities that, compared with traffic-focused planning, tend to involve reduced emphasis on private cars and increased emphasis on public transport, walking, and bicycle use. A mobility focus on moving people and goods, not vehicles, has become mainstream in many places. However, practitioners have often found it difficult to routinely measure (or even clearly define) accessibility and to integrate access thinking into everyday operational practice (Litman 2003).

6.2.4

Sustainable Transport and the Long Term

In evaluating an urban transport system in terms of sustainable development it is important to consider long-term development trajectories. Of course, a long-term perspective is inherent in the idea of sustainable development itself. Furthermore, an access focused vision of success, as discussed above, inevitably involves a long-term perspective, since land-use patterns cannot be rearranged quickly. Urban

98

P.A. Barter

transport/land-use systems, with their numerous large, long-lived, fixed investments, can be viewed as complex adaptive Large Technological Systems in which path-dependent (or increasing returns) processes are common, with the associated tendency for development trajectories to exhibit lock-in (Unruh 2000; Arthur 1994). Awareness of evolutionary processes in the urban transport literature is most prominently reflected in warnings of the danger of automobile dependence. This can be defined as the extent to which a city possesses a set of characteristics, systems and institutions that encourage, reinforce and entrench very high levels of private motor vehicle use and low usage of alternative modes of transport (Newman and Kenworthy 1999: 60; Victoria Transport Policy Institute 2002). Conversely, and more sustainably perhaps, urban land-use and transport systems can also become locked in to high levels of mass transit usage, creating a so-called transit metropolis, which is particularly relevant to the Singapore case (Cervero 1998). Simply having low car use may not necessarily involve being firmly set on a sustainable development pathway however. For example, urban transport systems in low-income cities may have significant roles for walking, bicycles and buses in mixed traffic, but these can be vulnerable to slight increases in vehicle ownership if not adequately protected by infrastructure. In evaluating sustainability, we will therefore also have to examine the extent to which a city’s systems have begun to lock in high private vehicle use or whether they are really entrenching the roles of lower-impact alternatives such as public transport and non-motorised modes (Barter 2004).

6.2.5

Multi-Dimensional Approaches to Sustainable Transport

Many also apply a multi-criteria notion of sustainable development to sustainable transport definitions. Such an approach presents sustainable transport as about achieving balanced success across multiple dimensions of development. It goes beyond simply reducing specific impacts and offers a more profound antidote to any business-as-usual focus on the economic development role of transport. However, it involves many difficult judgements over the choice of measures to be included in any list of sustainable transport indicators. There have been various proposed sets of such indicators, involving variables across the economic, social and environmental dimensions (see, for example, Jeon and Amekudzi 2005; Black et al. 2002; or Litman 2005). A widely used definition of sustainable transport that arguably addresses most of the definition concerns raised so far in this chapter is that promoted by Canada’s Centre for Sustainable Transportation, and which has also been adopted (with minor changes) by the European Union’s Ministers of Transport. This definition can serve as a reference point for sustainable transport with which to compare Singapore’s approach. In this definition (Centre for Sustainable Transportation 2005), a sustainable transportation system is one that:

6 Singapore’s Urban Transport ●

●

●

99

Allows the basic access needs of individuals and societies to be met safely and in a manner consistent with human and ecosystem health, and with equity within and between generations Is affordable, operates efficiently, offers choice of transport mode, and supports a vibrant economy Limits emissions and waste within the planet’s ability to absorb them, minimizes the consumption of non-renewable resources, limits consumption of renewable resources to the sustainable yield level, reuses and recycles its components, and minimizes the use of land and the production of noise

6.3

Singapore as Exemplar of Sustainable Development in Urban Transport?

This section briefly evaluates claims that Singapore’s urban transport system is an exemplar of a sustainable approach, at least in general terms. It begins with impacts but also considers the extent to which Singapore’s urban transport can be seen as a success more generally, in line with multi-dimensional notions of sustainable development. It also quickly describes the policies that are credited with creating the results widely described as sustainable. It then considers the extent to which Singapore’s long term urban transport development path is entrenching virtuous patterns. Finally, the section notes some interesting departures from policies usually associated with sustainable transport.

6.3.1

A Low-Impact Urban Transport System?

As noted earlier, various commentators have held up Singapore’s urban transport policies as an example of sustainable transport policies. The chief observations flow from its successful effort over several decades in containing the growth of overall traffic and vehicle ownership, and in expanding the role of public transport, even as incomes have risen. Singapore’s level of motorization has been kept remarkably low despite rapid economic growth throughout much of the last four decades. In particular the rate of private car ownership remained at only 92 per 1,000 persons in Singapore in 2005 (LTA 2006). Although the vehicle fleet has grown considerably since the mid1970s, this growth has only marginally exceeded population growth (Willoughby 2000). Currently, only approximately one third of resident households own a motor car (Singapore Department of Statistics 2001). By comparison, nearby middleincome Kuala Lumpur has for some time had much higher car and motorcycle ownership rates (Barter, 2004). In 2004, mass public transport’s share of daily trips was 48 percent (LTA 2005), which is much higher than in most other rich cities, except for a few others in eastern Asia (Kenworthy and Laube 2001).

100

P.A. Barter

The features above mean that Singapore’s passenger transport system is relatively energy efficient (Ang 1993b). In 1995, motorised passenger travel in Singapore resulted in overall energy use per person of 12,098 MJ per capita, much lower for example than the 30,000 MJ or more that was typical of Australian cities, slightly lower than the levels seen in most rich European cities, but slightly higher than other high-income eastern Asian cities considered in that study (Kenworthy and Laube 2001). The energy use figures (and hence contributions to greenhouse gas emissions) are perhaps not quite as thrifty as might have been expected from a “sustainable transport exemplar” and considering how firmly car ownership has been contained. Explanations for this will be mentioned later. Nevertheless, Singapore can be considered to have relatively low impacts from urban passenger transport despite being a wealthy consumer society.

6.3.2

What Policies were Used?

Three policy settings can be seen as crucial (and interdependent) in the transformation of Singapore’s transport scene and creating the results described in this section. These were: (1) the explicit choice to pursue a transit-oriented and compact urban structure; (2) the vigorous restraint of private vehicle ownership and usage; and (3) the commitment to the steady improvement of mainstream public transport. All three emerged in the early 1970s and have, in general terms, been adhered to ever since. A key influence on these choices was the State and City Planning (SCP) project conducted with the help of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and Australian consultants between 1967 and 1972 (Rimmer 1986; Dale 1999). This resulted in the 1971 Concept Plan which, although never made public, provided strategic guidance for large-scale spatial priorities for two decades. Specifically, it called for a high-density, corridor-based, strong-centred urban structure. The 1991 and 2001 Concept Plans that succeeded it have retained its central features. The SCP predicted that vehicle ownership and usage trends would quickly become incompatible with its compact spatial strategy and with any feasible programme of road construction (Pendakur et al. 1989; May 2004). It therefore recommended demand management of car travel to the city centre. This led in 1975 to the Area Licensing Scheme (ALS) (a world first) which required the purchase of a ticket to drive a motor vehicle into the central area. After many small modifications, the ALS was replaced in the late 1990s with the existing Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) system. The SCP also called for restraint of vehicle ownership (Rimmer 1986) and by 1972 the Government had begun to act vigorously on this, beginning a step-by-step set of increases in purchase taxes and ownership taxes. These were effective and arguably more influential in the long run than the better-known ALS. These measures culminated in the Vehicle Quota Scheme (VQS) in 1990, under which Certificates of Entitlement (COEs) are auctioned. Each COE confers the right to register a vehicle for ten years. Under the VQS the vehicle fleet’s growth is limited to no more than three percent per year (Toh and Phang 1997).

6 Singapore’s Urban Transport

101

Public transport improvements were also important. It would be easy to jump to the conclusion that it was the rail-based Mass Transit System (MRT), Singapore’s metro, that was most important, since both the urban structure strategy and the ability to contain traffic would seem to depend on the success of the MRT. However, it is important to note that the decision to build MRT had not yet been taken in the mid 1970s. The initial improvements to public transport focused on buses. Key steps included: forced mergers of the bus companies, then the imposition in 1973 of professional management on the unified company; two major reorganisations of routes; the banning of pirate taxis; allowing non-corporate supplementary services to help with peak demands; and the creation of a network of bus lanes on major corridors (Pendakur et al. 1989; Rimmer 1986).

6.3.3

A Successful System across Various Dimensions?

As mentioned earlier, we also need to consider the more elusive question of whether the transport system also delivers success in all three key dimensions. Certainly, for goods transport and the third of households who have been willing and able to pay the high costs involved in owning a private car, a high level of service is provided on the roads (May 2004). The system offers predictable travel times and generally serves Singapore’s broad economic development goals (Chin and Foong 2006). However, there is a common perception of elitism associated with demand management policies that have created a rather sharp divide between those with cars and those without, and there is a large gulf in the level of service offered to the two groups. The willingness of motorists to pay high prices presumably reflects in part a perception that alternatives are far inferior. Over the years, there have been questions about how well those without access to cars have been served by Singapore’s policies (for example, see Chua 1996). In the 1970s and 80s there was also some concern that Singapore’s decentralization of population had proceeded too quickly and had resulted in long public transport travel times for a significant proportion of workers (Willoughby 2000). Recent data suggests that this problem may have been ameliorated to some degree (LTA 2006). Recent soft demand for cars, reflected in low COE prices may, in part, reflect improvements in the alternatives to car ownership, such as the growing MRT network. Survey results on public transport in recent years have tended to show a rather high level of satisfaction, albeit with persistent concerns over waiting and travel times (Public Transport Council Singapore 2006). There are also persuasive arguments that Singapore’s urban transport strategy has been progressive in its equity outcomes (Asher 2002; May 2004; Willoughby 2000. Singapore’s vehicle taxes have operated as luxury taxes and have involved large payments from the wealthier third of the population. Important elements of the taxes are also levied as a percentage of the value or size of the vehicle, thereby introducing an element of progressiveness among motorists (Barter 2005). Moreover, the revenues from all of these sources enter general revenue and are

102

P.A. Barter

spent in ways that involve significant transfers to low and middle-income residents. So, despite the concerns mentioned above, urban transport policy has arguably delivered quite a socially, environmentally and economically successful system.

6.3.4

Is a Sustainable Urban Transport Development Pathway Well Entrenched?

The three key policies identified above complemented each other. Furthermore, their interactions involved positive feedback processes that enabled their results to become entrenched in long-lived systems in ways that would be difficult to reverse. The decision to deliberately slow down traffic growth was an important factor in allowing public transport to build its role, even as incomes increased. It gave Singapore a window of opportunity during which it was able to build up the usage of its newly efficient bus-based public transport system until mass transit became affordable (Barter et al. 2003). The MRT initial system was eventually built in the mid-1980s after vigorous debate. Public transport improvements also helped make the car restraint policies politically viable. Both the deliberate slowing of traffic growth and the successful improvement of public transport played key roles in allowing the high-density corridors and strong city centre to succeed. In turn, this urban structure helps lock in a high role for public transport which is well suited to such development patterns. The MRT also has longterm implications. As a large, immobile investment the country is highly committed to its success. It will provide high-quality transport services that will remain immune to congestion even if other policy settings should change. Furthermore, its integration with land-use planning is such that it will continue to reinforce transit oriented land use patterns. However, there are policies and outcomes in Singapore that might undermine our confidence that the path described above really is highly entrenched. Several involve deviations of Singapore’s experience from a notional ideal of sustainable transport and are discussed in the next section.

6.3.5

Differences Between Sustainable Transport and Singapore’s Priorities

The story so far has been of a reasonably close correlation between Singapore’s transport outcomes and those called for by a vision of sustainable transport, conceived as seeking to minimize a broad range of impacts while also delivering success across environmental, social and economic spheres. Nevertheless, there are some important differences between most visions of sustainable transport and Singapore’s approach. These provide some puzzling anomalies that sometimes disappoint visiting transport experts who expect to find an exemplar of green transport.

6 Singapore’s Urban Transport

103

For example, on certain impacts Singapore may not be doing as well as was suggested earlier. Large numbers of homes and several important activity centres are located close to heavy (and sometimes high-speed) traffic flows (May 2004). This likely results in considerable noise, community intrusion and possibly localised air pollution impacts. Road deaths are low by world standards reflecting the role of public transport, which is very safe (Kenworthy and Laube 2001). However a high proportion of the deaths are reportedly motorcyclists and pedestrians, indicating room for improvement on the protection of vulnerable road users. A high priority is generally afforded to high-speed traffic flows, often at the expense of local public realm and the convenience and safety of non-motorised modes. Road building and capacity expansion, including an ongoing expansion of the expressway network gathered momentum in the 1980s as the nation’s financial capacity grew and has not so far abated. It is also noteworthy that the predominance of a Corbusian “towers in the park” style in most public housing estates leaves surprisingly generous spaces for large roads. A relatively dense network of six lane arterial roads has been created. A number of these arterials are being converted to semi-expressway status in which flyovers or underpasses remove most light traffic delays. Such an emphasis on roads would seem to run counter to the goal of promoting public transport by eliminating any speed advantage that MRT could potentially have (Barter et al. 2003). Do these road-related priorities undermine the sustainability of Singapore’s transport? Such policies would usually not be considered compatible with the definition of sustainable transport adopted for comparison earlier. Nevertheless, in percapita terms the supply of high-speed traffic capacity remains relatively low. In fact, low road capacity per capita is almost inevitable, given Singapore’s high population density of over 100 persons per hectare within the urbanised area. Moreover, strong land use planning and tight control on the vehicle fleet mean that, so long as these policies remain in place, there is little risk that road expansion will induce traffic demand or stimulate sprawl (May 2004). However, if such planning policies were relaxed, then Singapore’s roads may yet prove problematic in the future and help entrench traffic patterns that would be difficult to reverse. For example, a recent planning decision allowing hypermarkets (with generous parking provision in car-oriented locations in a peripheral zone of the island) might seem a worrying step towards car-oriented patterns. However, this should be kept in proportion, since it would take many more car-oriented developments to significantly alter the predominantly transit-oriented retailing scene, especially given Singapore’s spatially constrained context (Tor 2006). There are also several perverse outcomes of the Singapore approach to capping car ownership. Remarkably high levels of car use per private car are due in part to the low level of ownership (Ang 1993b), but also probably to the high costs of ownership (Barter 2005). As mentioned earlier, high car use per car and the unusually large taxi industry (which complements low car ownership and high public transport use), mean that the energy use and greenhouse contributions of Singapore’s passenger transport are only slightly lower than the levels typical in European cities (Kenworthy and Laube 2001). These are much higher

104

P.A. Barter

than might be expected of a dense city with such an explicitly transit-oriented strategy. Ownership restraint may also serve to perpetuate a tendency on the part of the public transport industry to assume that their customers are captives, who do not own and cannot afford a private car. This is seen in a surprising lack of effort (so far) by public transport operators in Singapore to market to choice customers, and the stalling of progress towards true excellence in customer-oriented, highly-integrated public transport planning (Barter 2006, 2007). Recently worries have also been mounting that public transport improvements have yet to produce a system that is perceived as sufficiently attractive to maintain its market share against increasing car use. This would become a serious problem if car restraint policies were relaxed. This assumption that users of non-car modes are captives and that the market for these modes is a fixed pie is also reflected perhaps in another surprising divergence between Singapore’s approach and the usual visions of green transport. There is a marked lack of attention to planning for bicycles as a mode of transport, notwithstanding some efforts to provide for leisure cycling. Bicycles are a small but visible feeder mode to the MRT in certain parts of Singapore, and fear of competition with buses (for customers and space) may be a factor in an unwillingness to promote bicycle use. Singapore’s policies clearly deviate in significant ways from what would usually be seen as sustainable transport. However, a transport development trajectory involving a moderate role for private cars and a substantial role for public transport does still seem to be relatively securely locked in for the foreseeable future and is still clearly more sustainable than most other high-income cities around the world. To understand this conclusion better, we need to turn to the motivations behind Singapore’s policies.

6.4

Rationales for the Key Choices: Any Connections with Sustainable Development?

This section seeks to understand the connection between the priorities that prompted Singapore’s approach and the notion of sustainability. In the literature on Singapore’s experience with urban transport there seems to have been little analysis of why such a connection should arise. First, the section reviews prominent motivations in Singapore’s transport policy priorities, at least as they have been presented discursively, since the 1970s. The key themes identified in Singapore are then compared with the central ideas behind sustainable development. Not surprisingly perhaps, these show little or no explicit connection with sustainable development itself. However, the subsequent analysis does identify some underlying resonances or analogies that connect Singapore’s explicit priorities and those that would be expected under a sustainable development driven set of priorities.

6 Singapore’s Urban Transport

6.4.1

105

Reasons Behind the Key Policy Choices?

This section seeks to identify the arguments that have appeared over the years to justify the three main policies identified earlier. Sources drawn upon here include both original policy documents (at least those that have been made public), a review of Straits Times news reports from 1971 to 1974, and various later overviews and analyses. Recent observations draw on my familiarity with contemporary debates on Singapore’s transport policies. Road space arguments, especially the infeasibility of expanding road capacity fast enough to cope with potentially rapid increases in traffic were a key justification for the demand management efforts introduced in the 1970s (Pendakur et al. 1989). This theme has also, since 1973, consistently been paired with portraying rapid growth in vehicle numbers as a fundamental cause of congestion problems and was later a central argument for introducing the Vehicle Quota System. Arguments in the 1970s for traffic demand management also showed concern over the opportunity cost of the road building programme in the face of other pressing developmental priorities (Sharp 2005). It was only from the late 1970s that Singapore’s road budget expanded beyond a modest level (Willoughby 2000). Since the 1990s, road space arguments have changed subtly. The ultimately limited future expansion of roads has become a frequent theme in the justification of Singapore’s car restraint and promotion of public transport. Since at least the 1996 White Paper, the 12% of the island’s land area devoted to roads has repeatedly been mentioned, with the argument that significant further expansion will be difficult and increasingly expensive (LTA 1996). Remarkably, according to May (2004), spatial constraints on road building are now more emphasised by Singapore’s policy makers than the financial limitations. In the early 1970s, public statements asserting the need to solve city centre congestion were more prominent than more abstract arguments about its underlying road-space causes. The desirability of avoiding congestion is an argument that spans the decades. Congestion has often been equated with economic paralysis in Singapore, sometimes to the point of exaggerating its effects and costs perhaps. The early focus on congestion in and around the city centre has gradually changed to concern over the wider threat of congestion on various roads. The contemporarysounding argument that those imposing social costs on others should pay for them was made explicit as early as 1973. Congestion was clearly identified as the primary social cost being focused on. The congestion theme has often been closely linked to a consistent emphasis on economic efficiency and arguments closely related to it in envisaging success for the system. The role of free flowing roads in economic competitiveness has also been emphasized many times, including the specific objective of maintaining efficient access to the ports. This economic efficiency theme was also prominent in justifying an efficient transport system more generally, including also the considerable efforts from 1972 onwards to reform and improve public transport.

106

P.A. Barter

Although less prominent later, a consistently strong theme in the early 1970s was to see success as closely associated with a more orderly and less chaotic transport system. This was a prominent catch phrase in reported pronouncements against pirate taxis, poorly managed bus operations, and various other manifestations of indiscipline, such as haphazard parking, jaywalking, and such like. Order was associated with efficiency and modernity. In many ways, the transport shake-ups of the 1970s mirror the PAP Government’s developmental approach to reform of various key sectors in the early post-independence period. By 1970 it had a high degree of confidence as a developmental state deriving legitimacy from delivering development (Perry et al. 1997). It had already tasted success with major reforms in several economic arenas, such as housing, industrial development and enhanced foreign private direct investment. The transport reforms of the 1970s shared a number of common features with other efforts, including: concerted government action that often imposed strong supervision; appeals to an ideal of modernity and willingness to sweep away the old; a tendency to sideline existing local business and land-owning elites; shallowness or absence of public participation; and pragmatic determination to deliver dramatic, even if austere and functional, improvements quickly (Trocki 2006; Rodan 1989). Some of these features can be seen in the forced merger of the bus companies followed by the imposition of a professional management team and later dilution of shareholdings with a public float (Rimmer 1986) and the willingness to impose on the car-driving elite extremely robust demand management through pricing. Perhaps surprisingly, air pollution has been a rather minor theme, although not totally absent. An anti-smoky-vehicle campaign emerged in the late 1960s. It was not focused on cars however, but on smoky diesel vehicles, buses, trucks, and pirate taxis and reflected wider frustration with the inefficient state of the public transport system. The subsequent demand management and public transport reforms of the 1970s also helped address the most obvious air pollution issues by dramatically slowing traffic growth and producing a younger vehicle fleet (Ang 1993a; Chin 1996). These were of course complemented by more explicit anti-pollution policies but arguably on a relatively leisurely schedule (Hayashi et al. 2004). Energy thrift is a strong theme in sustainable transport agendas and has been highlighted as an advantage of Singapore’s approach (Ang 1993b; Kenworthy and Laube 2001). However, this was hardly presented as a motivation. An exception was during the oil crisis of 1973, which prompted a fuel conservation campaign to be launched. It should be noted that the oil supply shock hit soon after Singapore’s first important steps in traffic demand management. It cannot be seen as a cause of those choices and was hardly mentioned subsequently in justifying them. The choice of spatial strategy for urban development in Singapore under the 1971 Concept Plan was a very strong influence, constraining various other choices. However, the fact that the strategy did involve a choice, with more than one possible alternative, seems to have been publicly downplayed. As discussed earlier, alarming transport scenarios emerged from the study. The initial MRT study in the mid 1970s confirmed the soundness of the land-use strategy, which was consistent with an MRT-based public transport strategy (Rimmer 1986). Thus, despite the fact that

6 Singapore’s Urban Transport

107

the Concept Plan was never given the force of law, it did provide powerful guidance to all spatial decisions (Dale 1999). Its land use parameters apparently left little choice but to adopt a space-efficient transport strategy. The spatial strategy therefore also had strong implications on planning for the public transport system. On the SCP’s recommendation, detailed investigations of MRT began immediately (May 2004). The plan for a strong concentration of office employment in the city centre under the spatial strategy was a significant factor in the victory in the early 1980s of the MRT-and-bus option over the all-bus alternative in the so-called MRT debate (Phang 2003). Only MRT, it was argued, could avoid unacceptable bus congestion and nuisance in city centre streets such as Orchard Road (Sharp 2005). Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) had not yet been demonstrated successfully at that time, but even if modern BRT could somehow have been an option it would probably have required a revised spatial strategy, with more numerous, but somewhat less intensely developed, public transport corridors, and a less intensely developed central area. Wider national-level spatial constraints, which has provided a frequent argument for space-efficient transport priorities since the 1990s, as mentioned above, were already apparent much earlier to the SCP team, with its 1992 time horizon, and to the policy makers who implemented its recommendations. It seems clear that awareness of these constraints influenced the choice of a spatial strategy involving high density housing in strong, mass-transit-based corridors. A theme of excellence and of aspiring to be world class has been prominent since the 1996 White Paper produced by the newly formed Land Transport Authority (LTA), which called for a World Class land transport system. It should be noted that this is also a malleable notion, depending on which characteristics and international examples are held up for comparison. The White Paper presented a world class transport system as providing “… commuters with highly efficient, comfortable and convenient rides in free-flowing traffic. Having a world class public transport system is a key component of this system.” (LTA 1996: ii). The world class theme can be seen as similar to, but more compelling, positive and more responsive to community aspirations, than the earlier theme of efficiency. However, it continues to be carefully framed in the context of the reality of constraints. The pragmatic but austere policies that emerged in the mid-1970s were by the 1990s presented as virtues, and key planks in the set of policies that would help provide “the world class transport system that Singaporeans deserve” (LTA 1996: viii).

6.4.2

Interpretation: Coincidental Resemblance to Sustainable Transport?

The analysis above found that Singapore’s policies were justified and driven by a combination of a keen focus on efficiency, a desire for modernity and later, excellence, faith in state activism, and short-run and long-term awareness of spatial limitations at both local scales (such as in the city centre) and city-wide (national)

108

P.A. Barter

scales. Was it merely a coincidence that these priorities prompted strategies that somewhat resemble sustainable transport policies? We have seen that none of the most prominent justifications had much to do with environmental or community quality-of-life emphases usually prominent in sustainable transport agendas, at least not in any explicit way. For example, until recently, the terminology of sustainability had in fact been absent from official justifications of transport policy. This is not surprising for the 1970s and 1980s but, given the popularization of the idea from 1989 onwards, it is more surprising for the 1996 White Paper. Only very recently does the term seem to be entering official urban transport policy rhetoric in Singapore, as for example in a recent speech by the Minister of Transport, Raymond Lim, entitled “A Sustainable Land Transport System for Singapore” (Singapore Government 2006). We can interpret Singapore’s experience and motivations in terms of the “traffic, mobility, access” framework on success in urban transport that was discussed earlier. Singapore’s spatial realities meant that in practice this translated into a focus on moving people and goods as efficiently as possible – in other words, a strong mobility focus. This was complemented by some effort to also minimise the need to travel. Any shift away from traffic focused planning towards a mobility focus, or even better, an access focus, will tend to resemble sustainable development priorities, even if prompted by rather different motivations, as in Singapore. Singapore’s transport priorities were also clearly about doing better with less. However, in this case, neither environmental impact nor energy consumption were the focus of the “with less” imperative. Rather, spatial constraints and the related focus on congestion played this role and prompted a similar policy response. In a sense, they occupied the environmental corner of the sustainable development triangle. Let us consider more carefully each corner of the sustainable development triangle. The economic developmental corner is certainly prominent in the focus on efficiency and transport’s contribution to economic success. This can be seen in the unusually conscious and explicit attention to articulating what is considered to be success in Singapore’s urban transport policies. The social dimension was rather Spartan but nevertheless there was a functional contribution by urban transport to the social contract in Singapore, with non-car owners being offered a basic, efficient and gradually improving public transport system. However, the environmental corner of the sustainable development triangle received surprisingly cursory explicit attention. This is so despite the fact that the same policies did often have results that have been found to have offered environmental benefits. Although many of the specific objectives or indicators that are usually associated with sustainable transport are absent from Singapore’s priorities, it did have to work hard at balancing various difficult-to-resolve objectives simultaneously. This certainly resonates with multi-dimensional approaches to sustainable transport, even if it does not match perfectly, and even if some of the most important objectives being balanced against each other are not those seen in most definitions of sustainable transport. A further important parallel between sustainable transport, as usually understood, and Singapore’s policies lies in the rather long-term perspective to planning that has been taken in Singapore.

6 Singapore’s Urban Transport

109

It may now be possible to better understand the surprising deviations of Singapore’s priorities from those more usually associated with sustainable transport to interpret them in light of Singapore’s motivations. For example, the priority given to high-speed traffic can now be understood, as May (2004) points out, as compatible with Singapore’s focus on efficiency and on preventing congestion. Tolerating the perverse effects of the vehicle ownership controls also seemed odd but also reflects Singapore’s rather hard priorities. The approach to traffic speed above can also be seen as keeping faith with Singapore’s motorists in return for the very high price they pay for the privilege of owning and using their vehicles (May 2004). The surprising neglect of bicycle policy has also been explicitly explained in Parliament in terms of space efficiency and the priority given to mass movement in public transport, combined with the claim that there is not enough space for provision to be made for bicycles. This and several other deviations discussed in this chapter also reflect a lack of focus on energy as a priority as well as neglect of the more subtle liveability and choice-related dimensions of sustainable transport as emphasised elsewhere, such as Europe.

6.5

Implications and Conclusion

This chapter has shed some light on the meaning of sustainable development as applied to urban transport and interesting ways in which Singapore’s urban transport priorities have both resembled and differed from such an agenda. I have argued that Singapore’s urban transport and land use outcomes have entrenched a trajectory that is similar, although not identical, to a sustainable transport trajectory. It seems well placed to continue to entrench and maintain a high role for public transport. It has mostly avoided locking in significant automobile dependence. These pathways were the result of policies prompted by a range of priorities, especially local spatial and economic efficiency-focused imperatives, not by environmental, energy, or most of the other prominent elements of a typical sustainable transport agenda. The alignment is thus far from perfect and Singapore’s policies have diverged from the ideal of sustainable transport in important and interesting ways. Nevertheless, this chapter argued that the resemblance between Singapore’s approach and a sustainable one is not entirely accidental. There are underlying fundamental parallels which help us to understand the similarities. Both Singapore’s efforts and sustainable transport, as commonly understood, involve the need to “do better with less” and in both cases this is understood to involve both the short-term and the long haul. It has taken multiple objectives seriously in transport policy, even if the specific goals were rarely identical to those seen in multi-dimensional notions of sustainable transport. Furthermore, the imperative to be thrifty resulting from such a balancing act provoked an effort to develop sophisticated understandings of what exactly it means to succeed in urban transport planning. This prompted Singapore to shun traffic-focused visions of success in favour of conceptions in

110

P.A. Barter

which moving people and goods and enhancing ease of access, with reduced need to travel, become the key priorities. The findings may offer lessons for those seeking to promote a more sustainable approach to urban transport worldwide. Singapore did not require a global perspective to embark on a sustainable transport agenda. However, it did need an unusually long-term perspective and a willingness to face up to difficult trade-offs, especially those related to spatial constraints that were perhaps unusually compelling. Singapore’s experience suggests that it can be useful to be alert to locally relevant motivations that may parallel sustainable development priorities. It is obvious that acting out of urgent and local necessity is likely to be more persuasive than remote global concerns or an abstract ideal such as sustainable development. Cities with large populations and already high urban densities can learn directly from Singapore’s success in confronting its space constraints. Hong Kong’s and Seoul’s experiences here are relevant (Barter et al. 2003). However, few cities have such obvious space constraints as Singapore. And few have such a strong, single-tier government with so much power to effect dramatic reform and to shape the public discourse. For decades, such observations suggested that others could not hope to emulate Singapore’s approach. However, recent urban transport success stories in more complex and liberal democratic governance contexts suggest that Singapore’s experiences may indeed be of wider interest. London’s and Stockholm’s congestion pricing initiatives are examples. Even more dramatic are recent public transport, public realm and car restraint reforms in Bogotá and Seoul (Pucher et al. 2005; Wright and Fulton 2005). These large cities also faced up to difficult local trade-offs (albeit different in detail from Singapore’s) and embarked on sets of policies that also resemble sustainable transport. In 2007, Singapore will see two major transport policy reviews. It will be interesting to see if old familiar local constraints and newly emerging imperatives will continue to drive Singapore’s urban transport policies to parallel those of sustainable transport. It will also be interesting to see if a sustainable development agenda may soon begin to drive transport planning and policy more explicitly. Acknowledgements This author has benefited from discussions on Singapore’s transport policies with a number of people over the years who, even if not cited directly here, deserve to be recognized. They include K. Raguraman, Craig Townsend, Lew Yii Der, Piotr Olszewski, Anthony Chin, Phang Sock Yong, José (‘Tony’) Gómez-Ibáñez, Jeff Kenworthy, Francis Chong and many of my students at the National University of Singapore. I am also very grateful for the comments on an anonymous referee. However, responsibility for any opinions and errors is obviously the author’s alone.

References Ang BW (1993a) An energy and environmentally sound urban transport system: the case of Singapore. International Journal of Vehicle Design 14(5/6): 431– 444 Ang BW (1993b) Restraining automobile ownership and usage and transportation energy demand: the case of Singapore. Journal of Energy and Development 17(2): 263–278

6 Singapore’s Urban Transport

111

Arthur WB (1994) Increasing returns and path dependence in the economy. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI Asher M (2002) Reforming Singapore’s tax system for the 21st Century. In: Koh AT et al. (eds) Singapore economy in the 21st century: issues and strategies. McGraw-Hill, Singapore Barter, PA (2004) Transport, urban structure and lock-in in the Kuala Lumpur Metropolitan Area. International Development Planning Review 26(1):1–24 Barter, PA (2005) A vehicle quota integrated with road usage pricing: a mechanism to ease the phase-out of high fixed vehicle taxes in Singapore. Transport Policy 12 (6):525–536 Barter P (2006) Make not owning a car the smart choice. Straits Times 17 November 2006, p 41 Barter P (2007) Wanted: a more ambitious vision for public transport. Ethos (magazine of the Singapore Civil Service College), April 2007 Barter P, Kenworthy J, Laube F (2003) Lessons from Asia on sustainable urban transport. In: Low NP, Gleeson BJ (eds) Making urban transport sustainable. Palgrave-Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp 252–270 Black JA, Paez A, Suthanaya PA (2002) Sustainable urban transportation: Performance indicators and some analytical approaches. Journal of Urban Planning and Development 128(4): 184–208 Centre for Sustainable Transportation (2005) Defining sustainable transportation 2, Report prepared for Transport Canada, 31 March 2005. Centre for Sustainable Transportation, Toronto. On-line at http://cst.uwinnipeg.ca/documents/Defining_Sustainable_2005.pdf Cervero R (1996) Paradigm shift: from automobility to accessibility planning, Working Paper 677. Institute of Urban and Regional Development, California University, Berkeley, CA Cervero R (1998) The transit metropolis: a global inquiry. Island Press, Washington, DC Chin ATH (1996) Containing air pollution and traffic congestion: transport policy and the environment in Singapore. Atmospheric Environment 30(5): 787–801 Chin HC and Foong KW (2006) Issues in transportation planning – the Singapore experience. In: Basbas S (ed) Advances in city transport: Case studies. WIT Press, Southampton Chua BH (1996) Singapore: Management of a city state in Southeast Asia. In: Ruland J (ed) The dynamics of metropolitan management in Southeast Asia. Institute for South East Asian Studies (ISEAS), Singapore Dale OJ (1999) Urban planning in Singapore: the transformation of a city. Oxford University Press, Shah Alam, Selangor Dryzek J (1997) The politics of the earth: environmental discourses. Oxford University Press, New York Handy S (1993) A cycle of dependence: automobiles, accessibility, and the evolution of the transportation and retail hierarchies. Berkeley Planning Journal 8: 21–43 Hayashi Y, Doi K, Yagashita M, Kuwata M (2004) Urban transport sustainability: Asian trends, problems and policy practices. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research 4(1): 27–45 Jeon CM, Amekudzi A (2005) Addressing sustainability in transportation systems: Definitions, indicators, and metrics. Journal of Infrastructure Systems 11(1): 31–50 Kenworthy J, Laube F (2001) UITP millennium cities database for sustainable transport (CDDatabase). International Union (Association) of Public Transport (UITP), Brussels Levine J, Garb Y (2002) Congestion pricing’s conditional promise: Promotion of accessibility or mobility? Transport Policy 9: 179–188 Litman T (2003) Measuring transportation: traffic, mobility and accessibility. ITE Journal 73(10): 28–32 Litman T (2005) Well measured: developing indicators for comprehensive and sustainable transport planning. Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada (5 June 2005). Online at http://www.vtpi.org/wellmeas.pdf LTA (1996) White Paper: a world class land transport system. Land Transport Authority, Singapore LTA (2005) Singapore land transport statistics in brief. Land Transport Authority, Singapore LTA (2006) Singapore land transport statistics in brief. Land Transport Authority, Singapore

112

P.A. Barter

May AD (2004) Singapore: the development of a world class transport system. Transport Reviews 24(1): 79–101 Meadowcroft J (2000) Sustainable development: a new(Ish) idea for a new century? Political Studies 48(2): 370–387 Newman PWG, Kenworthy JR (1999) Sustainability and cities: overcoming automobile dependence, Island Press, Washington, DC Phang SY (2003) Strategic Development of Airport and Rail Infrastructue. The Case of Singapore, Transport Policy, 10(1): 27–33 Pendakur VS, Menon G, Yee J (1989) TSM innovations in Singapore: lessons from experience: 1974–88. Paper no. 88CK075 presented at the Transportation Research Board 68th Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, 22–26 January Perry M, Kong L, Yeoh BSA (1997) Singapore: a developmental city state. Wiley, New York Public Transport Council Singapore (2006) Findings of bus passenger satisfaction survey. Online via http://www.ptc.gov.sg/statistics_summary.asp Pucher J, Park H, Kim MH, Song J (2005) Public transport reforms in Seoul: innovations motivated by funding crisis. Journal of Public Transportation 8(5): 41–62 Rimmer PJ (1986) Rikisha to rapid transit: urban public transport systems and policy in Southeast Asia. Pergamon, Sydney Rodan G (1989) The Political economy of Singapore’s industrialisation. MacMillan, London Salomon I, Mokhtarian PL (1998) What happens when mobility-inclined market segments face accessibility-enhancing policies? Transportation Research D 3(3): 129–140 Schipper L, Marie-Lilliu C, Gorham R (2000) Flexing the link between transport and greenhouse gas emissions – a path for the World Bank. International Energy Agency, Paris Schwaab JA, Thielmann S (2002) Policy guidelines for road transport pricing: a practical step-bystep approach. United Nations, New York Sharp I (2005) The Journey: Singapore’s land transport story. SNP Editions for the Land Transport Authority, Singapore Singapore Department of Statistics (2001) Singapore census of population 2000, Advance Data Release No.5, Mode of Transport, Singapore Singapore Government (2006) A sustainable land transport system for Singapore. Speech by Mr Raymond Lim, Minister for Transport and Second Minister for Foreign Affairs, at the Launch of “Flag the Bus Early” Campaign, 23 October 2006. Government of Singapore Press Release. Available online via https://app-pac.mica.gov.sg/data/vddp/embargo/696339.htm or http:// app.mot.gov.sg/land_news.asp?cat = Speeches#../../data/s_06_10_23.htm Toh RS, Phang SY (1997) Curbing urban traffic congestion in Singapore: a comprehensive review. Transportation Journal 37(2): 24–33 Tor CL (2006) Who will emerge the big winner in the battle of the hypermarkets? Today (newspaper) 30 December 2006. Online via http://www.todayonline.com/articles/163379.asp Trocki C (2006) Singapore: wealth, power and the culture of control. Routledge, London/New York Unruh GC (2000) Understanding carbon lock-in’. Energy Policy 28: 817–830 Victoria Transport Policy Institute (updated 22 October 2002) Automobile dependency: transportation and land use patterns that cause high levels of automobile use and reduced transport options, Online TDM Encyclopedia (Online resource at http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/), http:// www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm100.htm Accessed 28 February 2003 WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development) (1987) Our common future. Oxford University Press, Oxford Willoughby C (2000) Singapore’s experience in managing motorization, and its relevance to other countries. Discussion Paper TWU-43, The World Bank, Washington, DC. Accessed via http:// www.worldbank.org/transport/publicat/twu_43.pdf Wright L, Fulton L (2005) Climate change mitigation and transport in developing nations. Transport Reviews 25(6): 691–718

Chapter 7

Achieving Sustainable Industrial Development Through a System of Strategic Planning and Implementation: The Singapore Model Kum Chun Seetoh and Amanda Hwee Fang Ong

7.1

Introduction

Sustainable Development as defined by the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED or more widely known as the Brundtland Commission) is “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. This calls for a fine balance of meeting the human’s economic and social needs (primarily through economic development and growth) while protecting the environment and its natural resources. Maintaining this fine balance between development and environment would safeguard the future generations to achieve the quality of life that is at least as good as the present generation. To meet the economic and social needs of humans, industrialization has been a key strategy adopted by many industrializing countries to achieve economic development and growth through the creation of industries, manufacturing output, job creation and government revenue. However, the industrialization process can often result in negative impact on the environment if stringent environmental regulations and control mechanisms are not properly implemented and enforced. Under the United Nations Agenda 21, three dimensions of sustainable development have been identified and these are the economic dimension, the social dimension, and the environmental dimension. In the context of sustainable industrial development, the United Nations for Industrial Development Organisation (UNIDO) defines that such development should accomplish three things: firstly, it encourages a competitive economy, with industry producing for exports as well as the domestic market (economic dimension); secondly, it creates productive employment, with industry bringing long-term employment and increased prosperity (social dimension); and thirdly, it protects the environment, with industry efficiently utilising non-renewable resources, conserving renewable resources and remaining within functional limits of the ecosystem (environmental dimension).

Jurong Consultants Pte Ltd., 8 Jurong Town Hall Road, #08-00, The JTC summit, 609434, Singapore, Republic of Singapore, e-mail author for correspondence: [email protected]

T.-C. Wong et al. (eds.), Spatial Planning for a Sustainable Singapore, 113–133 © Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2008

114

K.C. Seetoh and A.H.F. Ong

Against the above imperative vis-à-vis development which requires the support of sustainability planning, this chapter seeks to illustrate how Singapore has maintained the “fine balance” between development and environmental protection through a system of strategic planning and implementation. The study also highlights the important role that the industry has played in achieving Singapore’s economic success and social benefits for the community by making conscientious efforts to minimise adverse impact on the environment.

7.2

Sustainable Industrial Development in Singapore

Industrialization in Singapore did not come about by chance but was the brain child of visionary leaders and was impelled by the political and economic situation in the early 1960s. In 1965, Singapore was expelled from the Federation of Malaysia; and two years later, the British declared that they would withdrew their troops from Singapore. Faced with a high unemployment rate, poverty and housing slums with poor sanitation and overcrowding conditions, the government proceeded to diversify its economy from its predominant focus on trading to manufacturing, and had since achieved economic successes and job creation through this new sector. The early industrialization strategy was aimed primarily at labour-intensive industries with high export potential. This saw the birth of Singapore’s first industrial estate: the Jurong Industrial Estate. The Jurong Industrial Estate was originally envisaged to cover an area of 2,025 hectares but was increased later to 6,480 hectares as recommended by Dr Albert Winsemius, a United Nations expert. Industrialization was government-driven and approximately 85 percent of the industrial land was developed by government bodies. As a key engine driving the industrialization program, the Economic Development Board (EDB) was set up in 1961 and was instrumental in the birth of the Jurong Industrial Estate. In 1968, the Jurong Town Corporation was created as a full-fledged statutory board of the EDB to undertake planning, development, leasing and management of all industrial estates. In 2000, Jurong Town Corporation began its corporatization exercise to increase its competitiveness by becoming more lean and giving its subsidiaries greater autonomy. In 2001, Jurong Town Corporation was renamed as JTC Corporation to reflect its new corporatized identity (JTC website www.jtc.gov.sg). EDB and JTC Corporation are the twin engines that have been driving the industrialization process in Singapore. Singapore’s rapid and sustained economic growth through the 1960s–1990s can be traced to the systematic development of its planned industrial parks and its ability to change and adapt its industrial structure to meet the needs of the changing market and modern business trends. As mentioned, labour-intensive industries were the key industrial category in the early 1960s which Singapore sought to attract given its own weak industrial base and abundance of cheap and unskilled labour. In the late 1960s and 1970s, Singapore’s industrial focus switched to export-oriented industries. In the 1980s and 1990s, when faced with increasing competition for markets and investments, Singapore had to formulate and adopt a strategy for her future industrial development. Such a strategy would embody the upgrading and restructuring of existing

7 Achieving Sustainable Industrial Development Through a System

115

industries into higher value added types, higher productivity on the land, and attract higher technological products and services which are more competitive and can better afford the higher costs of production in Singapore. Government policies were thus targeting the development and upgrading of manpower and skills and improvement of existing industrial infrastructure to attract the needed target industrial investments. Several training institutes were set up by the government and joint ventures with reputable industry leaders to spearhead this initiative. Through various government support agencies and fiscal incentives, industries were able to mechanize, automate, computerize and conduct research to break out of the labour intensive and low productivity manufacturing. This has enabled it to stay competitive in spite of the cheaper operating environment in other ASEAN countries and low-cost countries like China and India. Over the last 40 years, Singapore has achieved great strides in industrial development. However, their remarkable economic achievements were not attained easily. Considerable time and painstaking efforts were devoted to gradually build up their respective economies. For instance, Singapore which started its investment promotion programme in the mid-1960s, took over 40 years in four major phases to evolve its economy from a very low-skilled industrial base to an increasingly sophisticated, very high value added, technology and often capital intensive, and knowledge-based economy. Table 7.1 and Fig. 7.1 depict this economic transformation and highlights the increasing sophistication of products manufactured in Table 7.1 Singapore’s Industrial Transformation, 1960–2005 Periods

1960s

1970s

1980s

1990s–2005

Very high valueIndustry Labour intensive Export-oriented Value-added e.g. e.g. added technology focus e.g. ● Import ● Medium value ● Highly skilled & knowledge● Technology based manusubstitution added ● Low value added ● Semi-skilled facturing and intensive ● Semi-automated ● Highly automated services Services Industries as Regionalization as external ecosecond engine of nomic wing growth; development of SMEs (small mediumsized enterprises) Products Sugar, soap, beer, Consumer Industrial electronics, Wafer fabrication, other beverages, electronics, computer and IC design, bioTV, oil refining, semiconductor peripherals, tech, research basic chemiassembly, texintegrated circuit and cals, car assemtile and gar(IC) testing, autodevelopment, bly, cement, ments, motive, aerospace petrochemical construction oilfield equipand other precision hub (Jurong steel ment and engineering comIsland), infoservices ponents, communication fine chemicals, and media medipetrochemicals cal services, pharmaceutical and logistics, educamedical devices tion and others

116

K.C. Seetoh and A.H.F. Ong

Fig. 7.1 Singapore’s economy from the 1960s to 1990s

Singapore (such as Integrated Circuit chips including wafer fabrication, petrochemicals and specialty chemicals, precision engineering components to bioscience products including pharmaceuticals) as well as the critical development of the small and medium enterprises, venture capital and service sectors. Moving in tandem with this economic transformation is the implementation of the skill development programmes and training for the workforce. At present, JTC Corporation’s 38 industrial parks provide home to more than 7,000 local and foreign multi-national companies. Approximately 7,000 hectares of net industrial land are occupied and in production. JTC Corporation’s market share of industrial properties in Singapore is approximately 85 percent whilst the remaining is owned by another government body, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) and the private sector. JTC Corporation’s portfolio of industrial properties range from the typical generic industrial parks to several specialised industrial parks, such as the petrochemical hub, Jurong Island (3,200 hectares); the biomedical hub, ONENorth; Tuas Biomedical Park; several wafer fabrication parks; and various science and business parks. Besides owning and managing 38 industrial parks, JTC Corporation also owns several logistics hubs, amenities, workers’ housing and 1.45 million square metres of built-up industrial space. In recent years, JTC Corporation’s involvement as a major industrial player has expanded beyond Singapore with its participation in several overseas industrial investments in Asia through its subsidiary companies. Singapore’s successful industrialization is not a coincidence but engineered by sound long-term industrial programmes and policies that adapt and respond well to the changing world trends and market demand. Her industrial achievement is also attributed to strong support from and coordination among various government agencies. While EDB and JTC Corporation are the key government agencies

7 Achieving Sustainable Industrial Development Through a System

117

responsible for the industrialization program in Singapore, strong support are also provided by other government agencies like the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA), Land Transport Authority (LTA), International Enterprise Singapore (IE Singapore), Spring Singapore, National Environmental Agency and the Public Utilities Board, towards the industrialization efforts.

7.3

Singapore’s Framework for Sustainable Industrial Development

Singapore has established a comprehensive system of strategic planning and implementation to achieve sustainable industrial development (see Fig. 7.2). In this system, the role of each agency is clearly defined, with EDB taking the lead in strategic planning, followed by close cooperation between URA and JTC to translate strategic plans into physical plans. JTC, MEWR and NEA are responsible for the implementation of planned programmes, with strong support from six other key agencies. The critical roles played by the various government agencies

Singapore’s Framework for Sustainable Industrial Development

STRATEGIC PLANNING

Economic Development Board (EDB) Strategic Directions for Economic Development

Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) Planning Authority of Singapore PHYSICAL PLANNING JTC Corporation (JTC) Planning of Industrial Developments

JTC Corporation (JTC) Development, management and control of Industrial Parks DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION

Ministry of Environment and Water Resources (MEWR) and National Environmental Agency (NEA) Regulation and Enforcement of Environmental Regulations

Industrial Investment Promotion

Trade Development

Standards and Quality

Research and Statistics

Industrial Funding

Manpower Training and Development

SUPPORTING AGENCIES

Fig. 7.2 Singapore’s Framework for Sustainable Industrial Development

118

K.C. Seetoh and A.H.F. Ong

in contributing towards sustainable industrial development in Singapore, are elaborated in the subsequent subsections.

7.3.1

Strategic Planning by the Economic Development Board

The efforts of EDB to promote and develop the industrial sector in Singapore are oriented towards attracting foreign multi-national corporations (MNCs) to invest here. To realize its objective, EDB has set up a very substantial network of promotion offices (18 overseas offices in 2005). Over the last 40 years, EDB has been able to proactively attract many leading global industrial MNCs to invest billions of US dollars in increasingly sophisticated manufacturing plants in Singapore. The MNCs that were attracted to Singapore were targeted companies that “fit” the target sectors, and sometimes even the specific manufacturing process chain spectrum. Many of the plants of these global companies are wholly foreign-owned and their economic contributions to Singapore have been very substantial. They have brought new sophisticated technologies in key strategic industry sectors that Singapore needs, as well as higher skilled jobs, access to international markets. In many occasions, their operations and business links have also benefited local small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), especially those providing supporting industrial services. Besides being an industrial promotion agency, EDB works closely with the Ministry of Trade and Industry to provide long-term planning and strategic directions to Singapore’s industrialization programme in terms of specific industrial trends and the targeted industrial sectors to be pursued. Nimble and quick adjustments to meet such changes are one of the key features contributing to a sustainable industrialization programme.

7.3.2

Physical Planning by the Urban Redevelopment Authority and JTC Corporation

Long-term physical planning is critical for land-scarce Singapore, which has limited natural endowments. It is the only way Singapore safeguards her scarce land resources for developing new and high value added and knowledge-based industries, such as wafer fab, chemicals and life sciences, which require large tracts of land and specific utility requirements. Comprehensive industrial planning also allows Singapore to safeguard sufficient appropriate land for industries and cluster synergistic industries together for greater growth, as well as minimize constraints on surrounding areas and negative impact on the environment. In this regard, JTC Corporation works closely with the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA), the National Planning Authority, to safeguard sufficient land for growth in the manufacturing and warehousing sectors by stating its requirements for the short- and medium-term clearly and ensuring that URA addresses it at the Concept Plan review. URA and JTC Corporation constantly review Singapore’s long-term landuse plans to incorporate the needs of the new economy into the current planning process.

7 Achieving Sustainable Industrial Development Through a System

119

For example, Singapore’s Concept Plan, a long-term strategic plan for the next 40–50 years, is reviewed every 10 years to ensure that adequate land is safeguarded for industries to grow and in specific areas to ensure that its location is suitable and able to match the changing trends (see Fig. 7.3). In drawing up and reviewing the Concept Plan, the environment is always regarded as a critical consideration in the siting of industries in Singapore. Spatial interventions in the planning in terms of the spatial distances separating the pollutive industries from the living environment are carefully considered to ensure environmental sustainability of the living and working spaces. In developing the Concept Plan for Singapore, URA ensures that the long-term demand of industries are met and also appropriately sited from an environmental perspective. As such, only the clean and light industries are located next to the population centres whilst; the more pollutive industries are sited furthest away from population centres. Industrial development in the urban areas is normally in high-intensity pockets of high-rise flat developments and dedicated for light and clean industries only. Measures to control air, water and noise pollution, the management of hazardous substances and the treatment and disposal of toxic wastes are also carefully monitored and enforced by the Pollution Control Board. For example, in Singapore, the petrochemical industries which are pollutive and hazardous are sited together on an amalgamated offshore island known as the Jurong Island, which was created by amalgamating seven small islands through reclamation to form one large island, linked to the mainland by a bridge. An ample size of industrial land is required for long-term sustainable industrial growth. To set aside land for the purpose, the Concept Plan, revised in 1991 and 2001, respectively, had recognized the need from industries and logistics use for

Fig. 7.3 Concept Plan of Singapore 2001 Source: Urban Redevelopment Authority, 2001. Concept Plan 2001, Singapore

120

K.C. Seetoh and A.H.F. Ong

about 11–12 percent of the total land area. Besides, structural changes have been made to match anticipated demand and supply such as higher returns to land, and higher intensity of landuse or plot ratio. These measures have been translated into industrial policies and plans so as to ensure that the industrial lands are being optimally used for its intended purposes and sufficient stock is being safeguarded in the long-term.

7.3.3

Industrial Development by JTC Corporation

Whilst EDB brings in the investment, JTC Corporation is responsible for nurturing and the management of customers’ needs for industrial land and facilities. As at 2005, JTC Corporation has planned, developed and managed 38 industrial estates with a total area of 5,750 hectares of net industrial land in the country. Besides providing industrial land with full infrastructure, JTC Corporation is also the largest single supplier of ready-built industrial spaces, with about 1,500 units of prototype low-rise standard factories for sale or lease totalling 2.5 million square metres of floor space. Additionally, it has more than 1.4 million square metres of high-rise flatted factory space, housed in 70 blocks of high-rise factory buildings and 202,000 square metres of stack-up factories spread across the island. JTC Corporation has been able to sustain its industrial development and growth in spite of stiff competition from lower cost countries – by way of careful planning and understanding its customers’ needs. JTC Corporation’s industrial parks are highly regarded in the East Asian context; and the quality of its products is widely known by its 7,000 customers. Its brand name is well respected and the after-sales are supported by various teams of competent estate management personnel who are responsive to customer’s complaints and ensure that its industrial parks are clean, safe and properly maintained. It also has a five-year rolling Repair and Redecoration programme to ensure that all its industrial properties are constantly re-painted, repaired and upgraded every five years. Maintenance fees payable are charged reasonably as after-sales service for tenants of its premises, and quality of maintenance services is reputedly high by regional standards.

7.3.4

Environmental Protection and Pollution Control by the Ministry of Environment and Water Resources, and the National Environmental Agency

In tandem with the rapid economic growth and industrialization in Singapore, an institutional framework was put in place early to protect the environmental resources and prevent pollution of the environment. Such a framework included the establishment of the Ministry of the Environment (ENV) in 1972 to ensure that

7 Achieving Sustainable Industrial Development Through a System

121

Table 7.2 The 6 Action Programme Committees No. Action programme committee

Lead agency

1 2 3 4 5 6

National Environmental Agency (NEA) Public Utilities Board (PUB) National Environmental Agency (NEA) National Parks Board (NParks) National Environmental Agency (NEA) Ministry of Environment (ENV)

Clean air Clean water Waste management Conserving nature Public health International environmental relations

rapid economic growth and industrialization would not be at the expense of the environment. Through working with other statutory boards (such as the National Environment Agency, the Public Utilities Board, the Urban Redevelopment Authority, the Building Control Authority, and JTC Corporation), ENV has adopted a multi-pronged approach to ensure that all legislation and regulations related to environmental protection and pollution control are integrated into all levels of planning and development of the environment. One significant national initiative was the drawing up of the Singapore Green Plan (SGP) in 1992 to provide strategic directions to ensure Singapore’s environmental sustainability through a comprehensive set of measures for all aspects of the environment. In 2004, ENV was renamed as the Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources (MWER) to reflect its expanded role in managing water as a strategic national resource. The Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources (MEWR) has recently updated the Singapore Green Plan 2012 (a continuation of the SGP 1992) – the environmental blueprint to help Singapore achieve environmental sustainability over the next 10 years. The vision of SGP 2012 is “Towards an Enduring Singapore” with six Action Programme Committees being set up to achieve the SGP 2012 targets. The six Action Programme Committees are headed by the lead agencies as in Table 7.2.

7.3.5

Supporting Governmental Agencies

To lend strong support to Singapore’s industrialization process, six specialised agencies were established to work closely with JTC Corporation to drive the industrialization process. These six specialized agencies are: ● ● ●

● ● ●

Industrial Investment Promotion Agency (part of EDB) Trade Development Board (the current IE Singapore) Standards and Quality Agency (the current Spring Singapore, also formerly known as PSB Corporation) Research and Statistics Department (Singapore Department of Statistics) Industrial Funding Agency (DBS Bank) Manpower Training and Development Agency (Ministry of Manpower)

122

7.3.5.1

K.C. Seetoh and A.H.F. Ong

Industry Investment Promotion Agency (Part of EDB)

As part of EDB, the Industry Investment Promotion Agency is given the task of promoting Singapore as an attractive industrial destination in the Far East to invest in and which can attract industrial projects that are deemed desirable from the point of technological know-how, and also penetrate and expand overseas and globally. This agency is also given the task of establishing cooperation between domestic and foreign industries, especially in the field of know-how and technological and knowledge transfers. This is clearly the marketing arm of Singapore’s industrialization effort.

7.3.5.2

Trade Development Board (the current IE Singapore)

The former Trade and Development Board (TDB) and later re-cast as IE Singapore, is given the task of enhancing and promoting the trade and export capabilities of Singapore and to look at trade policies and development and examine how to grow the international and regional markets and adherence to World Trade Organization (WTO) trade policies and practices. This agency is also given the job of identifying and widening markets for Singapore-made products and to assess and import technology through joint ventures and partnerships to produce high-quality products that meet international standards and good practice for enterprises.

7.3.5.3

Standards and Quality Agency (the Current Spring Singapore, also Formerly Known as PSB Corporation)

The Standards and Quality Agency is set up to enable the measurement of industrial standards and benchmarking of product quality including consumer protection. It is also given the task to help manufacturing companies operating in Singapore to access world markets through high-quality products that meet international standards and good practice. The main tasks of the Standards and Quality Agency are namely: measurement, standardization, testing and accreditation, without which our products would not be able to access world markets.

7.3.5.4

Research and Statistics Department (Singapore Department of Statistics)

The Research & Statistics Department is given the task of collating, generating and disseminating the relevant statistics to investors, decision-makers and industry. Its main objective is to keep record of relevant and up-to-date information and to provide policy makers as well as investors with an up-to-date picture of progress in the industrial sector.

7 Achieving Sustainable Industrial Development Through a System

7.3.5.5

123

Industrial Funding Agency (Development Bank of Singapore, DBS)

The Industrial Funding Agency is set up as a dedicated funding arm specifically to help local industrial enterprises, which are mostly Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) and to induce other enterprises currently operating outside Singapore to return. This is achieved by helping industrialists and SMEs to obtain external financing and other forms of assistance in order to set up and grow their businesses and enter into world markets through the availability of funds for financing export. Other tasks include improving access to capital, technology and manufacturing know-how that will help to ease the resource constraints for local enterprises. In Singapore, the original funding agency has since grown to be a local bank. 7.3.5.6

Manpower Training and Development Agency (Ministry of Manpower)

Manpower training and development for industries are taken very seriously in Singapore. The Manpower Ministry together with EDB is responsible for the development of Singapore’s human resources capabilities to match the needs of the industries. The main objective of this agency is to ensure Singapore’s competitiveness through the availability of high quality and trained human resources. Various training institutes and vocational training institutes for different skill sets are being set up for this purpose.

7.4

Approaches and Concepts Applied in Sustainable Industrial Development

This section explains the concepts and approaches applied by Singapore to her industrialization process to achieve the three dimensions of sustainable industrial development (i.e. economic, social and environmental).

7.4.1

A Comprehensive Planning System for the Whole of Singapore

To optimize the various competing landuses and integrate the environment into landuse planning, Singapore adopts the technique of zoning – an efficient method for regulating and controlling the various landuses and managing the environment more effectively. Singapore has achieved this so far through establishing a comprehensive planning system that comprises the Master Plan, the Concept Plan and 55 Development Guide Plans. This system is administered by URA that coordinates with other supporting government agencies.

124

K.C. Seetoh and A.H.F. Ong

Under the Concept Plan, the general principles that have been adopted to optimize landuse and integrate environmental and social concerns into landuse planning are: ● ●

●

● ●

Clustering of pollutive landuses to minimise land for buffer zones Land within buffer zones of sewage treatment plants and power stations are designated for proposed industries and warehousing Land within flight paths and noise zones are designated for industrial and warehouse developments Siting of pollutive landuses away from population centres Only clean industries are located within the new towns

7.4.2

Functional and Sustainable Industrial Master Plan

Industrial parks in Singapore are planned and designed with an in-depth understanding of the business operations of the end-users, and this is critically important in meeting the requirements of the various industries clusters to ensure proper siting of specific industrial plant and facilities. Hence, an Industrial Master Plan will address the needs of the future end-users from various perspectives such as environmental, utilities and services requirements, smooth movement of goods and people, particular specifications, logistics and custom requirements and compatibility of use with neighbours. To achieve optimal utilization of limited land resources, the understanding of the target industrial clusters and their operational processes will also allow for more accurate projections of utility requirements, determination of plot sizes and siting of complementary industries along the value chain to achieve greater optimization or in Just-in-time operations.

7.4.3

Phasing Strategies

For sizeable industrial development of at least 500 hectares, it is neither possible nor desirable to develop the entire site simultaneously. Development in phases will permit more cost-effective use of existing and proposed investments in infrastructure. Phasing provides an estimate of the land and capital requirements of the various users supporting the live-work-play concept that are being implemented in a sustainable manner. The industrial component for most township developments will normally be the main catalyst to spark off the project. The phasing plan will provide a comprehensive basis for the effective coordination and implementation of the various landuse components together with the various utilities and infrastructure to support it. The phasing plan will essentially address the following: ● ●

Take-up rate of the industrial land Holding costs and higher profitability

7 Achieving Sustainable Industrial Development Through a System ●

● ● ●

125

Supporting facilities and amenities necessary to support the living and working community within each phase of development Flexibility of planning Ease of infrastructure provision and cost efficiency Supporting transportation networks including the public access

7.4.4

Cluster Concepts

7.4.4.1

Cluster Concept for Cost and Operational Efficiencies

There are synergistic advantages in clustering industrial plants into an industrial park. For instance, many modern manufacturing industries consist of larger parent plants working closely with smaller supplier companies. With the adoption of Just-InTime manufacturing technology, the larger plants do not need to produce all their component parts but will just require smaller component suppliers to be located nearby, so that delivery can be made within minutes when desired. One of the main attractions for similar targeted industries to be located within the industrial estate would be that their suppliers or downstream industries could co-locate in the same vicinity for logistic convenience. Another cluster concept is to group allied industries together for better synergistic dependency and economies of scale in infrastructure provision. The concept of clustering similar industries with similar requirements within one defined area is to allow the sharing of common facilities and to provide opportunities to create linkages in production. For example, the food and beverage zone will accommodate only compatible food and beverage companies (which requires specific water, sewerage and electricity requirements), or companies that provide supporting services/processes in the food and beverage value change. Apart from ensuring ease and efficiency in provision of dedicated facilities to the clusters, it will also help to ensure the availability of speciality input of supplies and services. 7.4.4.2

Cluster Concept for Environmental Considerations

Environmental protection measures can be properly considered in master planned industrial estates due to economies of scale. The notion of landuse segregation allows assigning industries to appropriate sites according to their environmental impact characteristics. In that way, industries with stronger environmental impact can be isolated from residential areas and “bad neighbours” could also be segregated by buffers. In addition, waste handling facilities, utilities provision and services can be provided economically for a cluster of similar industries. Industrial operations can thus continue smoothly, without adverse impacts on neighbouring residential uses.

126

7.4.5

K.C. Seetoh and A.H.F. Ong

Live-Work-Play-Learn Concept

The earlier concept of an industrial estates seen only as a place of work has largely been replaced by a live-work-play-learn theme concept. The latter is a more pragmatic and sustainable approach as it is conducive to creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship. This is very relevant to business park uses where offices, clean industries, research and development facilities, training facilities, recreational facilities as well as community spaces can be located. To facilitate a total living and learning environment, URA has introduced new zoning guidelines to facilitate business. Industries, warehousing, utilities and telecommunication uses have been sited in separate, distinct landuse zones. The rigid zoning was amended to allow industrialists to vary or change the uses according to changing business conditions without the need to rezone the site. This means that businesses can have mixed-use developments under one roof or within the same site. Under this approach, businesses will be grouped under two new zones, Business 1 (B1) and Business 2 (B2), according to the nature of their environmental impact, thus providing a mixed work-live-learn-play environment.

7.4.6

Industrial Symbiosis or Eco-Industrial Park Concept

The concept of industrial symbiosis requires that an industrial system be viewed not in isolation from its surrounding systems, but in concert with them. This is achieved by engaging traditionally separate entities in a collective approach that would yield competitive advantage; and this involves physical exchange of materials, energy, water and by-products. The keys to industrial symbiosis are collaboration and the synergistic possibilities offered by geographical proximity. The concept of Industrial Symbiosis was deployed by Singapore in establishing her petrochemical hub on Jurong Island, which will be discussed as a case study later in this chapter.

7.4.7

Shared Supporting Services and Infrastructure

Another key advantage of clustering compatible and complementary industries is the possibility of shared supporting services and infrastructure. The economic benefits are lower infrastructure costs in laying the utility cables and pipes through saving material resources used and thereby enables the industrial park to operate within the resource limits. With shared services and savings, the firms are able to pass on economic benefits by producing affordable consumer goods that have minimal impact on the environment.

7 Achieving Sustainable Industrial Development Through a System

7.4.8

127

Infrastructure Coordination for Availability, Quality and Reliability

In transportation planning, all the industrial estates are provided with a safe and efficient private and public transport system and movement network that provides adequate levels of accessibility and mobility, catering to the needs of the residents and workers as well as all heavy vehicle movement. In Singapore, in order that its industrial estates are benchmarked against the industry’s best practices, the infrastructure planning will ensure adequate and reliable utilities to service the industries in a timely manner, with optimum use of all utility investment and delivery of those services. All industrial land sold to its lessees would be prepared land complete with six utilities and services such as proper drainage, sewerage facilities, telecoms, water, power and occasionally dedicated services for specific industries up to the boundary of the allocated plot. In addition, JTC Corporation also offers valued added facilities and infrastructure for its customers such as re-cycled industrial water, a district cooling system and dedicated industrial waste treatment facilities. For a sustainable industrial infrastructure development, two main utilities were specially studied for greater energy saving and water reclamation in line with the Rs. 3 initiative of Reduce, Reuse and Recycle. For the industrial sector, there are industrial water works that recycle wastewater, a drainage system and a sewerage system to optimize our limited water resources. At the Jurong Industrial Water Works, the effluent from water reclamation plants is further treated and reclaimed as industrial water for washing, cooling, textile manufacturing; and it can be further reclaimed to give higher grade potable water. All industrial facilities in Singapore, especially those energy-intensive operations, are urged to participate in the Energy Audit Scheme in an attempt to improve energy use and reduced emissions of air pollutants and carbon dioxide. This is an initiative by the National Energy Efficiency Committee (NEEC) and such audits are required to be carried out every three to five years to help industries systematically identify opportunities for improving energy efficiency regularly.

7.5

Case Studies of Sustainable Industrial Development

To illustrate some of the concepts and approaches applied in Singapore, two case studies are presented in this section: Jurong Island (the Petrochemical Hub of Singapore), and ONE-North (the Biomedical Hub of Singapore).

7.5.1

Jurong Island, the Petrochemical Hub of Singapore

Jurong Island, the petrochemical hub of Singapore, was developed as an application of the concept of industrial symbiosis (also known as Eco-Industrial Park). In 1980,

128

K.C. Seetoh and A.H.F. Ong

the chemical industries were identified as an industry cluster capable of contributing significantly to the economic growth of Singapore. Hence, Jurong Island was the natural choice for the development of a petrochemical hub of Singapore through the amalgamation of seven southern islands off the main island – Pulau Ayer Chawan, Pulau Ayer Merbau, Pulau Merlimau, Pulau Pesek, Pulau Pesek Kecil, Pulau Sakra and Pulau Seraya. Today, Jurong Island is home to leading petrochemical companies, such as Chevron, ExxonMobil, Celanese, Mitsui and Lonza, which have reaped the benefits of extensive infrastructure and production synergies from the cluster development for oil, petrochemical and chemical manufacturing. The conglomeration of refining and petrochemical companies on Jurong Island has attracted third party logistics providers, such as Vopak, Oiltanking and SembCorp Utilities & Terminals, to be located there. The synergistic advantages of locating the petrochemical companies and related services in a cluster development to create an Eco-Industrial Park can be classified into two aspects: economic and environmental. The economic benefits are cost reduction for transport of material and infrastructural services due to geographical proximity. The geographical proximity has enabled the exchange of material, energy and water between the companies located within the cluster, and in addition, allowed the recycling of by-products (by supplying to complementary industries to be manufactured into useful products), which may otherwise be discarded. Such practice propagates a “closed loop zero waste” environment which contributes to sustainable development, bringing about the environmental benefits of reduced waste, better resource utilization and hence, minimizing the impact on the environment. Figure 7.4 illustrates the concept of Eco-Industrial Park on Jurong Island. In terms of infrastructural and utility services, the condominium concept was adopted on Jurong Island where services such as infrastructure, utilities and logistics services were shared among the companies on Jurong Island to reduce capital

Fig. 7.4 Concept of Eco-Industrial Park on Jurong Island

7 Achieving Sustainable Industrial Development Through a System

129

cost and enable faster start-up. One such initiative is the multi-utility service corridor, which can be used to supply utilities and feedstock and transfer products directly to companies on Jurong Island. Other shared services include industrial fire fighting, waste treatment and waste incineration.

7.5.2

ONE-North, the Biomedical Hub of Singapore

Singapore’s biomedical Hub, ONE-North is a showcase of the unique work-livelearn-play concept created by the park developer and owner, JTC Corporation. ONE-North was created as Singapore’s biomedical hub that focuses on biomedical sciences, infocomm technology (ICT) and media industries. The concept of ONENorth was to provide a meeting place where exceptional minds can congregate to live, work, relax and learn. To provide the ideal lifestyle that inspire and stimulate minds for breakthroughs in biotechnology and ICT, the live-work-relax-play elements are integrated to create such dynamic space. Environment is a key contributor in creating the unique “live-work-relax-play” concept of ONE-North. This can be seen from the park’s adoption of technologies and initiatives that improve the natural environment and thereby enhances the quality of life of its inhabitants and users. The active promotion of environmental technologies and practices within ONE-North has encouraged its intellectual community to take on

Table 7.3 Environmental Technologies and Practices Implemented at Biopolis. Environmental No. parameter Aims Technologies/practices at Biopolis 1

Clean land

Recycling and use of recycled products

2

Nature conservation

Minimising impact on the ecosystem and conserving biodiversity

3

Clean air

Designing and operating buildings to use energy efficiently and using renewable energy

4

Clean water

Water conservation and the use of recycled water Designing and operating buildings that improve the living environment

5 Public health

• Biopolis Recycling Programme • Pneumatic Waste Conveyance • Use of Organic Compost • Sky Garden and Green Balconies • Tree conservation (original trees were conserved and transplanted back when construction of Biopolis was completed • Building-integrated photovoltaic • Energy-Efficient Architecture • District Cooling System • Hydrogen Refill Station • Intelligent Building Automation System • Solar Hot Water System • Solar Powered Lighting • Use of NEWater • Waterless urinal • Cleansing-friendly street design • Self-cleaning restroom seat

130

K.C. Seetoh and A.H.F. Ong

a conscientious role in creating an environmentally sustainable place for “livework-relax-play” that inspires scientists to achieve breakthroughs in environmentally sustainable technologies. Table 7.3 below illustrates the environmental technologies and practices that have been implemented at the Phase 1 of ONE-North, the Biopolis. As part of its continuous efforts in creating environmentally sustainable industrial developments, JTC Corporation has initiated a study project on Green Plot Ratio at ONE-North which is currently being studied and researched by the National University of Singapore. The study findings and recommendations will contribute to the developer’s understanding of how greenery in a high-density urban development can, in terms of the social and economic aspects, add value to the development concerned, and more importantly the environment.

7.6

Singapore’s Experience in Sustainable Industrial Development

Singapore’s comprehensive long-term planning system for sustainable industrialization has seen her achieve significant economic growth and wealth to provide social benefits for the community and enable the effective management of Singapore’s scarce resources within the limits of the environment. Singapore has achieved success in the three key dimensions of sustainable industrial development – in economic, social and environmental dimensions, which are further explained in the subsequent subsections.

7.6.1

Economic Success

Through sound policies and a system of strategic planning and implementation, Singapore has seen herself grow from a Third World country with a Gross Domestic Product per capita of US$427 in 1960 to a thriving economy today with one of the world’s highest Gross Domestic Product per capita of US$29,470 in 2006. Singapore’s economic growth was largely dependent on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and her success in attracting FDI was due primarily to the infrastructure (industrial zones, prepared land, ready-built facilities, inexpensive utilities, etc.) and incentives provided to the foreign investors. The government focused on developing an excellent infrastructure and valued investors were given the leases for land and buildings cheaply and quickly. Today, Singapore has attracted more than 7,000 multi-national corporations (MNCs) from around the world which have enjoyed a host of benefits and incentives by locating their businesses in Singapore. Singapore’s rapid industrialization has seen her progress steadily from 6th rank in 1985 to 1st rank in 1998, in terms of competitive industrial performance (UNIDO 2002/2003). Today, Singapore remains in the top rank as a high performer for industrial-cum-technological advancement.

7 Achieving Sustainable Industrial Development Through a System

7.6.2

131

Social Benefits

Singapore has consistently been placed highly in international and regional rankings from business environment to quality of life. In terms of living environment, Singapore has been ranked as the best place to live for Asian expatriates and the Asia’s top choice for place to live, work and play. This international standing is evidence of Singapore’s high standard of living, given its globally connected and pro-business environment with strong and stable infrastructure.

7.6.3

High Standard of Living and Environmental Protection

Singapore’s clean environment is comparable with the best cities in the world. The pollutant levels in Singapore are well within the recommended standards of the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Over the years, through the various government agencies, Singapore has implemented many initiatives and programmes to provide a clean environment. Recent programmes include the energy efficiency and clean energy programmes (e.g. the energy audit programme by the National Energy Efficiency Committee (NEEC), tax incentives for using alternative fuel for automobiles). As an effort to combat the rising levels in waste disposal, Singapore has also embarked on waste minimization and recycling programmes to meet her “Towards Zero Landfill and Zero Waste” goal. Programmes include the establishment of the Waste Management and Recycling Association of Singapore (WMRAS) and a National Recycling Programme. To increase environmental awareness, the NEA organized education programmes to encourage students to lead in recycling and environmental efforts in school and at home; and such education programmes include competitions and camps in schools. Such awareness programmes support capacity-building and contribute towards a sustainable environment.

7.6.4

Gaps in Sustainable Industrial Development

To meet the needs of her people and overcome the major social problems of poverty and unemployment in the 1960s, Singapore’s industrialization efforts have displaced natural areas and ecological habitats to pave the way for the development of industrial parks and infrastructure. Maintaining this fine balance between development and environment is a great challenge for Singapore, and the government agencies have been taking steps to minimize the negative impact of industrialization on the environment through technological innovation in efficient resource utilization, public education and close cooperation between the government and the private

132

K.C. Seetoh and A.H.F. Ong

sector in joint initiatives. One such example is the National Weather Study Project organised by Senoko Power Limited, in partnership with Ministry of Education and Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources.

7.7

Recommendations

Singapore’s industrial development experience has demonstrated the following key pre-requisites for the successful implementation of a sustainable industrialization programme: ● ●

●

●

●

Active government involvement driven by strong political will A clear and transparent industrial policy integrated with a system of long-term strategic planning and review, and implementation Appointment of key agencies to drive the industrialization process, for instance, EDB and JTC Corporation in the case of Singapore Support for agencies assigned with specific roles in industrial investment promotion, measurement of standards and quality and manpower training An environmental authority and related agencies to work closely with other agencies to integrate environmental concerns into other policy areas, and to implement effective enforcement of environmental regulations and monitoring of environmental performance to decision-making key agencies as critical feedback for long-term strategic planning

The experience of Singapore’s industrialization is evidence of the government’s vision in the early days of developing Singapore into a world-class industrialized economy with quality living standard, high productivity levels and a competitive business environment. Singapore has achieved her successful industrialization through long-term strategic planning that is supported by a coherent and strong institutional framework, comprising key government agencies that led in the interim planning, execution and implementation of economic promotion and industrialization programmes. Collaboration and coordination between key government agencies is critical in bringing about the successful outcomes of industrialization efforts.

7.8

Concluding Remarks

Industrial progress and growth in Singapore has demonstrated the importance of her multi-pronged approach towards an effective industrialization drive involving leadership, vision, long-term strategic plans, establishing a coherent and strong institutional framework, staffing and training competent manpower in key government agencies to plan and implement economic promotion and industrialization programmes in a collaborative and cooperative manner. From the perspective of the UNIDO’s definition of sustainable industrial development, Singapore has achieved the three fundamental dimensions: economic, social

7 Achieving Sustainable Industrial Development Through a System

133

and environmental. The government’s strong political will in driving the industrialization process has put in place a resilient and effective system to develop Singapore’s land resources in an economically, environmentally and, to some extent socially sustainable manner that benefits her people and hopefully future generations as well.

References Biopolis Green Building Guide (2006) Towards Greener Buildings and Brighter Future. Website: http://www.one-north.com/downloads/guides/BiopolisGreenBuildingGuide.pdf Chow et al. (1997) One partnership in development: UNDP and Singapore. United Nations Association of Singapore Department of Statistics (2006) Website: www.singstat.gov.sg Singapore Economic Development Board (2000–2006) Annual reports. Singapore Economic Development Board (2006) Website: http://www.edb.gov.sg JTC Corporation (1975, 2000, 2001, 2005) Annual reports. Singapore JTC Corporation (2006) Website: http://www.jtc.gov.sg Marian C (2000) Industrial Symbiosis. Annual review of energy and environment. Singapore Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources (2006) Singapore Green Plan 2012. Singapore Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources, Singapore (2006) Website: http://www.mewr. gov.sg Ministry of National Development, Singapore (2006) Website: http://www.mnd.gov.sg National Environmental Agency (2004, 2005, 2006) Annual reports. Singapore National Environmental Agency, Singapore (2006) Website: http://www.nea.gov.sg ONE-North. Website: http://www.one-north.com Periscope (1997) A magazine for customers of JTC, JTC Corporation. Singapore Peter C (1983) Singapore development policies and trends. Oxford University Press, Oxford Ramkishen SR (2003) Sustaining competitiveness in the global economy – The experience of Singapore. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham The Singapore Experience: Skywards and Greenery in the Urban Environment. Website: http:// www.unet.univie.ac.at/∼a9418742/CoL/7-NUS-Singapore.pdf United Nations Division for Sustainable Development – Agenda 21. Website: http://www.un.org/ esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/index.htm United Nations Industrial Development Organization (1998) Sustainable Industrial development – UNIDO position. New York United Nations Industrial Development Organization (2002/2003, 2005) Industrial development reports. New York Urban Redevelopment Authority (2001) Concept Plan 2001. Singapore Urban Redevelopment Authority, Singapore. Website: http://www.ura.gov.sg

Chapter 8

Public Housing in Singapore: A Sustainable Housing Form and Development Tony Tan Keng Joo1 and Tai-Chee Wong2

Singapore’s monumental achievements in public housing have dumbfounded supporters and critics alike. Many praise the Singapore government for transforming a tiny, overcrowded, poor and slum-ridden, Third World island into a spotless haven for foreign investors within a space of 25 years (see Dale 1999; Wong and Guillot 2005). Today, 85 percent of Singapore’s population reside in high-rise flats designed and built by the Housing and Development Board (HDB). Some 92 percent of HDB’s residents own their apartment units, leaving only eight percent as renters. Having virtually achieved a “roof over every head” (see Wong and Guillot 2005), Singapore’s public housing programme is impressive in ownership access in a citystate with a high population density of 6,220 per square kilometre. Right from the early 1960s, high-rise, high-density public housing model has been adopted in order to satisfy the housing demand. This model is expected to continue in a sustainable way, and would be the principal housing form to meet future needs. However, how and why high-density living has started out as the provision of basic housing needs and has, over time, evolved into a sophisticated political and social engineering process associated with a model of sustainable housing merits further investigation. From land-saving initiatives, Singapore’s high-rise and highdensity public housing has captured a greater concern and debate about its sustainability since the energy crisis of the 1970s. There is an evolutionary process in terms of the form of sustainable housing. The present chapter is organised in three dimensions of analysis about sustainability. Firstly, it is the social sustainability that was imprinted in the origin of the public housing of affordability, through the central provident fund’s self-financing mechanism. Public housing has been made operational and as a function of social infrastructure to act as a social stabilizing agency. Secondly, public housing has been built into the frame of economic sustainability in which Singapore’s nation-building and growth-driven economic system has been

1

Surbana Intl Consultants Pte Ltd, 168 Jalan Bukit Merah, #01-01, Surbana One, 150168, Singapore, Republic of Singapore, e-mail: [email protected]

2

National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, 1 Nanyang Walk, 637616, Singapore, Republic of Singapore

T.-C. Wong et al. (eds.), Spatial Planning for a Sustainable Singapore, 135–150 © Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2008

This page intentionally blank

136

T.T.K. Joo and T.-C. Wong

strongly associated with its industrialization and urbanization processes. Public housing has also acted as a generator for domestic demand of building materials, professional and sub-professional services and other contractual works. In so doing, HDB as the public provider at moderate and affordable costs for the populace has made the statutory board a sizeable agency of employment (see Phang 2001). Environmental sustainability is the third issue. As a useful instrument in countering urban sprawls (see Simmonds and Coombe 2000; Ravetz 2000), the Singapore highdensity and high-rise model has been equipped with ample open space and greenery at ground level and it has become a compromised form of land use intensification and artificial greenery provision in a Western-modelled landscaped living space.

8.1

Social Sustainability

Two fundamental elements in terms of the social sustainability of public housing are its affordability and social living environment. Affordability for lower income groups is symbolic of equitable redistribution of national resources integral of social sustainable development as socially disadvantaged groups are a temporally sustained existence par excellence. In retrospect, the primary reason for the chronic housing shortage during the pre-colonial era was the concentration of Chinese immigrants in search of better life in the downtown areas adjacent to the port at the southern tip of the island. Highly dependent on the port activities and retail services, low-income “coolies” and petty traders lived in poor living conditions. Their plight included crowdedness, inadequacy of sanitary facilities and the lack of light and ventilation. Attempts by the British colonial administration began in 1927 with the Singapore Improvement Trust but the scope was extremely limited as social housing investments were perceived as non-contributors to economic returns (Goldblum 1986; Wong and Guillot 2005). This perception was twisted around from the early 1960s when the newly elected self-government led by the People’s Action Party that took the opportunity to turn social housing not only into a mass social movement but also an economic sector with the state as the leading and monopolizing actor. In 1960, after the Island obtained its self-government status, a “Public Housing Programme” was established under the newly formed “Housing and Development Board” (HDB) to tackle the acute housing shortage and deplorable living conditions. Measures undertaken included a legislative and self-financing ownership mechanism known as the Central Provident fund in line with the basic principle of affordability and building quality control.

8.1.1

Legislative Support

The Housing and Development Act (1960) legislatively enabled the HDB to have absolute control over the use of private property and the restriction of private property rights through the use of the Land Acquisition Act (1964). The Housing and

8 Public Housing in Singapore

137

Development Act invested HDB with extensive authority to create and implement housing policies. Part III of the Act detailed HDB’s responsibilities to acquire, clear, develop and manage lands necessary for the development of public housing (Tan 1998; Tan and Phang 1991). It also established other duties to be carried out by HDB, defined the eligibility criteria required for the purchase of HDB flats, circumscribed the election requirements in the main upgrading process and detailed the financing procedures. By providing preference to lower-income groups, owners of private properties and high income groups are strictly not eligible to purchase a new flat directly from HDB. Clauses in the Act also restrict owners from leasing out completely their units unless conditions are met and approval given by the HDB, which has equally the power to acquire any flat compulsorily if owners are found to have breached the contract. The Land Acquisition Act, revised and complemented with by-laws from time to time, empowers HDB to acquire land for public housing and other specified purposes. It also provides for the assessment of compensation to be made on acquisition accounts. The Act enables the possibility that whenever any particular land is needed for uses which are of public benefit, utility or interest or for any residential, commercial or industrial purposes, the President may, by notification published in the Gazette, declare the land to be required for the purpose as specified and that the notice shall be conclusive (Yeh 1975; Wong and Yeh 1985). With the notification, the Collector may begin the proceedings for the acquisition of the land. The Act is therefore an important tool that paves a rather smooth path in land development processes. In Singapore, privately owned lands enjoy a tenure of either freehold or leasehold of 99 years or shorter. The sale of state land to private developers is administered either by the Urban Redevelopment Authority or the Housing and Development Board through open tenders. For the development of public housing, HDB purchases land from the State at a slightly discounted rate, albeit with conditions attached. It is a 99-year leasehold status and only public housing development can take place there. By such a legal arrangement, HDB apartment purchasers are lessees of state property.

8.1.2

Financial Mechanism and the Central Provident Fund

The Housing and Development Act has allowed HDB to receive two types of loans from the Government: a) the Housing Development Loan which covers development programmes and operations; and b) the Mortgage Financing Loan which enables HDB to grant mortgage loans to its buyers. They are supplemented by a third, which is granted through the Central Provident Fund Act, which enforces compulsory savings by both the employee and the employer. A portion of the savings contributes directly towards the purchasing of the HDB flats, thus enabling home ownership for many. Together, the Acts facilitated the clearing of otherwise unyielding obstacles in land use development and aided the smooth flow of work done by the HDB.

138

T.T.K. Joo and T.-C. Wong

By taking on the dual role of the developer and banker, HDB has made it easy for a buyer to own his flat. HDB also receives an annual grant from the Government to cover the net deficit incurred for its public housing activities. As such, the Central Provident Fund Act is an Act which allows the Central Provident Fund Board (CPF) to provide security for workers on retirement or when they are no longer able to work. All employees and employers in Singapore, by mandate, participate in the CPF scheme.1 For practical reasons, rental flats dictated the public housing programme during the first three years. Low-income tenants who had little saving but were resettled from the central city slums or squatter sites at the fringe could only afford small rental flats fixed by HDB at a maximum of 20 percent of their monthly income. In 1964, the government introduced the Home Ownership Scheme to give citizens an asset – a means of financial security earned from family savings. Since 1968, CPF contributors have been allowed to withdraw their CPF savings from the Ordinary Accounts for the purchase of public housing flats. Buyers could choose to repay the mortgage loans over 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 or even 30 years. Interest rates charged by HDB are much lower than the prevailing market rates. Using CPF for property access was further extended in 1981 to private residential properties. Although the scope of uses of CPF has since extended to other approved investments, CPF insurance and others, the funds from the CPF scheme has played a pivotal role in complementing and supporting the implementation of the home ownership scheme.

8.1.3

Phases of Development

The development of public housing in Singapore went through various stages of growth according to five-yearly building programmes. In assessing the general transformation of quality, planning and design over the last four decades, public housing provision has demonstrated a few stages of improvement in terms of ownership, apartment sizes and auxiliary services.

1 Each CPF contributor has three accounts with the fund, including the Ordinary, Medisave and Special Account. The CPF contributions are split amongst these accounts as decided by the Government. The bulk of one’s contribution, between 28 and 30 percent, goes to the Ordinary Account. Between six to eight percent of the contribution goes to the Medisave account while four percent goes to the Special Account. The compulsory contribution ends when one reaches the retirement age, typically at 55. The CPF provides its contributors with tax-free interest-bearing savings account which can be accessed for various purposes. The Medisave savings are targeted to help the contributor, and family members meet medical expenses and medical insurance, while savings in the Special Account are reserved for old age and contingency purposes. In the context of housing, it is the Ordinary Account savings with the bulk of the contributions that is of critical implications.

8 Public Housing in Singapore

8.1.4

139

1960 to 1970

The priority of the Board was to alleviate the chronic housing shortage on the island. The task was focused on building the maximum number of housing units within the shortest possible time for the low income population. Basic rental units, such as emergency one-room (33 m2) and two-room (40 m2) units were built. In the subsequent years, larger three-room (60 m2) flats for purchase became available. This first stage of HDB’s development was during the formative years in testing out the public’s acceptance of high-rise and high-density living as a viable way of life.

8.1.5

1970 to 1978

Following the building up of CPF savings, the early part of this period saw the HDB strengthening its capacity to meet the rapidly increasing numbers of qualified applicants and their higher expectations in housing quality. By the mid1970s, HDB was already moving towards the refinement of physical planning and design standards, as well as the introduction of estate management services. For example, design emphasis was placed on minimizing tropical heat via direct sunshine, and to provide adequate cross-ventilation and fire safety measures. In order to aid the efficiency and ease of construction, modular co-ordination and building spacing standards came into play in the design and development of public housing blocks.

8.1.6

1978 to 1984

1978 marked the breaking point of the nation’s housing shortage problems. Intensive efforts by HDB to provide a total living environment with the provision of better quality and more differentiated facilities in the new towns set in. The Board also began to play a leading role in community development. It became involved in the implementation of the Government’s social objectives such as the encouragement of multi-tier family living. The other change was that a greater number of larger units, including the four-room (100 m2) and five-room (123 m2) units were built. This move was to cater to a broader target group as well as to provide opportunities for the existing residents to upgrade. Having solved the core issue of housing shortage had encouraged the HDB to look into the finer aspects of public housing in design and architectural elements. Furthermore, there was an attempt to break away from HDB’s monotonous physical outlook and image by introducing the notion of identity and character in the new towns.

140

8.1.7

T.T.K. Joo and T.-C. Wong

1984 to 1990

By the early 1980s, there was an observable scaling down of the building programme resulting from falling fertility rates since the 1960s. This allowed the Board to focus its attention more on improving the quality of the living environment within the housing estates and fine-tuning of the public housing system. It also provided the much needed space to examine the intangible issues that were previously only granted superficial or no consideration at all, including the notion of quality living environment with an identifiable character that would encourage communal activities and would instil a sense of belonging.

8.1.8

From 1990 to the Present (Upgrading, Renewal and Rejuvenation)

The main thrust has been on the renewal and rejuvenation of the mature public housing estates, apart from its normal building programme. Three measures are used on improving the aged housing stock built during the 1960s and 1970s: (a) upgrading of existing blocks by modernizing the faςade, neighbourhood facilities, and additional living space such as a balcony. In estates with large numbers of aged couples, a lift is provided at all levels; (b) more efficient utilization of land or intensification by constructing taller infill blocks; and (c) redevelopment of poor quality blocks of rental flats, replacing them with much better quality new apartments. Upgrading and value enhancement are the key policy measures that are intended to share the nation’s accumulated wealth through the enhancement of the population’s public housing assets with budget surplus. In terms of social sustainability, nevertheless, a key future challenge to be encountered is to cater to the specific needs, in particular of the greying population. Due to widening income gaps over the last two decades resulting from Singapore’s intensive integration in the global economic system, two paradoxes have emerged in the public housing estates. On the one hand, there are high income groups living in HDB new towns who could well afford unsubsidized private housing. Yet they choose to stay on for various reasons such as cost saving, convenience of public transport and services or perhaps more active communal life etc. Conversely, public policy to promote residential upward mobility or upgrading with incentives has attracted many who could marginally afford it. Fall in real income for some has resulted in their apartments being repossessed by HDB (see Ong 2006). By the year 2030, some one-fifth or 800,000 Singaporeans are projected to be 65 years and above. Practically, studio apartments, already initiated in 1998 for the elderly are supposedly a desirable option designed with a range of social and communal services. Having lost their regular income but enjoying in anticipation a longer life span, the elderly will require affordable housing integrated with the wider community, not in isolation amidst the elderly themselves (see Ministry of

8 Public Housing in Singapore

141

National Development 2006). Such changing needs and rising aspirations of the more affluent middle class whose number is on the rise will oblige the government to seek for a greater variety in housing forms within public housing itself.

8.1.9

Estate Management

HDB has 19 branch offices strategically located in each new town to handle lease and tenancy matters for all its residential, commercial, and industrial properties. This decentralized system ensures that residents’ needs are met on the ground effectively. Prior to 1989, HDB was the estate manager in charge of routine and cyclical maintenance and repair works. From 1989 onwards, management of public housing has been transferred to the Town Councils where elected members of parliament have been given a direct responsibility to provide cost-effective and efficient services in their constituencies. Town Councils help formulate and implement housing policies that support the building of communities, in favour of the interests and benefits of their end-users. However, HDB has continued to manage and maintain a very small number of estates on behalf of the Town Councils as its managing agent.

8.2

Economic Sustainability

Singapore launched off with its public housing programme as basic low-cost housing which, however, was functionally linked to industrialization and economic survival. Asset ownership which has required in return a commitment to regular and routine work has motivated citizens towards appreciating their earned asset, thus rendering HDB a political and social stabilizing agency (Chua 1991, 2000; Wong and Guillot 2005). Whilst jobs were created during the large-scale industrialization supported by foreign multinationals attracted by Singapore’s pro-business policy, HDB itself had become effectively from the 1970s a large employer and an important stimulator of Singapore’s sustained economic growth.

8.2.1

Economic Elements of Public Housing

Commercialization of HDB began in 1970 when it was made a strong self-financing statutory board provided with great autonomy in carrying out its designated functions. Being financially autonomous, it receives incomes from the sale of flats, rents from residential, commercial and industrial premises and services, monthly car parks and conservancies from residents (Tan and Phang 1991; Phang 2001; Wong and Yap 2004). The inclusion of middle income housing in 1974, known as HUDC apartments, had enabled higher income earners who did not qualify for public housing

142

T.T.K. Joo and T.-C. Wong

to purchase houses using their CPF savings. For HDB, the HUDC was a profitable business that generated revenues to support lower cost public housing. Until its advent of partial privatisation from the late 1990s, HDB was a key supplier of its own building materials such as sand, granite,2 bricks, tiles and toilet bowls. Infrastructure and other related construction works provide local contractors with contracts and sub-contracts, which by means of a public tender system generates incomes and multiplier effects. In order to guarantee regular and reliable resource support in materials and labour, a long-term programme of resource planning was established in the 1970s. For building materials, HDB has a practice of bulk purchasing, stock piling, and quality inspection, particularly the key building materials such as bricks, granite, sand and steel. This practice has also helped ensure their price stability. Natsteel Ltd is typical of Singapore’s state-managed industrial plant assigned with the mission to support national economic sustainability. Natsteel Ltd was incorporated in the early 1960s as a national iron and steel industry whose role was to support Singapore’s nation-building efforts in infrastructural and residential development. It was a pillar of public housing and publicly listed on the Singapore Exchange since 1964. As a “propulsive” government-linked company, it went on to diversify in the 1980s to broaden its earnings base by expanding into steel fabrication and construction-related products and services. Natsteel products were used in a large scale for residential and commercial buildings, and infrastructural works such as flyovers, bridges and public rail transport. In the early 1990s, Natsteel Ltd went regional to broaden its steel market scope and expanded into electronic businesses, and served the Asia Pacific market, providing research and development, engineering consultancy, logistics, procurement and other support services. However, Natsteel Ltd’s role is influenced by Singapore’s strategic economic undertakings as the city-state’s economic base has shifted to knowledge-intensive and high-value activities recently. After selling its electronics and steel businesses in the early 2000s, it has now concentrated on three industrial products (construction, chemicals and engineering products) with operations in 10 Asia-Pacific countries (Natsteel Ltd 2006). • Construction products: cement, concrete, precast concrete, premix mortar and related building products. • Environmental Chemicals and Services: lime products, industrial water treatment chemicals, oily sludge, slop treatment. • Engineering: proprietary engineering products and services. In 2006, Natsteel Ltd reported a sum of S$140.5 million of profit after tax (Natsteel Ltd 2007).

2 Reliant on neighbouring countries for the supply of sand and granite, Singapore has recently had to face ban on these commodities. In March 2007, Indonesia, the largest supply source, banned its sand and granite exports to Singapore, forcing the latter to look for alternative sources (Tan 2007: H10).

8 Public Housing in Singapore

8.2.2

143

Asset Enhancement Scheme through Estate Renewal Strategies

Since the early 1990s, a series of upgrading programmes have been designed implicitly as an activity towards the sustainable economic development of Singapore. Asset enhancement could be interpreted as a capital reinvestment measure. Initiated as HDB’s Main and Interim Upgrading Programmes, the intention is to return part of the accumulated national wealth by upgrading older flats and their precinct surroundings to make them look closer to those of the newer new towns. Under the Selective En Bloc Redevelopment Scheme, old flats are acquired for higher density redevelopment, with flat owners given compensation and offered new homes at subsidized prices. In the process, new life is breathed into the gradually deteriorating estates normally having a high concentration of lower income and greying population. The Main Upgrading Programme (MUP) would upgrade homes and the living environment including the common area at the ground level and within the blocks. Facilities for recreation and communal activities are added with the elimination of surface car parking lots. Multi-level car park blocks are built instead, thus freeing much space for landscaping, and where possible infilling blocks. Better lifts are introduced to replace the old. Within the units, old water and sewage pipes as well as the toilet facility are replaced with new. These improvements are included in the “Standard Package”. In addition, if the great majority of residents vote for it, an additional space of six square metres (sq. m) will be added in the form normally of a utility room that is big enough to serve as a study room. This addition, together with the other improvements, is included in the “Standard-Plus Package”. MUP is part of the Government’s continual efforts to enhance the quality of life and to ensure that every Singapore HDB household would enjoy upgrading once. Only Singapore citizens are entitled to upgrading subsidies whilst Singapore permanent residents will have to pay for the full cost.

8.2.3

Interim Upgrading Programme (IUP)

In essence, and increasingly by demand, the scope of works involved in the Interim Upgrading Programme is similar to the Main Upgrading Programme with the exception of the additional space and the works within the Units. Also, IUP is administered by the respective Town Councils. HDB only acts as the “Checker” to ensure that the amendments to be made do not violate the regulations and do not impose any foreseeable danger to the residents. The cost of IUP is totally borne by the Government.

8.2.4

Selective En Bloc Redevelopment Scheme

Under the “Selective En Bloc Redevelopment Scheme” (SERS), the project will identify and acquire old blocks of rental or sold flats with high potential for more

144

T.T.K. Joo and T.-C. Wong

intensive and better quality redevelopment. To ensure that the existing tenants are not adversely affected, new flats will first be built on vacant sites in the vicinity, and will be sold to the tenants or lessees. The old flats will only be demolished after the tenants have moved in. Hence, the scheme enables residents to upgrade to new flats without having to leave the neighbourhood with which they have been familiarized. Only a small number of estates/areas are likely to be considered for development under SERS. These are old HDB estates developed at low density or blocks that can be redeveloped with adjacent vacant land to give a better yield of flats. The sold flats affected by this scheme will be acquired under the Land Acquisition Act. The affected flat lessees will be informed of the scheme, the compensation and the prices and locations of the new flats to be offered to them.

8.2.5

The Studio Apartment

Studio apartments are introduced to cater to the aged couples’ reduced demand for space and they do not live with their children who have formed their own nucleus families. The elderly couple would normally sell off their four- or five-room flat in the open market and purchase a smaller studio apartment directly from HDB. The transaction would provide elderly couples with a new home and some disposable income during retirement.

8.2.6

The Executive Condominium and the “Design & Build” Model

These two schemes are introduced to those who aspire respectively to higher quality apartments and to do their own internal designs. Both schemes would involve professional consultants from the private sector who promise to deliver better design proposals comparable to private housing developments executed by the private sector. These units have a higher price tag but possess fewer restrictions as compared to that of the typical HDB flats.

8.3

Environmental Sustainability

Within the high-density and high-rise public housing framework, environmental sustainability is essentially concerned with a clean, healthy and green living environment in which basic services and public facilities could be effectively provided. Until the mid-1980s, these prerequisites were not directly linked to the notion of sustainable development but were highlighted as a critical norm in the assessment of Singapore public housing by Stephen Yeh, Aline Wong and other researchers (see Yeh 1975; Wong and Yeh 1985). In safeguarding this environmental norm, HDB and

8 Public Housing in Singapore

145

Parks and Recreation Department, both under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of National Development, have collaborated to provide a landscaped open space, greenery including the planting and maintenance of tropical trees. More precisely, public housing development has followed some environmentdriven principles expressed in its construction of a series of compact new towns. Indeed, Singapore’s embryonic concept in new town development was out of its selfconsciousness in land limitations, which resulted in “vertical compactness” through primarily air space expansion. Consequently, the option of compactness for all new towns was implemented islandwide, ignoring the conventional practice of gradual decline in population density from the city centre (Liu 1975, Wong and Yap 2004). A compact pattern, however, inevitably causes more acute impact from pollution inevitably and other environmental hazards. As a whole, compactness in a high-rise built environment and well planned conditions, has the potential to contribute towards urban sustainability such as lower rate of car use, emissions, energy consumption, and high rates of public transport services, overall accessibility, and revitalization of redeveloped land plots in the city centre. Through use of appropriate technology and building design, the potential of energy saving is large (see Wheeler 2004; Wong 2006; Hui 2001; Newman and Kenworthy 2000; Van and Senior 2000; Ravetz 2000). In the case of central London, for example, it could offer elderly single-person households better access to services without the need for driving (Towerblocks 2006). Despite certain inherent weaknesses, high-rise residential blocks have also provided recent evidence of popularity and a high level of acceptance among those surveyed in Singapore by Belinda Yuen (2005) for better open view, breezes and privacy. A high degree of environmental sustainable development has been attained, notably in the provision of an effective public transport system and a mandatory provision of open space and greenery in new town estates. Below is a brief description of new town development that portrays the ways in which Singapore had gone through its planning of public housing.

8.3.1

Comprehensive New Town Planning

Since the 1960s, public housing has been integrated in the comprehensive new town policy of planning. The building provision includes all infrastructures such as water, electricity, gas supplies as well as sewerage and drainage systems. In 1987, a mass rail transportation system (MRT) was added to the transportation network to serve the residents. As a planning principle, flatted factories of light industry are built adjacent to public housing estates to facilitate easy access of workers. Based on clauses drafted up by the Anti-Pollution Unit in 1970 in the Prime Minister’s Office, environmental protection of factory areas has been initiated to assure pollution control of solid, gaseous and liquid wastes in favour of a high standard of public health and hygiene. This role was shifted to the newly established Ministry of the Environment in 1972. Protection of nature, the natural eco-systems and the man-made greenery began in

146

T.T.K. Joo and T.-C. Wong

1963 with the launch of the tree planting campaign, managed by the Garden City Action Committee. In Singapore, till perhaps the end of the 1990s, environmental management was not gauged against conceptual sustainability criteria and indices; rather than that it was directed to address the more immediate and negative impact of urbanization arising from rapid economic growth and industrialization. The scope of environmental management unavoidably encompasses public and private housing and their environmental quality control.

8.3.2

Planning and Design of the Public Housing New Towns

Planning of the high-rise, high-density public housing estates in Singapore has followed the planning hierarchy and design principles of new towns. The Concept Plan has laid a foundation in providing planning guidelines and principles.

8.3.3

The Concept Plan

Tracing its formal establishment in 1958, the first Master Plan went through 10 subsequent years of substantial change in several stages. Unconvinced by the “colonial and conservative” planning intentions of the 1958 Master Plan, the newly elected selfgovernment led by the People’s Action Party sought a dramatically different path of development from the early 1960s: full-scale urbanization and industrialization coupled with a Central Business District around Raffles Place (see Ministry of National Development 1970; Wong and Yap 2004). With the assistance of a United Nations team, the Master Plan was replaced by the “Singapore Concept Plan” approved by the Cabinet in 1971. Twenty years later, the revised 1991 Concept Plan has further mapped out the vision for Singapore’s long-term physical development into the 21st century, charting the long-term development of the island in three stages – to Year 2000, Year 2010 and Year X of the distant future. It was again updated in 2001. Public housing has occupied an eminent place in the Concept Plan in land use planning guided by the notion that land is an essentially limited resource. Scattered around the whole island, there are currently 25 new town public housing estates, each with a projected average population of 150,000 (Fig. 8.1).

8.3.4

The New Town

The New Town Structural Model is a theoretical model built to guide planners in planning a HDB new town. The model is updated regularly to embody the latest land use planning concept and policies. This is to ensure that all new towns are well planned and function efficiently. Each new town is designed to be self-sufficient and houses a population of between 50,000 and 200,000. The development of a new town takes on a fully inte-

8 Public Housing in Singapore

147

Fig. 8.1 Spatial Distribution of Public Housing in 2003 Source: Housing and Development Board (2004) Annual Report (2003/2004, p.87)

grated approach. With the concurrent participation of the relevant authorities coordinated by the HDB, the notion of a Just-in-time delivery for all utilities and facilities within a new town and its neighbourhoods is ensured. The prime aim is to ensure optimum allocation of resources and to minimize or avoid wastage.

8.3.5

The Neighbourhood

New towns are formed by four to eight neighbourhoods with a population between 20,000 and 30,000 each. Each neighbourhood is within the 300–400 metre-serving radius of a centrally located neighbourhood centre. Identified by themes according to the historical background of the site such as “Fishing Village” or “Art City”, the architectural design approach is guided by the theme accordingly. The main aim is to establish a visual cohesiveness and an identity within the neighbourhood that the residents can relate to. A sizeable neighbourhood meeting a threshold service clientele has proven useful in sustaining locally-oriented businesses accessible by residents within walking distance.

8.3.6

The Precinct and Block

A neighbourhood is made up of “precincts” which focus on the design of friendly communal spaces to be shared by 600 to 1,500 families. A precinct may include

148

T.T.K. Joo and T.-C. Wong

facilities such as communal garden with pavilions and children playgrounds. There could also be a kindergarten, childcare facilities, residents’ committee centre, old folks corner or grocery store. Its main aim is to encourage interaction amongst the residents within the precinct, thus forging a sense of community and a sense of belonging. Typically, three to eight blocks of flats between 12 and 30 levels each form a precinct. The primary concern in the design of a block within a precinct is resident safety. Whilst the corridors in each level of the block ensure visibility to public spaces, a degree of privacy is also provided within individual units. Particular concern is given to efficiency in terms of circulation area and lift-to-unit ratio, and smooth and safe evacuation of the residents in the event of fire and other hazards.

8.3.7

The Unit

A block is normally formed by 4–12 dwelling units per level. The area of the units ranges between 90 sq. m for a four-room flat and 140 sq. m for an executive unit. To ensure the maximum utility of the internal spaces, it is crucial that the functionality and efficiency of the unit layout is not compromised. The other important factors are the adequacy of light and ventilation and the safety and privacy of the residents.

8.4

Conclusion

In any society, housing its population is a complex and multi-faceted issue. In the implementation of housing policies, sufficient land and funding alone cannot guarantee success. In Singapore, careful matching of administrative and technical capacity to the scale of the programme, setting and implementing social and environmental objectives and measures as well as linking them with viable economic operations are needed to achieve sustainable housing development in three dimensions: social, economic and environmental. HDB, with a staff-strength of 8,000, is an example of a multi-disciplinary organization that houses the whole spectrum of technical expertise required for the planning, design, development, management and maintenance of public housing under one roof. With the legislative provisions, particularly the Land Acquisition Act, a public land bank has been built up for comprehensive and cohesive development. This has been supported by another mechanism – the Central Provident Fund, which has proved instrumental in realising over 85 percent of home ownership. The comprehensive and integrated new town planning and development process has provided a total environment for home, work, and play in tandem with the sustained economic growth over the last four decades. Though sustainable public housing has never been publicly claimed, the ways in which strong and continuous governmental commitments have been acted upon, and in which public housing has evolved to meet rising aspirations are a manifestation of sustainable development.

8 Public Housing in Singapore

149

Despite partial privatisation of HDB’s operations in recent years to raise greater efficiency of operations, public housing is expected to continue to serve the populace as a subsidized commodity in a nation where public welfare is generally minimal. Consequently, it plays the role of a social and political mediator, important for the ruling party to upkeep and retain as an election stake. Thus, HDB or perhaps under a different name in future, will continue to function as a supplier of basic housing with a sustained objective in qualitative improvements, incorporated into the “garden city” concept furnished by high standards of tropical living and services. The unchangeable reality of the city-state are nevertheless its land limitations of only 700 square kilometres, as a result of which the public housing’s high-density and high-rise form is likely to be retained. Yet, this form is sustainable given its inherent popularity and established familiarity.

References Chua BH (1991) Not depoliticized but ideologically successful: The public housing programme in Singapore. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 15(1): 24–41 Chua BH (2000) Public housing residents as clients of the state. Housing Studies 15(1): 45–60 Dale JD (1999) Urban planning in Singapore: The transformation of a city. Oxford University Press, Shah Alam (Malaysia) Goldblum C (1986) Singapour: Une cité-état moderne à l’épreuve de la fondation urbaine. Unpublished doctoral thesis submitted to the Institut d’Urbanisme de l’Académie de Paris, Paris Hui SCM (2001) Low energy building design in high density urban cities. Renewable Energy 24: 627–640 Liu TK (1975) Design for better living conditions. In: Yeh SHK (ed) Public housing in Singapore: a multi-disciplinary study. Housing and Development Board, Singapore, pp 117–184 Ministry of National Development (1970) Annual report. Planning Department, Singapore Ministry of National Development (2006) Special housing assistance programme. http://www. mnd.gov.sg/handbook/building/build_main.htm accessed 24 March 2007 Natsteel Ltd (2006) History & Industrial Division. http://www.nsl.com.sg/history.htm & http://www. nsl.com.sg/industrial.htm accessed 07 April 2007 Natsteel Ltd (2007) Annual report 2006. Singapore Newman P, Kenworthy J (2000) Sustainable urban form: The big picture. In: William K, Burton E, Jenks M (eds) Achieving sustainable urban form. E & FN Spon, London, pp 109–120 Ong SC (2006) The two paradoxes in public housing. The Straits Times, March 25, p S17 Phang SY (2001) Housing policy, wealth formation and the Singapore economy. Housing Studies 16(4): 443–459 Ravetz J (2000) Urban form and the sustainability of urban systems: Theory and practice in a northern conurbation. In: William K, Burton E, Jenks M (eds) Achieving sustainable urban form. E & FN Spon, London, pp 215–228 Simmonds D, Coombe D (2000) The transport implications of alternative urban forms. In: William K, Burton E, Jenks M (eds) Achieving sustainable urban form. E & FN Spon, London, pp 121–130 Tan AHH, Phang SY (1991) The Singapore experience in public housing. Times Academic Press, Singapore Tan HY (2007) Contractors act to protect bottom line. The Straits Times (local Singapore newspaper), 7 April 2007 Tan SY (1998) Private ownership of public housing in Singapore. Times Academic Press, Singapore

150

T.T.K. Joo and T.-C. Wong

Towerblocks (2006) Tower blocks and social housing – the key issues. http://www.towernlocks. org.uk/html_report/2.htm accessed 18 January 2007 Van U-P, Senior M (2000) The contribution of mixed land uses to sustainable travel in cities. In: William K, Burton E, Jenks M (eds) Achieving sustainable urban form. E & FN Spon, London, pp 139–148 Wheeler SM (2004) Planning for sustainability: Creating livable, equitable, and ecological communities. Routledge, London Wong T-C (2006) The role of compact new towns in search of economic and environmental sustainability in Singapore. Journal of Sustainable Development 2(1): 47–62 Wong T-C, Yap ALH (2004) Four decades of transformation: Land use in Singapore 1960–2000. Eastern University Press, Singapore Wong T-C, Guillot X (2005) A roof over every head: Singapore housing policy between state monopoly and privatization. Sampark, Calcutta Wong AK, Yeh SHK (1985 eds) Housing a nation: 25 years of public housing in Singapore. Maruzen Asia, Singapore Yeh SHK (1975 ed) Public housing in Singapore: A multi-disciplinary study. Housing and Development Board, Singapore Yuen B (2005) Romancing the high-rise in Singapore. Cities 22(1): 3–13

Chapter 9

Vertical Living and the Garden City: The Sustainability of an Urban Figure Xavier Guillot

9.1

Introduction

In Europe, the debate on sustainable urban development in housing has led to the formulation of a set of generic questions regarding the future of human settlements in the context of a society which is becoming more and more individualistic and mobile. The movements associated with this debate are more and more complex to foresee. In this debate, re-evaluating the sustainability of existing urbanization processes and settlement patterns, as developed during the 20th century, is at the top of the planner’s agenda. For European urban planners, one of the main tasks is to find an alternative to worldwide processes occurring around cities known as urban sprawl, i.e. the development of individual housing as a dominant dwelling type and the use of the automobile as its “domestic extension”. In this context, alternative housing programmes appeared in the last two decades offering a more environmentally friendly solution than the “individual house + car package”. This solution tends to re-examine the “ecological potential” of the traditional form of dwelling that optimizes local services and minimizes automobile transport. Parallel to these experiments in housing, alternative planning schemes at the scale of the territory involving the concept of sustainability is also on the planner’s agenda. For example, master plans recently designed for the area of Ijburg in Amsterdam, Bjorvika in Oslo or Orestäd in Copenhagen are representative of these attempts as each suggests a specific geographical strategy defining the relationship between humans and the territory. One of the main goals is to contain ecological nuisance in low density residential development around cities driven by the market. Relationship with nature is of prime importance in the definition of these schemes. Master plans are associated with a specific landscape design in which the relation between built areas, transport infrastructure and the natural environment is considered through a specific scenario leading to the formulation of a recognisable spatial scheme. For some analysts (Marcillon et al. 2006 for example), one beneficial aspect of designing such a recognizable spatial scheme is its capacity to convey the

Ecole d’architecture de Saint-Etienne, 7, rue Etienne Dolet, BP 94, 42003 Cedex 1, Saint-Etienne, France, e-mail: [email protected]

T.-C. Wong et al. (eds.), Spatial Planning for a Sustainable Singapore, 151–167 © Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2008

152

X. Guillot

“geographical memory” of a place, as well as to carry its future for its inhabitants and visitors. It is in this sense that they are called “sustainable urban figures”. At first glance, this type of planning venture may be interpreted as outdated by its ambition to associate in the long term the future of a place through a master plan and a specific spatial scheme. Indeed it is possible to read this scheme as an attempt to rehabilitate planning doctrines inherited from the 19th century, leading to the formulation of a model. Contrary to this first reading, the goal of these master plans is not to formulate a model which can be reproduced from one place to another. In the above mentioned examples in Europe, sustainable planning is taken as an “open concept”, leading planning design goals to be reformulated according to each place. This is why each urban figure mentioned above is not only induced by specific indicators of sustainable development. They are also the result of a combination of different parameters taken from the analysis of a specific context. According to this approach, sustainable planning is primarily a “cultural” and political approach in the formulation of goals regarding the physical evolution of a place.

9.2

Introducing the Case of Singapore: The Ring City and Garden City Concepts

It is with this cultural approach that the notion of sustainable development will be examined in the case of Singapore. This city-state constitutes a remarkable study case in this domain. Right from the time it gained its independence, governmental decisions to transform the colonial city core and its hinterland into a modern city-state were associated with a set of planning concepts, two of which have proved their durability in the implementation of a spatial entity at the scale of the island: the “Ring City” and the “Garden City”. The “Ring City” concept originated in the Netherlands where a group of major towns, including Amsterdam, Harlem, Utrecht, Delft and Rotterdam, form a large circle around a central stretch of open country that is used for water collection, food production, recreation and fast flowing traffic. It was introduced in Singapore in 1963 by a United Nations planning team, led by Professor Otto Koenigsberger, a German architect-planner and Housing Advisor to the UN Economic Commission for Africa. Although largely revised and reformatted by the subsequent “Concept Plans”, this original spatial planning scheme remains valid. Since its implementation in the early 1970s, the old colonial city of Singapore was progressively “atomized” to be part of a “ring” of new settlements connected with each other by a modern transport system, the MRT, the center of the island being kept as a natural reserve for water catchment. In 1963, the same year as the “Ring City” concept was launched, Lee Kuan Yew, in a farsighted and intuitive action, launched the “tree planting campaign”. As Koh Kheng Lian (1995) said: “the ‘seeds’ of the garden city were planted ”. Five years later, on 16 December 1968, the concept of “garden city” was officially

9 Vertical Living and the Garden City

153

introduced during the passage of the second reading of the Environmental Public Health Bill, when the then Minister for Health, Mr Chua Sian Chin, in considering the Environmental Public Health Bill, said: “The improvement in the quality of our urban environment and the transformation of Singapore into a garden city – a clean and green city – is the declared objective of the Government” (see ideas of Lee Kuan Yew in his work, Lee 2000: 199–204). Today, the “garden-city” concept is still a constant reference to orient the planning strategy of the Singapore government and has proved remarkably durable. In this context, it is legitimate to question the use of this concept and the meaning it has in the context of Singapore.

9.3

A Sustainable Urban Figure “Made in Singapore”: The Garden City

The use of the term “garden city” is borrowed from the Planning Concept, formulated by Ebenezer Howard in the early 20th century in his book: Garden Cities of Tomorrow (1901). Because of its European origin, the use of the concept in Singapore implies a “cultural transfer” form the West to the East. On this matter, Charles Goldblum (1988) explains that the use of this concept in the case of Singapore reflects that of all the social and built environment forms which emerge in England, the theme of the garden city manages to find its application outside the industrial society of the European metropolis, in its “overseas extension”: in the compact and overcrowded Asian cities, that simultaneously appear to be symbolically the equivalent of the working district of Europeans cities.

In principle, one should briefly recall that planning and implementing a garden city as defined by Howard involved the preservation of a green belt for food production for its population and to prevent the physical connection with the industrial city. In this sense, a typical garden city tended to be self-sufficient. It was limited by the size of its population: 30,000 inhabitants, plus 2,000 farmers in the green belt.1 Obviously, the garden city concept, as defined by Howard, does not match with the reality of Singapore. After forty years of intensive development, Singapore is

1

In the work of Pierre Merlin and Francoise Choay (2005), Dictionnaire de l’urbanisme et de l’aménagement, Quadrige/Manuel, 2005, p. 174, they assert that :“The garden city recommended by Howard provides a detailed description but is hardly realistic. It has incorporated Malthusian views (30,000 inhabitants and 2,000 farmers in the green belt), and a rural-oriented idea (the green belt surrounding the garden city serves to produce food for the city people and to avoid any conurbation with the city and its suburbs). The garden city is designed to be an autarky, whose population has a diversity of age profile, social groups and activities of production. It aims to achieve a balanced development and to be self-contained in food and industrial production.”

154

X. Guillot

not a discrete and self-sufficient settlement that is limited by its population. The question therefore is to understand why and how Singaporean planners and government choose to operate this cultural transfer form Europe to Asia to determine planning guidelines for the future of Singapore. The city of Queenstown (Queenstown Industrial and Housing Estate), started by the colonial government at the beginning of 1950, gives clear indications of how Howardian ideas were locally received and reinterpreted. In its early phase, Queenstown was designed along the same lines as British new towns, according to the principle of neighbourhood unit that would preserve privacy thanks to its low density. However, from the 1960s, a radical transformation was carried out in the planning strategy. A high density housing complex was later built (1,000 people/ha), in order to face the severe housing shortage. Subsequently, this planning option would be applied to all new settlements, contributing to the promotion of what would become the main dwelling form for Singaporeans: the apartment block of 10/15 storeys, also called “slab blocks”, which later were transformed into a higher building in the form of towers of 25 storeys (point blocks). Accordingly, “garden city”, as used by the government, suggests a different interpretation of the Howardian concept. It does not refer to the construction of a low-density, self-sufficient settlement in which industry and farming provide a balanced environment. To the contrary, it matches the reality of an urbanization which tends towards high-density development rather than low-density, high dependency rather than self-sufficiency through its multiple economic connections as a global city. Underlying this evolution in the reinterpretation of the Howardian concept, there are two historical and geographical facts. First, the fact that we have entered another economic era; but moreover, the fact that Singapore urban growth has entirely occurred on a limited territory and, due to the constant awareness of lack of space, the choice for high density construction. While maintaining this historical reference to the Howardian concept, it is another planning doctrine which was implemented. It is a model that historically finds its roots in France and Germany rather than in England, and which directly refers to this “modern order” (Sota 1994) that was defined by the CIAM protagonists in the early 20th century. For these reasons, as in the example of European cities described above, references made to the double use of the “Ring City” and “Garden City” concepts are representative of the durability of a planning strategy which, in the long term, has guided the geographical relationship between housing and the territory. Up to the present, despite the increase in population and the nonextendable area of the territory, the catchment area in the centre of the island has been preserved. Construction regulations of apartment blocks in new towns have prevented urban sprawl from developing. Nowadays, individual housing, largely known as “landed properties” in Singapore, represents a small proportion of the housing stock on the whole island. As Victor Savage (1991) correctly suggests, the concept of Garden City, as it is now interpreted and used by the Singapore authority, must be perceived as a kind of “neo-utopian ideal” to be reached for. It is representative of the search to identify a global urban environment, where the daily-life setting, shaped by humans, would be

9 Vertical Living and the Garden City

155

inscribed in a large garden shared by the whole Singaporean population.2 Looking back at the previously mentioned examples in Europe, the challenge now is to understand the characteristics of this urban figure reflecting this neo-urban ideal, and simultaneously to define and comprehend the main planning mechanisms allowing its sustainability.

9.4

Verticality and Greenery: Achieving the “Modernist Dream”

Construction in the 1970s of the first Housing and Development Board (HDB) 25storey five-room-apartment tower, also called “point block” apartment, can be seen as the beginning of a movement which has since become common: that is, towards what we call here a process of “verticalization” of its housing stock. Although few examples still exist, such as the Forfar House built by the Singapore Improvement Trust, it is from this decade that Singapore housing policy is closely associated with the construction of the apartment tower on a large scale. Indeed in comparison to the 15-storey slab blocks mentioned earlier, the point block building represented a significant evolution in the design of apartment buildings. All architectural characteristics recalling the spatial organization of the traditional city are erased. The relationship between land and building along a street, inducing simultaneously a specific orientation to the apartments, is obsolete. The building becomes independent of land. Simultaneously, land is given another status and function which tends to promote this idea of becoming a large garden. Regarding this fact, Sumiko Tan (1999) writes: “With more homes being built near parks, garden and recreational areas, you don’t need to have a garden to enjoy living close to the nature…”. One should understand here that the need to have a garden linked to a private house would inevitably involve urban sprawl. In other words, the reference to the “garden city” as a neo-utopian ideal is used to specify a double planning process in the transformation of the built environment involving on the one hand the “verticalization of housing” at the scale of an island, and on the other hand an ongoing process of transformation of its landscape to optimize greenery as a public resource including land reclamation to extend the island territory. In this domain it is crucial to mention the work conducted by some government bodies, in particular the Parks and Recreation Department or the National Parks Board, to name a few. As Koh Kheng Lian (1995) points out: 2 In another paper Savage (1992, p. 189) develops the idea that “Singapore’s success as an environmental friendly city is a product of the political leadership’s pragmatic environmental ideology that is hinged on possibilistic and anthropocentric human-nature relationships. I have used the concept of environmental possibilism in contrast to environmental determinism in the sense that human beings, societies and civilisations are not influenced by environment. Possibilism is a school of thought which upholds the view that humans, by virtue of their culture, intelligence, pragmatic philosophy, technology, organisational abilities, among other things, are active participants in human–nature relations”.

156

X. Guillot

“Without effective administration and financial support from the Government it would not be possible to implement the Garden City Concept”. More than three decades after the first HDB point block buildings were erected, the choice made by the government to associate “vertical living” and “green landscaping” proved its longevity as a planning tool to develop a sustainable urban figure. Nowadays, a very large majority of Singaporeans live in high-rise buildings and identify themselves with this urban setting. Although having been distorted, reference made by the Singapore authority to the Howardian concept, remains consistent, as it acquired a symbolic status in the mind of the population regarding the undergoing transformation of their city. It meets this neo-utopian ideal mentioned earlier by Victor Savage by associating its future with the construction of a large garden in which all the nuisances of the city would disappear. The need now is to understand how Singapore planners manage to sustain this dwelling model considering the diversity of the demand. Indeed, since the 1970s Singapore society has greatly evolved. The time when the population had to face housing shortages and precarious comfort has been left behind. Instead, Singapore has emerged as a so-called “middle class society” and the level of income is comparable to developed countries. In this context, one of the key questions which needs clarification is how the government manages to match both the fast transformations of cultural values and aspirations of society with the continuity of planning strategy that portrays a durable urban figure. Alternatively, it is how the government manages to introduce adjustment mechanisms to renew the first models as designed and implemented in the 1960s. In response to this, the notion of housing sustainability is approached via a social dimension which is reflected by the capacity of its policies and programmes to include ongoing social changes and lifestyle values, in particular those related with the growth of the middle class. In this process, the increased involvement of private developers in the evolution of the housing stock will play a major role (Wong and Guillot 2005).

9.5

Sustainable Development as a “Multidimensional Recycling Process”

One of the clues to understanding this adjustment mechanism and the specificity of the Singapore approach is to look at the destiny of the housing stock built during the two decades which followed independence and, simultaneously, to compare it with the European experience. In Europe, and in particular France, demolition programmes have been implemented on a large scale in order to replace post-war housing apartment blocks. In comparison, such demolition in Singapore is rare. It only applied to a restricted housing stock that was built with minimum comfort in the years immediately after independence. Indeed, during the last 40 years, the government has favoured a constant “adaptation” of its historical model of vertical living chosen to meet a new demand, rather than introducing radical change. It is here that a specific approach of Singapore

9 Vertical Living and the Garden City

157

planning strategy emerges, in which recycling appears to be central to the various dimensions it applies to. In this perspective, the question is therefore to identify the mechanisms which characterize this recycling process. It will be reviewed in three entries corresponding to three directions taken by the government, the URA in particular, to extend vertical dwelling.

9.6

Recycling Process 1: Extending Vertical Living Island-Wide Through Privatization

The first important measure taken by the government to maintain this planning goal was to extend vertical living to the private sector in order to satisfy a demand coming from expatriates, as well as from the rising middle-class groups who, given an option, would generally invest in landed properties. This extension was possible through the launch in the late 1970s of the condominium formula. Completed in 1976, Futura Tower is one of these first buildings marking the extension of vertical living to the private sector based on the condominium design guideline elaborated by the URA. The idea is to abandon the traditional functional separation between dwelling and urban facilities and services, and to propose a more intensive use of the land with the presence of various sport and leisure facilities within the condominium parcel.3 By the verticality of the building and also by the minimum impact it has on the land, the continuation with the Garden City concept is confirmed. Indeed, the possibility of building up to 30 storeys, combined with a relatively high plot ratio (2.8) and the requirement that the building should not occupy more than 20 percent of the land parcel, largely determined the final design: a high-rise apartment block of 26 floors. Its architectural feature is largely founded on past models, in particular the HDB point-block as described earlier. It has the same principle of distributing the apartment around a central core comprising the vertical circulation. Simultaneously, the condominium benefits from the architectural and technical know-how required to design a high structure similar to office towers that were simultaneously built in the central business district. Besides high design standards for the apartment (size, finishing, etc) the extension of vertical living to the rising middle-class is therefore associated with the introduction of the principle of “multipurpose urban housing”. Extension of vertical living to the middle class had important consequences for the geographical repartition of the housing stock at the scale of the island. During the 1990s, condominium production equaled almost one-third of the public housing produced by the HDB, whose rhythm of production had, to the contrary, decreased 3 Facilities include a swimming pool, gymnasium and a tennis court. There are only 69 apartments and, except for the penthouse apartment, they are all four-room duplex apartments of the same design, each covering an area of 256 m2. This idea of multi-purpose habitat has some American antecedents. One of the pioneer examples of such a building is Marina City, in Chicago, designed by Bertrand Goldberg (completed in 1967). Despite the change of scale (the buildings by Goldberg are much higher) one finds the same design principle for the tower apartment, as well as the presence of various private services and facilities.

158

X. Guillot

considerably.4 This slowdown in the construction of public housing is the consequence of the change in HDB policy guided by the publication of the Revised Concept Plan. The objective is effectively to reach a new balance in the ratio between public and private housing. In 1980, the condominium’s share was less than 1 percent of the HDB share. In 1999, its share rose to 8.3 percent. By 2002, the ratio of condominium to HDB units rose to slightly less than 10 percent (Department of Statistics 2001, 2003) (see also statistics in Tables 9.1 and 9.2 in Appendix 1 below). As a logical consequence of the spectacular increase in the construction of condominiums, one observes the inversion of the ratio between individual housing and apartment buildings in the private residential stock, producing an outcome fulfilling one of the key objectives of the government.5 These results show how the government and private investors manage to reach the goal to promote vertical living at the scale of the island in order to facilitate the construction of a specific landscape where large green, private, and public features are prominent. However, beyond the quantitative figure, one should understand that the territorial impact resulted from the increase in numbers of condominiums according to which location/logic it follows. The main issue here being: how the extension of vertical living to the private sector interacts with the urban figure inherited from the Ring City concept plan. From the 1970s until the end of the 1980s, the majority of condominiums were located within a five-kilometre radius around the city centre as exemplified by the Futura Tower. Through its Sales of Sites Programme, URA favoured condominium construction in the city centre by selling sites in Districts 9, 10 and 11: a logical choice in terms of marketing strategy for private developers considering the advantages given by the proximity of the CBD and the commercial district in terms of employment and services.6 From the 1980s, the original concentric development

4 At the beginning of the 1980s, only 26 projects had been completed, providing a little more than 3,000 private apartments. At the end of the 1980s, 16 years after the introduction of the condominium ruling, one could count almost 20,000 condominium apartments. The real boom of condominium development occurred in the 1990s between 1990 and 1999; their production tripled and reached 60,000 units; and by 2002, the total available number exceeded 81,000 units 5 In the 1970s, private housing was mainly low-density individual housing (bungalows or terrace houses, semi-detached houses). During the 1980s and 1990s, a radical change took place in favour of medium-density condominiums and apartments in the private residential market. In 2000 there were twice as many apartment units (127,000 units) than low-density individual housing (65,900) (statistics to be updated). 6 This choice of location is also in line with the logic of enhancement of existing built environment through infill projects on vacant parcels. It follows an original concentric development pattern, leading to spread of condominiums to outlying areas. In the 1980s one may identify three condominium zones in and next to the city centre:

a) The first zone originated from bungalow residential type, located close to the city centre. It spreads across the residential district of River Valley Road, south of the city centre. Condominiums are grouped along this main road, which gives access to Leonie Hill; b) The second zone is the residential district of Tanglin, west of the city centre; and c) The third zone is the residential district of Holland Village, in the west, as a continuation of Tanglin.

9 Vertical Living and the Garden City

159

pattern, leading to the spread of condominiums to outlying areas is shattered. With the development of road infrastructure, in particular urban highways, and the rising land prices in the city centre, the choice of condominium follows a new set of location criteria. In this context, along with the growth of the real estate market, one witnesses the formation of linear-shaped residential settlements located outside the city centre called condominium belts. In general, the location of these settlements matches with a unique natural site, and a set of modern facilities, all easily accessible by automobile with an efficient network system. After almost three decades, one observes the presence of three of these types of settlement each with its own character: (a) The Bukit Timah Condominium Belt which is attributable to its proximity to Bukit Timah Nature Reserve, Singapore’s tallest hill. In addition to this natural attraction, the presence of two highways, the Pan-Island Expressway and the Bukit Timah Expressway, allows easy access to the city centre, as well as to Jurong industrial estate and to Johor Bahru in Malaysia. (b) The East Coast Condominium Belt, which is served by the East Coast Parkway connecting the city centre to the Changi Airport. It also has a natural element which makes this residential area unique: the proximity of the sea and beach. This park comprises sport and leisure activities: playground area, cycling paths and seafood restaurants. (c) The West Coast Condominium Belt which is accessible by both the old Pasir Panjang Road and the Ayer Rajah Expressway. The advantage of this condominium belt is its proximity to key employment areas – the city centre, Jurong industrial zone, the Singapore Container Port, and the potential Silicon Valley of Singapore: research and development activities in the Singapore Science Park and the National University of Singapore (NUS). Since the year 2000, condominium construction through the development of condominium belts has entered a stage of “maturity”. In many ways this type of housing settlement complied with the “neo-utopian ideal” to build a garden city, to quote again V. Savage. It brought housing close to the nature to which the presence of parks or natural reserve these belts are generally linked. One remarkable aspect of this evolution is that the other planning ideal – to build a ring city – is not left behind. As the Concept Plan 2001 shows, in the next decades the transformation of the territory will be associated with the construction of an extensive rail network that will increase the 93 km of rail lines to about 500 km. Beside the construction of new radial lines such as the one recently completed to connect Pungoll to the city centre, this network comprises two “orbital lines”, allowing travel from one end of the island to another – and from one condominium belt to another – without going through the Central Area (URA 2001). This infrastructure construction programme “pushes” the concept of the Ring City to another stage while remaining perfectly “faithful” to it. It links the old centre to an outer railroad ring. Simultaneously, it reinforces Singapore’s land transport policy to minimize the dependence on car travel within the island, by offering island-wide rapid transit.

160

9.7

X. Guillot

Recycling Process 2: “Vertical Living” and “Green Landscaping” – A Multi-scale and Multi-goal Programme

In the 1990s, parallel to the government’s effort to promote private condominiums to meet a demand coming from wealthy households, improvement works were conducted on existing new towns and on the public housing stock. This improvement work, known as the “upgrading programme”, started in the 1990s and applied to more than 370,000 units. Its objective was to improve the standard of comfort of apartments built between 1960 and 1970 to match the latest evolution in architectural design. Although initiated by the HDB, the private sector was largely involved in this programme. Various degrees of upgrading work were identified, taking into account the date of construction of the building. Only the so-called Redevelopment and Selective En Blocs Renewal (SERs) Programme includes THE possibility of demolition.7 The process of upgrading also includes urban design work. Specific outdoor facilities are added in all upgraded new towns in order to mark a hierarchy between the buildings and to break the homogenous and monotonous new town built environment. Simultaneously, the precinct concept,8 introduced in the 1980s, was extended to older new towns, to soften the homogenous and anonymous urban landscape produced by the former planning concept of neighbourhood unit. The first new town, which reflects the model rather well, is the Tampines New Town. The objective of the precinct concept is to design a cluster of apartment blocks with well-defined spaces and facilities for 400–800 dwelling units, to help foster community development. It is also a strategic tool to keep green open spaces that reinforce the image of a garden city. Each precinct entrance is equipped with a porch and covered ways linking different buildings, providing protection from rain and sun, and which also mark the perimeter of each precinct and emphasize the feeling

7

a) The Main Upgrading Programme applies to housing blocks, which were constructed more than 18 years ago. Upgrading work includes the addition of new rooms in the apartment by adding prefabricated elements to the façade as well as adding various facilities, including a multi-storey parking building. These works are largely subsidized by the government and the inhabitants pay only a small share of the cost. b) The Interim Upgrading Programme applies to housing units 10 to 17 years old. In this case, upgrading work applies essentially to common areas, to access in particular, and the cost is only partially paid by the government. c) The Redevelopment and Selective En-Blocs Renewal (SERs) Programme applies to the oldest housing units. In this case, upgrading means in most cases the demolition of the blocks and their reconstruction according to current HDB standards of comfort. Inhabitants are therefore re-housed in other apartments during the period of construction, contrary to the two other programmes, in which inhabitants continue to live in the block during the upgrading work. 8 The first new town, which reflects the model rather well, is the Tampines New Town. In line with the precinct concept, a structural model of new town was developed. This model incorporated the more recently developed planning principles and criteria within the distribution principles of the earlier model. Basically, the structural model should help to better interrelate and integrate the various planning standards for facilities, continuously being developed, tested and updated. It has been successfully applied.

9 Vertical Living and the Garden City

161

of belonging (Tan 1997: 8). By adopting this form of development, the precinct becomes the basic building block in the overall new town concept. It repeats itself in clusters of 4 hectares (200 × 200 m) or sometimes half this size. Some of the commercial facilities are redistributed within these centres. Along with this work occurring on the existing housing stock and outdoor areas, another type of action led by the government is carried out in order to raise the new town image to that of a more up-market residential area. It is to introduce private housing within the perimeter of the New Town. Vacant plots of land were sold to the private sector through the Sale of State land. In this case, the government’s objective is to change the prevailing segregating arrangement between new towns and the rest of the territory. To reach this goal, a new type of housing called the executive condominium was launched in 1996. Its design principle is largely inspired by those of a private condominium. Again, it is from an existing type of housing that the government planned this evolution, by recycling the condominium formula to make it accessible to a lower budget and larger population. Primarily, the Executive Condominium Housing Scheme was designed to broaden the private housing stock and provide access to households whose monthly income must not exceed S$10,000, and who aspired to own private housing but could not afford it.9 Thus, the scheme is intended to respond to the government’s objective to extend private housing to a larger population, as they are sold at a cheaper price on the real estate market than private condominiums. This objective is achieved through indirect financial assistance of the state, in this case the HDB, by selling land to government-linked companies, such as Pidemco Land, NTUC Choice Homes, Singapore Technologies, Capitaland or to private developers at lower than market prices. In turn, these companies are obliged to sell apartments at a lower price than private condominiums. The first two executive condominiums are located in Pasir Ris and Jurong East new towns, and were financed by Pidemco Land, Eastvale (312 units) and Westmere (280 units) respectively. They were both started in 1996 and completed two years later. Good response to the first two projects saw in 1998 the construction of the third

9

Under the revised Act 1997 of the ECHS, a series of rules and regulations were laid down under the jurisdiction of the Minister for National Development and the eligibility conditions to purchase an executive condominium are subject to: a) Singapore citizenship, family nucleus and non-ownership of private residential property; b) The income ceiling for an eligible household is S$10,000 per month; and c) EC owners will no longer be able to buy flats direct from HDB. Buyers of an executive condominium have to pay 20 percent down payment in cash while the remainder can be settled by monthly instalments through CPF deduction chargeable at commercial interest rates, which are higher than HDB 3- to 5-room rates. New occupants are obliged to occupy the apartment for at least five years, before being able to resell it to another Singaporean or permanent resident household. This measure aims to slow down speculative investments based on rapid buying and selling of apartments, which is a common practice in the private condominium market. After an additional five years, they can sell it to foreigners as well. Strata titles in the form of private property will only be issued after 10 years of occupancy.

162

X. Guillot

executive condominium, Simei Green, financed by NTUC Choice Homes. In view of this success, the HDB has since accelerated the rhythm of sale of land allocated to this type of housing. In 1997, indeed, 10 additional sites were sold in new towns: Bukit Panjang, Choa Chu Kang, Tampines, Sengkang, Woodlands, Jurong and Hougang. Since this date, the sale of land for construction of executive condominiums has continued at a steady pace in order to realise about 4,000 units per year. The two planning schemes and recycling processes described above, which contribute to recycle “vertical living”, must be associated with other measures to improve the presence of nature to fit the requirement of the Garden City concept. As the concept plan 2001 (URA 2001: 23) specifies, a significant increase of green areas will cater to the recreational needs of a large population. Unlike the 1991 Concept Plan that envisaged new towns at Pulau Ubin and Lim Chu Kang, the Concept Plan 2001 plans to keep this and other existing nature areas in their rustic state as long as possible. Moreover, it aims to almost double the amount of green space from 2,500 ha to 4,500 ha. The additional open space to be provided is equivalent to another 34 Bishan Parks. The Parks will have distinctive characteristics with distinct activities and outlook. In addition to the increased green areas at the scale of the island, various micro planning schemes will contribute to the same goal at other levels. The “Park connector scheme” is one of the micro tools that will be used. The aim is to make green spaces more accessible. Park connectors are linear open spaces proposed by the National Parks Board to link major parks, natural reserves, natural open spaces and other places of interest in Singapore. These connectors will be mainly along drainage reserves linking the population centres and transportation nodes with the major parks. Upon completion they will form a green network over the whole island (Oi 1998). The park connector network will be extended to link parks with town centres, sport complexes and homes. At the building scale, three significant regulations have been implemented since the year 2000, allowing the increase of green areas: (a) The first is the incentive to provide larger balconies areas to be planted. It is based on a regulation introduced in 2001, allowing residential and hotel developments to add 10% surface area over and above the allowed development intensity. Before this date, developers had to reduce space from other areas (e.g. bedrooms) in order to provide space for balconies. (b) The second regulation concerns the treatment of the building roof tops. In 2003, the URA relaxed the guidelines on gross floor area (GFA) exemption for rooftop pavilions. Rooftop pavilions with up to 50% of its perimeters enclosed will be eligible for the GFA exemption. Furthermore, the overall height control for developments with complete sky terrace floor was also relaxed to offer greater design flexibility (URA 2004: 37). (c) The third regulation concerns the bottom part of the building and is called “landscape deck”. In 2004, the URA introduced the landscape deck as an alternative building form to residential flats and condominium development. It throws up new possibilities to improve the provision of greenery and communal facilities for flats and condominiums (URA 2004: 52).

9 Vertical Living and the Garden City

163

9.8 Recycling Action 3: “Reconceputalizing” the HDB Heritage to Match the Aspirations of a Post-industrial Society Government plans involving the renewal of the housing stock to meet the changing demand goes beyond the earlier prescribed actions. It also includes the elaboration of planning concepts to renew the new town planning fundamentals as they were implemented until the 1980s. As described above, since the construction of Queenstown, the original planning concepts that guide construction of a new town have constantly evolved. The 1990s marks a new step in this process with the launch by the HDB of the construction of Pungoll 21.10 The first difference is the choice of Pungoll’s location along the coast to take advantage of its natural features, as URA (1998: 12) presents their vision of a city endowed with “scenic views and extensive waterfrontage” – the sea. But besides this location choice, planning guidelines mark a significant step in the new town design. The plan for the new town is to implement a grid system for the road network for distribution of buildings and facilities. To a certain extent, one can see in this plan an attempt extend the planning principle applied to the city centre: a largescale road network characterised by a four or six-lane highway dominates, lined by high-rise buildings. The smaller scale road network, as found in earlier new towns, has disappeared. Another particularity of Pungoll 21 is to increase the role of private developers in line with the objective to meet the changing social demand mentioned earlier. The distribution between public and private is planned along the following proportions:11 (a) 60 percent public housing by HDB; (b) 30 percent private housing (private condominiums, terrace and semi-detached houses); and (c) 10 percent executive condominiums. The presence of private housing has an important effect on the physical arrangement of the new town. Private condominiums are given a better location and are systematically located at the periphery, close to the sea, while public housing is located inland near the Mass Rapid Transit station and along the Light Rail Transit Network. This mix of private and public housing has important consequences for built intensity and height. According to the New Town master plan, HDB buildings and executive condominiums (70 percent of the entire new town) are high-rise, which reinforces the vertical building landscape.

10

Located along the northeast coast of the island, the total area to be developed is 957 ha on which it is planned to build 85,800 housing units and various facilities. Housing occupies 50 percent of the entire site. The rest of the site is occupied by commercial and institutional buildings (6%), public and leisure spaces (14%), road infrastructure (15%), water features (12%) and land reserved for future development (3%). 11 This ratio clearly shows the importance given by the authority to the private sector in the overall construction of the new town. Indeed, if one adds the volume of private condominiums to the volume of executive condominiums (which in the short term will be considered as private housing), a total of 30,000 apartments or 35 percent of new town housing stock has been achieved.

164

X. Guillot

Another important characteristic that marks a difference with previous new towns is the fact that Pungoll 21 is entirely residential and does not include an industrial estate. This planning principle is a reflection of the changing economic activity towards services. In line with this evolution, since the 1990s, state intervention in the development of a self-contained settlement in which the condominium is the architectural founding element, has developed on a larger scale. Tanjong Rhu and Sentosa Cove are two residential developments which reflect this new planning strategy. Taken individually, each demonstrates that the condominium can be a generator of large high-rise residential areas in the same manner that HDB blocks generate the new town space. But each of these projects reveals differences in their architectural characteristics, making them a true alternative to the HDB new towns as well as to condominium belts because of the rapidity of their construction. Tanjong Rhu development is on the city centre’s immediate fringe. The site is a long strip of land covering 34.5 ha of which 5.6 is reclaimed land. It is bordered on one side by the East Coast Parkway, which leads to the city centre, and on the other side by the Kallang Basin. The site was cleared of its industrial activities to be replaced by a residential one with 3,500 units. There is maximum accessibility on the one hand, and optimal attractiveness on the other, endowed with the presence of water. Taking over a relatively vacant site, the planning process is similar to that of a new town where infrastructure, housing and facilities are developed from scratch. However, the planning goal as defined by the URA is radically different: it is to implement a residential area entirely dedicated to sports and leisure: a resort city in the heart of the River District.12 As in Tanjong Rhu, the Sentosa Cove planning concept also emphasizes sport and leisure activity. It is located on reclaimed land in the continuity of the development of Sentosa Island, which is now well known as Singapore’s main entertainment park. The planning goal is to build housing by the sea, and in addition, due to its distance from the city centre, to provide “the opportunity for people to fully experience the ambience of island living” (URA 1996). Currently under construction, except for two high-rise condominium blocks sited on each side of the main access point by sea, it is planned to be a low- to medium-density residential area (with 2,000 condominium dwelling units, in addition to the 300 bungalows and 150 terrace houses). Sentosa Cove is therefore a kind of small marina new town. On a smaller scale, a similar type of settlement has recently developed on the land formerly used by Keppel shipyard in Telok Blangah.

12

“Kallang Basin will be a sanctuary for water sports. You can choose between water skiing and windsurfing or simply decide to canoe quietly down for a change of scenery. The riverside promenade, stretching two kilometres, allows for the romance of wining and dining by the waters and long leisurely strolls fanned by cool sea breezes. There would also be a landing point, making boat cruises possible within the Basin, with connections to the waterways of Marina Bay and the Singapore River. When completed the leisure hub at Kallang Basin is set to make a big splash with its entertainment and recreation variety”. Urban Redevelopment Authority. 1993. Kallang Planning Area, Planning Report 1993. Singapore, p. 11.

9 Vertical Living and the Garden City

9.9

165

Condominium as an Eco-architecture: Tackling the Next Challenge for the Future of a Sustainable Figure: Some Concluding Remarks

Despite all these measures taken by URA planners in order to bring nature and humans closer, in line with the Garden City concept, up until now, designs at the building scale do not seem to have reached the same degree of innovation. Generally, condominium designs seem to have reproduced a model largely formulated along the lines of the first example, such as Futura Tower, constructed in the late 1970s when environmental issues were not yet a concern. Until now, experience in the production of a more environmentally-friendly architecture is almost non-existent. Moreover, the circulation of architectural models on the world-scale, influences design schemes towards homogenization. Simultaneously, the specificity of the local concept is ignored, in particular, the climate (Guillot 2006). The current early phase of the 21st century may be the time of an important change in this domain although evolution will be more incremental than radical (due to the additional costs incurred in construction of a more environmental friendly architecture). In 2000 the URA set up the Design Guidelines Waiver Committee (DGWC) “to evaluate development proposals of high quality and innovation that may merit deviation from the urban design guidelines and standard development control requirement. The scope of waiver of DGWC includes aspects such as building form and building height (except for technical building height)” (URA Skyline, May–June 2005) The Rivergate development, a residential project on a landmark site along Singapore River, has benefited from this flexibility based on innovative design approach: it is a 43-storey block while the existing guidelines required the block to be no more than 10 storeys. The innovation is based on extensive use of greenery that is integrated with the building from the base to the roof and on its entire “envelope”. The building is provided with balconies and generous planter boxes and contrasts strongly with the full glazed façade that characterizes the latest design trend of a condominium. In one way it is an update of some innovative and rare examples that were built in the past along similar lines, such as The Collonade by Paul Rudolph. The next step appears to give more self-sufficiency to the building in terms of energy dependency, such as experimental towers which are now on the agenda in other cities.13 With an abundance of yearlong rainwater and sunshine, one may think that the heyday of the condominium has not yet been reached and hope that the next recycling process of designs to improve vertical living will include this design evolution as well as the ecological factor.

13

The architectural design competition to build the Tower “Phare” designed by Thom Mayne in Paris La Defense (to be completed in 2012) is significant of this evolution.

166

X. Guillot

Appendix 1 Table 9.1 Growth of condominium units, 1980–2002 Year

Number of condominium units

1980 3,364 1990 18,739 2000 70,572 2002 81,738 Source: Department of Statistics (various years). Yearbook of Statistics. Singapore.

Table 9.2 A Comparison of Condominium and Public Housing Developments, 1980–2002 Number of Number of Ratio of condominium Year HDB units condominium units to HDB units 1980 1990 1995 2000 2002

372,640 623,820 700,060 846,650 866,070

3,364 18,739 34,908 70,572 81,738

0.9% 3.0% 5.0% 8.3% 9.4%

Source: Department of Statistics (various years). Yearbook of Statistics. Singapore. The table draws a comparison between developments of public housing and condominiums. The spectacular progression of condominiums during the first seven years of the 1990s reflects the economic vitality of Singapore that had bolstered upper housing market demand until it was hit by the 1997 financial crisis. This increase in the production of condominium units must also be associated with the evolution in the type of developers engaged in their financing. In the early years of condominium development, it was small private entrepreneurs who were involved. Gradually more large private local firms took the lead, in particular “private–public firms” such as CapitaLand, Keppel Land and Singapore Land. The leaders of private developers are Far East Organization, City Developments, Wing Tai, etc.

References Goldblum C (1988) Singapour (1819–1986): Emergence de la ville moderne et mythe rural. Villes d’Insuline 1, Special issue of Archipel (E.H.E.S.S.) 36: 227–270 Guillot X (2006) Flux économiques, transferts d’expertises et production immobilière haut de gamme en Asie orientale. Géocarrefour (Volume entitled ‘Expertises nomades. La circulation des modèles urbains hors du monde occidental). 80: 171–181 Koh Kheng Lian (1995) The Garden City and beyond: The legal framework. In: Ooi GL (ed) Environment and the city: Sharing Singapore’s experience and future challenge. The Institute of Policy Studies/Times Academic Press, Singapore, pp 148–170 Lee Kuan Yew (2000) Fran Third World to First–The Singapore story:1965–2000. Times Media Pte Ltd, Singapore Marcillon D, Rebois D, Younès C (2006) Figures urbaines du durable. Urbanisme 348: 54–56 Oi Keng Hunt (1998) Park Connectors. In: Yuen B (ed) Planning Singapore: From plan to implementation. Singapore Institute of Planners, Singapore, pp 31–42 Savage VR (1991) Singapore Garden City: Reality, symbol, ideal. Solidarity Issue: 131–132

9 Vertical Living and the Garden City

167

Savage VR (1992 Human–environment relation: Singapore’s environmental ideology. In KC Ban, A. Pakir and CK Tong (eds), Imagining Singapore, Times Academic Press, Singapore, p. 187 Tan Keng Joo (1997) Success in public housing: The Singapore experience. Paper presented at The Third International Convention held in Singapore Urban Planning, Housing and Design Tan Sumiko (1999) Home, work, play. Urban Redevelopment Authority, Singapore Urban Redevelopment Authority URA (1996) Southern Islands Planning Area: Planning report, Singapore Urban Redevelopment Authority URA (1998) The Punggol Planning Area: Planning report. Singapore Urban Redevelopment Authority URA (2001) Concept plan 2001. Singapore Urban Redevelopment Authority URA (2004) Annual report, 2003–2004, p. 52 Urban Redevelopment Authority URA (2005) Skyline, May–June issue Wong T-C, Guillot X (2005) A roof over every head: Singapore’s housing policies in the 21st century between state monopoly and privatization. IRASEC, Studies on Southeast Asia & Sampark, Calcutta

Chapter 10

Nature and Sustainability of the Marine Environment Loke Ming Chou

10.1

Introduction

Singapore’s marine environment continues to perform a highly significant but largely unacknowledged role in supporting the country’s economic growth. Its strategic location and natural harbour assets were immediately recognized and capitalized on by its founder, Sir Stamford Raffles, in 1819. The waters were fully utilized for shipping since the country’s early history allowing it to develop into one of the world’s busiest ports today. The trend is likely to continue unabated with the Maritime and Port Authority’s mission “to develop and promote Singapore as a premier global hub port and an international maritime centre, and to safeguard Singapore’s strategic maritime interests”. Vessel arrivals increased 62 percent between 1995 and 2005 to reach a record high of 1.15 billion gross tons (MPA 2005). Container tonnage more than doubled in the same period to 23.2 million TEUs (twenty-foot equivalent unit). Cargo tonnage increased 38.6 percent to 423.3 million tons and bunker sales went up by 45.7 percent to 25.5 million tons. The impressive growth enabled the Port of Singapore to maintain its position in 2005 as the world’s busiest in terms of shipping tonnage and the world’s top bunkering hub. It also overtook Hong Kong to become the world’s busiest container port (Fig. 10.1). Over 80 percent of Singapore’s limited territorial waters of about 750 km2 are managed as port waters, emphasizing the prime importance of shipping. Other demands for the marine environment come from a variety of sectors including industry, military, aquaculture, fisheries, home security, housing, recreation and conservation. Major coastal development involving extensive coastal reclamation to provide the required infrastructure for efficient port operation and the needs of other sectors were necessary and this altered much of the coastal and marine environment. After more than four decades of coastal reclamation, people have come to accept it as a

Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore, 14 Science Drive 4, 117543, Singapore, Republic of Singapore, e-mail: [email protected]

T.-C. Wong et al. (eds.), Spatial Planning for a Sustainable Singapore, 169–182 © Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2008

This page intentionally blank

170

L.M. Chou

Fig. 10.1 A section of the container port built on reclaimed land

necessary facet of development. Engineering progress has made reclamation speedier and possible over greater depths. Land area has increased more than 20 percent since 1960. Almost the entire southern coast of the mainland and large areas of the northeastern coast have been modified by reclamation. The shape and coastal geomorphology of many of the offshore islands were also altered through land filling. A holistic approach to environmental sustainability involves prime consideration of natural habitats as an integral part of the natural environment. When natural habitats are not appreciated in development planning, environmental sustainability is reduced to simply maintaining environmental quality. This approach requires heavy investment in pollution management technology and the creation of artificial habitats. The latter needs continuous external inputs to maintain while at the same time offer significantly reduced levels of ecosystem goods and services. Despite the widespread loss and degradation of the natural marine environment, Singapore has suitable case studies to demonstrate that environmental sustainability is not an impossible goal.

10.2

Development

The rapid pace of development has until recent years proceeded with little consideration given to the protection of natural habitats. Marine environment management focused on the physical environment with measures targeted at maintaining an adequate water quality accompanied by conscious efforts at preventing pollution.

10 Nature and Sustainability of the Marine Environment

171

Protection of the natural environment was not apparent; and the direct impact of habitat loss accompanied by the indirect impact of habitat degradation was perceived as an unavoidable consequence of coastal and marine development. This resulted in the loss of 95 percent of mangroves and 60 percent of coral reefs. Other coastal and marine habitats such as seagrass, seabed and seashores of various types suffered the same fate of loss, degradation and conversion (Chou 2006). The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process is not included in Singapore’s development management framework and there is no legislation to make it mandatory (Tan 2002), but from the later half of the 1990s, a change in management attitude became apparent. Major development projects affecting the coastal and marine environment were accompanied by extensive EIAs, which identified impacts as well as the necessary mitigation measures. One such project was the Ministry of the Environment’s Semakau Landfill development, which included impact assessments of coral reefs and mangroves. However, these studies remained within the domain of the respective development agencies and excluded public participation. The change in management attitude where greater sensitivity towards environmental impact has become more apparent can be attributed to a few or a combination of factors. Increased public awareness, obligations to regional and international agreements on the environment, a national policy on developing Singapore into a tropical city of excellence, all helped to increase the concern over environmental degradation on the part of development agencies. EIAs are therefore conducted to determine how impacts can be reduced, but in many cases, development plans have already been established and the EIA serves as a tool to identify mitigations rather than to search for alternatives. It is not an ideal situation as far as conservationists are concerned but still a welcome change. The change in management attitude may not necessarily signify that there is now a good appreciation of the value of natural habitats. This can only happen when the entire EIA process with full stakeholder and public consultation is adopted. Environmental groups can only voice their opinions and are only in rare instances able to influence change in development plans. This was the case for Chek Jawa, a little known but highly species-rich intertidal location at the eastern end of Pulau Ubin, a large offshore island in the northeast. Land reclamation covering an extensive south-eastern stretch of the island’s coast had already started. The intense publicity generated on Chek Jawa’s valuable biodiversity and its status as one of the last few remaining pristine habitats brought about a reversal in 2001 of the Government’s decision to proceed with its reclamation. As the tender for its reclamation was already awarded, the decision change was not without cost as the contractor had to be compensated for the cancellation of the project. This is one instance of strong public participation in persuading for the conservation of a marine habitat. All the environmental groups involved and the public were of one voice, which helped to strengthen the case. In recent years, the consultation process improved with development agencies inviting concerned parties to predevelopment presentations and making available EIA reports for viewing. Whilst there is an opening of the process to keep relevant groups informed through public communication programmes, participation is

172

L.M. Chou

confined to noting the concerns expressed and to adopt appropriate mitigations. In most cases, development plans have already been cast and there is little room in the consultation for the invited groups to press for alternatives. However, what is apparent is the increased sensitivity displayed by development agencies towards reducing impacts on natural habitats and not just the quality of the physical environment. Singapore ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity in 1995. Earlier in 1986, it ratified the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. These dealt specifically with species and habitats. The National Parks Board, which had all along focused attention on the terrestrial environment, expanded its scope to cover the marine environment in 2004 with the establishment of the Biodiversity Centre. For the first time, an agency was finally identified to deal with marine biodiversity. Environmental groups have a constructive role in marine conservation if they fully devote their energy towards public education and provide useful, unbiased information. While disappointment still remains with the scope, pace and extent of marine conservation measures by the Government, the change in management attitude holds out more hope now than in the past. Some activist groups consistently oppose any new development so that marine life and habitats can be saved. They demonstrate their lack of understanding of the concept and principle of sustainable development. Experience in Singapore has shown that environmental groups have a supportive and valuable role if they work with instead of against development agencies. The channel of communication has to be kept open for any hope to be realized and improved.

10.3

Impacts

The most apparent impact is habitat loss. Singapore’s coral reefs, estimated to cover an area of over 100 km2 prior to the land reclamation programme, decreased to 54 km2 (Burke et al. 2002). The real reef extent, past and present, is believed to be lower if based on actual field mapping (Chou and Tun 2005) but the relative loss of 60 percent of the habitat is considered unsustainable (Hilton and Manning 1995). The country has also lost about 95 percent of its mangrove forest area from an estimated 7,500 ha in the 19th century to 491 ha in 1995. The present mangrove cover represents less than 0.5 percent of total land area (Ng and Sivasothi 1999), a result of habitat loss coupled with increased land area. There is no known assessment of seagrass habitat loss, but the present status includes isolated patches on the mainland such as at Labrador and Changi beaches, and more extensive beds at offshore islands such as at Chek Jawa, Cyrene Reef and Pulau Semakau. Seashore profiles have undergone extensive modification and the only natural pocket remaining along the entire southern coast of the mainland is the 300 m length of intertidal rocky shore flat at Labrador (Todd and Chou 2005) (Fig. 10.2). Nestled within the management boundary of the Labrador Nature Reserve, it remains exposed to encroaching coastal development from all around. Least known of the marine habitats is the seabed; and research has not kept pace with that for reefs, seagrass and

10 Nature and Sustainability of the Marine Environment

173

Fig. 10.2 The 300 m long rocky shore at Labrador is about the last remaining original shore along Singapore’s entire south coast

mangroves for the simple reason of logistics. Most of the seabed is mud resulting from the settlement of fine sediment and the removal of sand for construction and reclamation. Seabed communities respond quickly to impacts (Chou 2006) and can be suitably used as natural indicators. The open water itself has similarly been reduced as land is reclaimed from the sea within the country’s maritime boundary. Reef habitat degradation is seen from an overall decline in live coral cover since the late 1980s when coral reef monitoring was first initiated, and a reduction in depth at which corals thrive (Chou and Tun 2005). In spite of habitat loss and habitat degradation, species diversity remains high (Chou et al. 2006) and local extinctions of marine species are limited. Population abundance is depressed for many species making them less commonly seen but species diversity on the whole does not appear to have suffered much impact. Apart from the open water, the remaining fragments of natural habitats can no longer provide high levels of ecosystem services but they maintain an adequate representation of the rich natural heritage that was once abundant. Greater sensitivity to nature conservation in development planning can help to improve sustainability of the marine environment. The Johor Strait for example is regarded as heavily impacted by coastal development on the Singapore as well as the Johor side, yet the Singapore nearshore is inhabited by 133 species of fish (Hajisamae and Chou 2003). The dominance of juveniles indicated the habitat’s role as a nursery. At the same time, elevated fish density occurred at the site of a restored sandy shore and greater

174

L.M. Chou

fish diversity at a reforested mangrove (Jaafar et al. 2004). This showed that habitat restoration does help to support the formation and development of stronger biotic communities. At the same time, human-modified habitats, if suitably constructed can support a comparatively richer biodiversity than the surroundings. A study of marine biodiversity at Raffles Marina, located along the northwest reclaimed coast, showed that the biological community was greater in abundance and diversity within the marina than the surrounding environment (Chou and Jaafar 2002). The rich species diversity can be attributed to the location of Singapore within a global marine biodiversity hotspot, the interconnectivity of the marine environment, and the replacement of original habitats with human-engineered ones that favour or promote the development of new living communities. At the same time, strong anti-pollution measures have helped to maintain an adequate water quality that meets recreational water guidelines, enabling the marine environment to sustain life. Pollution management however, has not addressed the issue of sedimentation, which poses a serious threat to marine life. It not only smothers sessile organisms, but also cuts down sunlight penetration. This effectively reduces the biological productivity of the marine environment.

10.4

Value of Natural Habitats

The value of natural habitats has never been fully appreciated and is therefore excluded in the economic formula of development. Each development activity generates economic benefits that can be quantified and readily understood by planners. Cost and benefit analyses are conducted only in terms of the economy and not the environment. The loss of natural habitats is not accounted for in terms of what is readily understood – dollars and cents. Economic valuation of natural resources remains a huge challenge, although attempts have indicated that it runs into millions or billions of dollars. Costanza et al. (1997) estimated that nutrient cycling alone provided by the earth’s seagrass and algal beds is worth US$3.8 trillion per year, whilst that of coastal shelves is US$4.3 trillion. They further assigned a value of US$375 billion per year to the recreational and disturbance-regulation services provided by coral reefs. The limited extent of coral reefs in the Malacca Straits is valued at US$563 million for their varied roles in carbon sequestration, shore protection, ecotourism, fisheries production and research (MPP-EAS 1999). Policy makers and economic planners commonly balk and are also quick to dismiss with skepticism the high monetary value assigned to living resources by resource scientists. Is the valuation really justifiable and why is the value so incredibly high? The direct use of habitats can be readily understood. Goods can be extracted for various purposes including food, building materials and traditional medicine, and market values give a direct indication of their cost. More difficult to accept is the indirect value of ecological services that habitats offer. Coastal protection, water quality regulation, biodiversity enhancement are just

10 Nature and Sustainability of the Marine Environment

175

a few of the significant services that each habitat provides. These services disappear with the loss of the habitat and costly human engineering is then necessary to replace and maintain them. A habitat is more than a simple aggregation of species. It is an ecosystem in which the member species interact with each other and together with the physical environment to recycle materials efficiently through the system, to generate organic matter from inorganic driven by solar energy, and to constantly renew and grow in complexity without disruption to the fine balance of nature. Almost impossible to conceptualize is the intrinsic value of the natural heritage. If a species is not edible or not used for any means by people, just how much is it worth? And how is species loss to be valued? Economic planners do not see why such considerations should be factored into the equation. Whatever the limitations, habitats are living entities that make the environment wholesome. The services that they provide will reduce the cost of necessary human interventions if habitats are eliminated. A natural habitat is self-sustaining, self-regulating and does not require external inputs to maintain it, except for sunlight, which costs nothing. Compare this to an artificial habitat such as a large oceanarium and the difference is immediately apparent. Energy is required to maintain water quality through filtration and aeration and adequate water flow through the system. Food has to be introduced because of our inability to establish a natural mix of species with the right community structure that is finely balanced. All these external inputs come at a high cost. Displacing natural habitats and creating artificial ones make no economic sense. Investigations of the biodiversity at Raffles Marina showed that the biological community performed a role in maintaining the quality of the water (Chou and Jaafar 2002). Removal of the biological community will lead to a quick deterioration of water quality.

10.5

Challenges

A fundamental challenge in sustainable development is to minimize loss and degradation of the natural environment as development proceeds. This requires an adequate appreciation of the natural environment, particularly the significance and value of natural habitats. Singapore’s spatial limitation and the high human population density make the inclusion of nature in environmental sustainability most challenging. A qualification of marine environment “sustainability” within Singapore’s context is perhaps necessary. One cannot expect the limited marine environment to provide sufficient food for more than 4 million people and at the same time handle the waste generated. This “human footprint” concept cannot be met. However, if we view it from the point of accommodating development while at the same time reducing loss of habitats and impacts on environmental quality, then sustainability becomes more digestible. Perhaps one of the strongest challenges is that we do not depend on our living resources for survival and therefore need to keep looking for other justifications to explain why we need to invest in managing and maintaining natural habitats that do not offer apparent economic returns, and always at the expense of development.

176

L.M. Chou

Services that marine habitats offer include environmental cleansing. Seagrass and seaweed beds trap and facilitate sediment deposition and in that way, improve water clarity. Burrowing animals on seabed mud help to oxygenate the seafloor and improve its condition to support life. Mangroves protect shores against erosion (Fig. 10.3) and coral reefs help to dissipate wave energy. Mangroves can also accommodate organic loading and help to reduce organic pollution. These services do contribute to the improvement of coastal water quality. A better quality marine environment provides more opportunities for use. It can support recreation, mariculture and the emerging new lifestyle of waterside housing. At the same time, cleaner waters translate into cost savings from reduced filtration effort. This can be considerable based on the massive volume of seawater pumped up by power plants, desalination plants and other facilities. Mariculture farms, which occupy only 5,000 m2 of seaspace produced 5,280 mt of finfish, crustaceans and molluscs in 2005 (Ngiam and Cheong 2006). This made up 5.8 percent of local consumption, valued at almost US$7.8 million. There is scope for expansion using deep net cages suitable for the more open waters in the south; and good water quality will support a move towards greater food security. Economic growth will expand the country’s wealth and food can be imported, but in times of a crisis, all the money available may not guarantee that supplies will still be forthcoming

Fig. 10.3 Mangroves provide essential services such as erosion prevention, environmental conditioning, nursery and storm buffering

10 Nature and Sustainability of the Marine Environment

177

Fig. 10.4 Bioactive compounds have been isolated from the mucus of the hard coral, Galaxea fascicularis

from exporting countries. With marine environment sustainability, food production can be boosted and food security can be seriously considered. The rich marine biodiversity is a source of material for research in bioactive compounds. For example, bioactive compounds with anti-tumor activity were isolated from the mucus of the coral Galaxea fascicularis (Ding et al. 1994, 1999; Fung et al. 1997) (Fig. 10.4). Extracts from gorgonians (seafans) contained chemicals that deterred fish feeding (Koh et al. 2000), exhibited anti-microbial (Goh and Chou 1998) and anti-fungal properties (Koh et al. 2002). The management of marine habitats will allow such research to continue and lead to possible commercialization.

10.6

Case Studies of Sustainability

The marine conservation initiative may appear dismal with the large loss of marine habitats especially over the last five decades but habitat protection and restoration is not foreign to the country’s history of maritime development. One such example is the Semakau Landfill, which was commissioned in 1999. An area of 350 ha of the sea was demarcated by a 7 km perimeter rock bund. Operated as a sanitary landfill receiving only incinerated ash and non-combustible construction debris, its 63 million cubic metre capacity will meet the country’s solid waste disposal over

178

L.M. Chou

the next four decades. No other suitable landfill site on the mainland could be identified and the decision had to be taken for a marine landfill. As the environmental risks were high and loss of the marine environment substantial, a comprehensive EIA was carried out. Surprisingly, predevelopment plans included minimizing damage to the island’s coral reefs and mangroves. In the case of the mangroves, where destruction could not be avoided, mitigation consisted of mangrove reforestation. In the case of the coral reefs, sediment screens were deployed to prevent silt generated from the containment bund construction on the eastern shore from reaching the reef on the western shore. This was the first instance of the use of sediment screens to protect coral reefs in the country. These measures ensured that the eastern reef remained unaffected. Mangrove restoration covering 13.6 ha in two plots, carried out towards the completion of the bund development was extremely successful. Today dense growth of restored mangroves and a healthy reef with seagrass continue to thrive, demonstrating that such habitats can coexist with a marine landfill (Fig. 10.5). If predevelopment plans had not targeted these habitats, then only the landfill will be there today and nature tours, which are currently immensely popular with the public, would be nonexistent (Chou and Tun, 2007). This development demonstrates what sustainable development could and should be.

Fig. 10.5 Coral reefs and seagrass thriving at the Semakau landfill

10 Nature and Sustainability of the Marine Environment

179

An earlier example of sustainability is the cleaning of the Singapore River and Kallang Basin, a ten-year habitat improvement project that started in 1977 to remove accumulated pollution from these water bodies and elevate the environmental quality. These water bodies with a strong tidal influence drain a significant watershed area equivalent to 20 percent of the mainland. Heavily polluted through decades of abuse, they were biologically dead and nothing more than open sewers and rubbish dumps. The unsustainable use created a situation that could no longer be tolerated and triggered the massive cleanup targeted at improving sustainability. Pollution sources had to be identified and addressed through relocation and more effective management. Contaminated mud from the riverbeds was removed to help improve environmental quality. Within the early years of the restoration initiative, biodiversity increase was already evident (Chou 1998), indicating an improvement in the ecological carrying capacity of these water bodies. The huge investment in the cleanup cost has resulted in economic benefits arising from increased use opportunities and real estate growth, and most significantly a healthy ecosystem with a respectable biodiversity that can perform the service function of water quality maintenance. The 71 ha Pasir Ris Park demonstrates how planning took into account the conservation of mangroves as the park was developed as a social amenity. The development included land reclamation to provide for the space needed, but an original 6 ha mangrove plot was kept intact. Development plans ensured that sea water continued to reach these mangroves, now further removed from the sea by the reclamation. Today, well-constructed boardwalks and a lookout tower facilitate the movement of visitors through the mangrove habitat and allow people to be in close contact with nature without adding further impacts. The recent change in management attitude is evident with greater attention given to impacts on habitats including coral reefs. In the past three years, major development projects cutting across coral reefs have in place strong management measures to localize the impact and also to relocate corals. Coral translocation as a management measure by development agencies was unheard of in the past. Measures now include moving corals from the impacted site to a temporary holding site and then restoring them back to the impacted site after completion of the development. These examples illustrate that development and nature conservation are compatible. Protecting habitats as development proceeds may appear to escalate development cost but the benefits are not only in terms of a healthier environment but also in economic improvements. It is also less costly to consider habitat protection and management and factor these into development planning than to proceed with development first followed by habitat restoration. While mangrove and seagrass habitats are easier to restore, coral reefs are more difficult and limited in scale. Habitat restoration has its limitations and is a poorer alternative to habitat management, but unavoidable when needed to improve habitats degraded by past activities. It has to be considered together with habitat protection to reduce further and unnecessary loss so that nature can be enhanced.

180

10.7

L.M. Chou

Innovative Approaches

The improvement in the attitude of development agencies towards marine habitats, the establishment of the Biodiversity Centre to oversee marine biodiversity and the relentless pollution control measures, all pave the way for a fresh look at nature in the marine environment. Are there ways in which the momentum can be increased towards sustainability where we have clean seas and good marine biodiversity with the multitude of coastal activities and the plethora of ships moving constantly across the waters? Environmental groups have been pressing for the setting up of marine-protected areas, especially in the southern offshore islands that include coral reefs. There is, as yet, no actual marine protected area. Among the coastal protected areas on the mainland are the 130 ha Sungei Buloh Wetland Reserve with its mangrove forest and mudflats, and the 10 ha Labrador Nature Reserve with its short stretch of rocky shore harbouring coral and seagrass communities. The intertidal flat at Chek Jawa is currently managed by National Parks Board as a nature area until such time when it is needed for development. Although not an ideal situation, it is far better than the original plan to have it obliterated. Singapore’s marine environment is intensively used for shipping and various other sectors compete for the remaining restricted spaces. In such a scenario, conservation or management of marine habitats need not be excluded as they are indeed compatible with most other uses. They do not stand in the way of development and, if suitably considered in the planning, will enhance the environmental value of the area after the development is completed. In this respect, a network of marine areas that are currently under some form of management could be a practical alternative to a large marine protected area and perhaps more acceptable to policy makers. Some islands and their reefs are currently restricted to visitors. The collection of islands including Pulau Senang, Pulau Pawai, Pulau Sudong and Pulau Salu lie within the Southern Islands Live Firing Area and is used by the military. Free of visitors and major development, their coral reefs are known to be in good condition. Similarly, the reef of Pulau Satamu (Raffles Lighthouse) is healthy because of restricted access. The reefs of other access restricted islands such as Pulau Bukom, which holds the Shell oil refinery support good live coral cover. These reefs are effectively already under some form of management, although the management is not focused on conserving marine habitats. Connecting these into a network and convincing operators of these islands to participate in habitat protection immediately creates a large protected area. Utilization of marine resources should also be considered in connection with manipulating the ecological cycle to improve environmental quality. This may sound controversial to pure ecologists believing in letting nature take its course, but in an environment that is already disturbed, such measures should not be dismissed. For example, nutrient levels have increased and are driving production of seaweed. This abundant supply of seaweed is a ready source of biofuel. Settled sediment on

10 Nature and Sustainability of the Marine Environment

181

the seabed could be removed, treated and used as construction materials. This will effectively transform a waste material into an economic product and at the same time improve the seabed’s condition to support life.

10.8

Conclusion

There is a need to address the question of sediment, the major impact affecting our marine environment. Improved engineering and new techniques can help to reduce the introduction and spread of sediment. At the same time, research is needed to address sediment accumulated on the seabed. This will help to improve water clarity and allow solar energy to drive ecosystem processes more efficiently through the marine environment. Sustainability of Singapore’s seas could be looked at as a balance between a diversity of economic activities and environmental quality maintenance including biodiversity preservation. The expansion of the National Parks Board’s mandate in 2004 to include marine biodiversity, current increased public awareness and recent change in attitude of development agencies towards environmental conservation all help to move towards sustainable development of the seas and both past and present case studies illustrate the possibility. New approaches could also be considered within the present constraints of limited sea space and high population density to help meet the challenge. The ultimate question is whether it is possible for Singapore to have a harbour filled with numerous ships, yet teeming with rich marine habitats and life such as dolphins? It is certainly not impossible as the seas currently support marine life, habitats and dolphins. Sustainability of the marine environment can be realized and should be pursued. If not, then we will have to be contented with seeing marine life only in oceanariums and be prepared to lose all the goods and services that natural habitats offer without any economic cost.

References Burke L, Selig E, Spalding M (2002) Reefs at risk in Southeast Asia. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC Chou LM (1998) The cleaning of Singapore River and the Kallang Basin: approaches, methods, investments and benefits. Ocean and Coastal Management 38:133–145 Chou LM (2006) Marine habitats in one of the world’s busiest harbours. In: Wolanski E (ed) The environment in Asia Pacific harbours. Springer, The Netherlands, pp 377–391 Chou LM, Jaafar Z (2002) Improving the aquatic environment in semi-enclosed areas through biological applications. Proceedings of the 6th Asia-Pacific NGOs’ Environmental Conference, Foundation of Ocean, Taiwan, pp 1–12 Chou LM, Tun KPP (2005) Singapore. In: Status of coral reefs in East Asian Seas region: 2004. Ministry of the Environment, Japan, pp 53–69 Chou LM, Tun KPP (2007) Conserving reefs beside a marine landfill in Singapore. Coral Reefs 26:719

182

L.M. Chou

Chou LM, Tan HTW, Yeo DCJ (2006) The natural heritage of Singapore. Pearson/Prentice-Hall, Singapore Costanza R, d’Arge R, de Groot R, Farber S, Grasso M, Hannon B, Limburg K, Naeem S, O’Neill RV, Paruelo J, Raskin RG, Sutton P (1997) The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387:253–260 Ding JK, Fung FMY, Chou LM (1994) Cytotoxic effects of mucus from coral Galaxea fascicularis. Journal of Marine Biotechnology 2: 7–33 Ding JL, Fung FMY, Ng GWS, Chou LM (1999) Novel bioactivities from a coral, Galaxea fascicularis: DNase-like activity and apoptotic activity against a multiple-drug-resistant leukemia cell line. Marine Biotechnology 1:328–336 Fung FMY, Tachibana S, Chou LM, Ding JL (1997) Cytotoxic and anticancer agents in mucus of Galaxea fascicularis: purification and characterisation. Journal of Marine Biotechnology 5: 50–57 Goh NGK, Chou LM (1998) Bioactivity screening of Singapore gorgonians: antimicrobial activity, toxicity to Artemia salina and efficacy against Plasmodium berghei. Zoological Science 15:805–812 Hajisamae, S, Chou LM (2003) Do shallow water habitats of an impacted coastal strait serve as nursery grounds for fish? Estuarine. Coastal and Shelf Science 56:281–290 Hilton M, Manning SS (1995) Conversion of coastal habitats in Singapore: indications of unsustainable development. Environmental Conservation 22:307–322 Jaafar Z, Hajisamae S, Chou LM, Yatiman Y (2004) Community structure of coastal fishes in relation to heavily impacted human modified habitats. Hydrobiologia 511:113–123 Koh LL, Goh NKC, Chou LM, Tan YW (2000) Chemical and physical defenses of Singapore gorgonians (Octocorallia: Gorgonacea). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 251: 03–115 Koh LL, Tan TK, Chou LM, Goh NGK (2002) Antifungal properties of Singapore gorgonians: a preliminary study. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 273:121–130 MPA (2005) Annual Report 2005. Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore, Singapore MPP-EAS (1999) Total economic valuation: coastal and marine resources in the Straits of Malacca. MPP-EAS Technical Report No 24/PEMSEA Technical Report No 2, Global Environment Facility/United Nations Development Programme/International Maritime Organisation Regional Programme for the Prevention and Management of Marine Pollution in the East Asian Seas (MPP-EAS)/Partnerships in Environmental Management for the Seas of East Asia (PEMSEA), Quezon City, Philippines Ng PKL, Sivasothi N (1999) A guide to the mangroves of Singapore 1. Singapore Science Centre, Singapore Ngiam TT, Cheong L (2006) Southeast Asian Agriculture and Development Primer Series: Singapore. SEAMEO/SEARCA, Philippines Tan AKJ (2002) APCEL Report: Singapore (ASEAN Project). Asia-Pacific Centre for Environmental Law, National University of Singapore, Singapore Todd PA, Chou LM (2005) A tale of survival: Labrador Park, Singapore. Coral Reefs 24:391

Chapter 11

Singapore’s Natural Environment, Past, Present and Future: A Construct of National Identity and Land Use Imperatives Min Geh1 and Ilsa Sharp2

Singapore 21 is about a home for a people, not a hotel (Goh Chok Tong, Singapore’s former Prime Minister launching his Singapore 21 vision in Singapore’s Parliament, 5 June 1997.)

A famed Garden City, Singapore is located in one of the world’s richest biodiversity hotspots. But because of her small size and the dominance of government for more than four decades by a single political party with a singular vision, the impact of government policy on land use and nature conservation has been decisive. The bread-and-butter imperatives of economic progress and nation-building have been paramount until quite recently. Nonetheless, Singapore has retained impressive biodiversity for a small city-state. With the maturing of Singapore’s acknowledged powerhouse economy, better balance is now being achieved, partly thanks to a constructive dialogue between planners and conservationists. This improved dialogue has been powered by the ideological quest for national identity and “roots” through a “sense of place” that has increasingly engaged both Singapore’s government and civil society. Understanding is growing that what distinguishes Singapore’s identity is “indigenous tropicality,” rather than a manicured parkland image derived from a colonialized, Westernized sub-conscious, or even a reinvented tropicality reminiscent of hotel-resort horticulture. Environmental NGOs’ interface with the Singapore government on land use has evolved into a less elitist, more post-modern and diffuse networking style than in the past. The shared goal is sustainable development for Singapore. In this context, we take “sustainable development”1 to mean development that protects, conserves, integrates or

1 “Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” (April 1987) Towards Sustainable Development. In: Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development (“Brundtland Commission”) Our Common Future, chap. 2, p. 54.

1

Mount Elizabeth Hospital, 3 Mount Elizabeth, #17-11, 228510, Singapore, Republic of Singapore

2

PO Box 170, Bentley, Western Australia, 6982, Australia, e-mail: [email protected]

T.-C. Wong et al. (eds.), Spatial Planning for a Sustainable Singapore, 183–204 © Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2008

184

M. Geh and I. Sharp

adapts natural2 areas, wherever possible in their original, pristine form, with the final outcome of continued survival as a viable natural heritage for future generations to enjoy. Such heritage serves a human need for continuity and identity. Much of what has been achieved so far can be attributed to a serendipitous convergence of factors; in the final analysis however, government remains the agendasetter, promoting nature insofar as it is economically and politically affordable – i.e. sustainability for the government is equivalent to affordability.

11.1

Introduction – Curbing the “Tropical Beast” Within

Definitions of the optimal level of “Green-ness” in Singapore – how much, what kind, where and how – have evolved in tandem with ideas of Singapore’s national identity. In a small nation such as Singapore (699.4 square kilometres/270 square miles (Department of Statistics 2005), government’s policy directions inevitably have impacted heavily on the country’s “physiology”, shaping it physically as well as socially, from 1819 through to today. The nation’s most recent search for identity is expressed in its planners’ determination to create a “Tropical City of Excellence” (Singapore government’s Revised Concept Plan 1991), leading to what eminent Dutch architect Rem Koolhaas (1995: 1075), has called “the reconstructed tropicality of landscaping”, superimposed on a virtual tabula rasa (or slate rubbed clean/blank sheet), following urban redevelopment. This new creation of tropicality today must be seen as an ironical re-creation, for Singapore of course ever was tropical, but planning and land use trends during the 1970s and 1980s seemed set on evasion of this truth. There was a retreat into airconditioned, indoors isolation, sequestered from the tropical realities of heat and humidity, provoked by a “deep primordial fear of being swallowed up by the jungle” (Buruma 1988, cited Koolhaas 1995: 1083). That sense of the need to control tropical nature even while attempting to rehabilitate it can be detected in Living the Next Lap: Towards a Tropical City of Excellence (URA 1991: 4), a manifesto published by the Singapore government’s national planning agency, the Urban Redevelopment Authority in 1991, in elaboration of the national Revised Concept Plan of that year – the Concept Plan being the key national planning instrument in Singapore, first conceived with United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) assistance in 1971: Our vision is an island with an increased sense of ‘island-ness’ … Singapore will be cloaked in greenery, both manicured by man and protected tracts of natural growth…

2 There is no space here to debate the definitions of “natural” or “pristine”; discussion of these concepts in the Singapore context is contained in Ho 1999, and in NSS Feedback on SGP 2012 (2002), appendix 1, p. 2.

11 Singapore’s Natural Environment, Past, Present and Future

11.2 11.2.1

185

Identity and the Land – the Colonial Experience From Jungle to Garden

Singapore’s journey from wild and forested tropicality to a controlled Garden City, and now back again to a “controlled tropicality”, began well before Independence in 1965; even before the day in January 1819 that modern Singapore’s founder Sir Thomas Stamford Raffles planted the British East India Company flag on the banks of the Singapore River. Before Raffles’ arrival, a handful of Chinese gambier farmers had begun to slash and burn the interior in shifting agriculture mode, radically changing the rain forest vegetation mosaic in interior areas such as today’s Bukit Timah Nature Reserve (BTNR). As early as 1840, already about 2,000 hectares (4,942 acres) (Wheatley 1954, cited Wee, Corlett 1986: 5) was planted with gambier (Uncaria gambir, yielding the astringent resin used in tanning). The firewood needed to boil gambier leaves brought further deforestation (Corlett 1992: 413). Other plantation crops, from pepper to sugar cane, soon boosted the cultivated area. In the early 20th century, extensive rubber plantations completed the picture, covering almost 40% of the total land area (22,500 hectares, almost 55,600 acres) by 1935 (Corlett 1992: 413). By 1883, 93% of the forest had already been destroyed, according to the first local forest survey conducted by Nathaniel Cantley, the first Superintendent of Singapore’s Botanic Gardens (Cantley 1884, cited Corlett 1995). The total habitat loss today, since 1819, has amounted to more than 95% of Singapore’s estimated original 540 square kilometres (208 square miles) of tropical forest. As for biodiversity loss, the extinction of species may be as high as 73% (Brook et al. 2003: 420–421, Corlett 1992: 415).

11.2.2

Traders, Transients and Expats

The British quest for commercially productive economic resources such as spices, crops, metals and minerals, fuelled the foundation of Singapore as a key trading port for the resource-rich Southeast Asian archipelago, and her prosperity – and also precipitated the associated clearance of land both for urban settlements and agricultural plantations. Both people and exotic plants flooded in via trading ships. The lure of Singapore’s “pot of gold” pumped the population from an estimated base of only 1,000 in January 1819 to 81,000 by 1860 (Turnbull 1989: 5, 36). These transient newcomers still looked to their homelands in China, India, Malaya and Indonesia for their identity, with scant emotional attachment to the alien land on which they squatted. Most expatriate colonials (numbering barely 500 by 1860, yet wielding disproportionate power) reconstructed the landscape according to their own nonindigenous mindscapes. But some assigned intrinsic rather than merely utilitarian value to Singapore’s natural resources and so fortunately fostered vital gene pools

186

M. Geh and I. Sharp

such as Singapore’s renowned Botanic Gardens, and forest reserves such as today’s BTNR. Reversing the moment in 1938 when all Singapore’s nature reserves except Bukit Timah were proposed for de-gazetting, the Singapore Botanic Gardens Director and Assistant Director, R.E. Holttum and E.J.H. Corner respectively, got them re-gazetted in 1939. Thus nature reserve land still stood at over 11% of Singapore’s total land area right up to 1939 (Wee and Corlett 1986: 11, 13). Today, it accounts for just under 5% of Singapore’s land area.

11.3

Nation-Building and the Land – the Post-Colonial Experience

After 1959, economic imperatives again impacted on Singapore’s natural environment under the People’s Action Party (PAP) government of the independent nation’s first Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew (now “Minister Mentor”). This was hardly surprising, in the context of alarming statistics: unemployment at 13% (1959 figure, US Library of Congress); over-dependence on revenues generated by the still-present British military bases on the island (about S$519 million in 1965 – Goh 1972: 262 – or more than US$1 billion in today’s US dollar values, and around 20% of Singapore’s Gross National Product (GNP) – Turnbull 1989: 294); a more than 4% annual birth growth rate in the late 1950s (Goh 1972: 150, Lee 2000: 293), and a desperate need for decent housing to replace even more desperate inner-city slums. Structurally, nature conservation concerns were subsumed under a “mega-ministry”, the Ministry of National Development (MND – established at Independence, in 1959), along with other land-use responsibilities ranging from housing and roadbuilding, to urban renewal and agriculture. Obviously, nature conservation could only play Cinderella when ranked alongside these pressing concerns (until the MND’s fully empowered National Parks Board was created in 1996). These factors, combined with the continuing dominance of the repeatedly re-elected PAP, and coupled with government’s strong hold on most land, including compulsory land acquisition powers, have made the impact of government planning on the natural environment inevitable. Only when government began to “fine-tune” its nation-building project to anchor its formerly transient citizens to the land, could nature conservation come into its own.

11.3.1

Government’s Role: Greening a Nation

Yet the government of fully independent Singapore in 1965 did indeed have a Green policy, which it consciously used as a nation-building tool. “Green” then meant more a manicured parkland green than a natural wild green. Nonetheless, Singapore’s early greening programme was revolutionary in the Southeast Asia of the late 1960s, where the focus was on mere survival. It attracted the attention of neighbouring country governments, and eventually, their emulation (Lee 2000: 203).

11 Singapore’s Natural Environment, Past, Present and Future

187

Lee Kuan Yew was the ideological architect of Singapore as a Garden City. Among sundry moves promoting environmental responsibility, Lee located independent Singapore’s first environmental agency, the Anti-Pollution Unit, within his own Prime Minister’s Office. He himself has identified the prime driver of his vision as economic: his strong desire was to characterize Singapore as a First World nation, civilized, cultured and disciplined, competitively distinct from other Asian countries, thereby attracting investors and tourists. He has described his greening programme as his most cost-effective project ever (Lee 2000: 201–211). Besides its economic dimensions, the greening programme was also touted for its health benefits. The Garden City concept was first aired on 16 December 1968, during the second reading of the Environmental Public Health Bill in the Singapore Parliament (Koh 2007: 2), when the Minister of Health said: “The improvement in the quality of our urban environment and the transformation of Singapore into a garden city – a clean and green city – is the declared objective of the Government.” Additionally, the greening programme aimed to instil national pride and foster a Singaporean identity, as confirmed by Lee Kuan Yew himself (Lee 2000: 202). Lee has admitted to his own emotional response to his creation, recounting how his spirits rise when on his return to Singapore, he views the lush landscaping lining the highway from the airport to the city (ibid: 205). This feeling of pride in shared national identity expressed through the greening programme is perceived by returning Singaporeans and new visitors to Singapore alike as they drive that same route. There is a strong sense of coming home. The contrast with many other airport arrivals in the region is quite stark. Singapore’s pioneer greening budget was considerable for a young nation confronting urgent infrastructural needs. Between 1975 and 1993 alone, total expenditure by the then Parks and Recreation Department (PRD) was more than S$700 million (Lee 1995: 144–145) – about US$59 million in today’s dollars – escalating from just under S$14 million a year in 1975 to over S$53 million by 1993. Much of this went on tree-planting and parkland beautification. Lee Kuan Yew’s newly created tree-care unit, within the Public Works Department (PWD) and under MND, planted more than five million trees and shrubs from 1970–1992 (Singapore Government UNCED 1992: 39).

11.3.2

The Garden City – Colonial Hangover?

To some conservationists, the Garden City’s motto seemed to be “any Green is good Green.” But was it a truly Singaporean Green? Lamenting Singapore’s inability to grow the green grass enjoyed by New Zealand or Ireland (Lee 2000: 202), Lee Kuan Yew has noted with pride his early park planners’ importation on his instructions of 8,000 species of foreign plants, from tropical Asia, Africa, the Caribbean and Central America. Of these, they managed to cultivate 2,000 species (ibid: 204). These non-indigenous species sometimes made Singapore look less Singaporean, but admittedly replicating tropical forest ecosystems in cultivated plantings is a challenge (Chuang 1973: 49). Foreign free-flowering species can

188

M. Geh and I. Sharp

seem superficially more attractive. At the time, Singapore’s landscapers felt their more local options were limited (Lee 2000: 202). But beyond the practical, another factor was the mindset of the decision-maker generation at Independence, still to some extent a creature of its colonial past: rolling green meadows were its gold standard for a superior civilisation. Emerging from the colonial education system, many Singaporeans were more familiar with the daffodils of English poetry and the green, green grass of an alien, temperate home, than with their own flora. This was a botanically prejudiced generation, ill at ease with its own untamed wilderness. The struggle for a truly Singaporean identity was only just beginning. Singapore was not yet “home.” Sometimes, it has taken foreigners to reveal to Singaporeans that their indigenous biota is precious and unique. British conservationist and TV personality David Bellamy once pronounced that the number of plant species growing in the 163-hectare (403-acre) BTNR (about 400 tree species) is more than that found in the whole of North America (USA and Canada) (Ministry of the Environment 2002: 12).

11.3.3

Back to the Forest

Just as a country with no history has no memory, so one with no nature has no soul. (Singapore’s former Chief Planner, architect Dr Liu Thai Ker, now a Director of RSP Architects Planners & Engineers, Singapore – personal communication, 2006.)

Despite the undeniable economic progress resulting from development by the 1980s, Singaporeans evinced an underlying malaise, identified by Singaporean architect William S.W. Lim (2002: 49) and by Koolhaas as an anxiety and loss of identity arising from excessive and frequent change at too fast a pace. “It is a city perpetually morphed to the next state …”, Koolhaas (1995: 1075, 1079) has said of Singapore, “since the island is considered changeable in its entirety, no version is ever definitive. After the first wave of transformation, there will be further conversions, new destructions, a second wave, a third …” Hence, the government’s drive to rejuvenate or “Remake Singapore” (2002–2003), while creatively stimulating, may actually have made national identity less secure; there is nowhere to put down one’s roots, no sense of place if nothing is permanent, if everything must constantly be re-made. This has led to what Koolhaas has called “the systematic erosion of … tradition, fixity, continuity – a perpetuum mobile” (1995: 1035). By the late 1970s, the new generation coming of age in Singapore had discerned that nature could offer a safe haven from this psychosis, since nature alone, not new shopping centres or theme parks, could achieve endless variety through subtle change, yet remain eternal, offering a stable reference point throughout. The realization was growing that perhaps the Singaporean identity need not be defined solely in economic terms or in terms of matching international (= Western!) standards, rather that it might equally lie in Singapore’s origins as a primaeval forested tropical island at the hub of Southeast Asia. As one conservationist has put it, “Is the Swiss standard of living without the Swiss Alps and mountains and scenery, worth it?” (Ho 1999: 175).

11 Singapore’s Natural Environment, Past, Present and Future

189

11.3.4 External Factors: The Role of the International Community Could the growth of local interest in Singapore’s indigenous environment be seen simply as a response to international developments such as the foundation of Green political parties overseas (e.g. Australia/Tasmania 1972, Germany 1980)? Probably not. International impact on Singapore’s conservation movement is subtle and difficult to measure, not least because many of the players involved, both in government and in the non-government organizations (NGOs), are quick to deny any international role in domestic change (Interviews: Ho et al. 2006). Most NGO activists also maintain that international pressure applied to domestic issues has never been effective in Singapore (Interviews: 2006). One international development admittedly has been instrumental in local change: the growth of the Internet from the late 1990s (shaping the 2001 campaign to save the Chek Jawa mudflats). Singaporeans’ increasing access to international television documentary channels such as Discovery and National Geographic superficially is significant too, but local conservationists worry that these may on the contrary have deluded many Singaporeans into believing that real wild nature exists only overseas, not at home (Ho 1999: 158; Interview: 2006). International influence has perhaps played more at the government level than at the grassroots. From the government’s point of view, with the achievement of some prosperity by the 1980s, it was now time to position Singapore as a full member of the global community, and therefore as a responsible global citizen. There has been some synchrony of global environmental events with policy changes in Singapore (Francesch Huidobro 2005: 147). The UN Conference on the Human Environment took place in 1972, the same year that Singapore established its Ministry of the Environment. The Brundtland Report Our Common Future (World Commission on Environment and Development) was published in 1987; Singapore declared its new Sungei Buloh Nature Park in 1989. The Rio Summit of 1992 (United Nations Conference on Environment and Development/UNCED) was another international milestone that impacted on Singapore, which presented a national report to the Summit; it was partly the Summit that triggered Singapore’s first official Green Plan in the same year. But there were many more powerful local factors at work, from a more sophisticated electorate to the increasingly urgent search for national identity.

11.3.5

Internal Factors: The Role of a Catalytic NGO

The identity issue has played out even within the domestic nature conservation movement. Inside Singapore’s leading and oldest green NGO, the Nature Society (Singapore) (NSS), or the Malayan Nature Society (Singapore Branch) (MNS Singapore) as it initially was, the conservationist baton has been handed from the colonial generation on to a newly aware generation of Singaporeans seeking a new identity. This generational shift has recreated the Society as a catalytic agent in changing attitudes. The Society had short-lived beginnings in 1921 but was formally founded in 1954 as the Singapore branch of the older Malayan Nature Society (MNS 1940),

190

M. Geh and I. Sharp

headquartered in today’s Malaysia. Members inherited the colonial British tradition of passionate but knowledgeable amateurism and volunteerism. Singapore was not only for long politically part of Malaya, but more importantly to the MNS, it was also ecologically part of the wider bio-geographical entity known to Southeast Asian specialist biologists as Malesia. So for both political and ecological reasons, Singaporean conservationists at first professed more a regional than a national identity. This mindset persisted until the NSS’ and MNS’ amicable separation in 1992, long after the political separation of Singapore and Malaysia in 1965. The NSS’ own Independence arguably triggered a stronger, more truly Singaporean identity for the local nature conservation movement. By the early 1980s, the younger, better educated Singaporeans joining MNS Singapore were increasingly aware that urbanization and resettlement into high-rise housing estates were rapidly changing the landscapes of their childhood. About a quarter of a million Singaporeans had until then grown up in rural kampongs or villages (Wee and Corlett 1986: vii). Today, close to 90% live in high-rise housing estates (Housing and Development Board/HDB Annual Report 2005–2006 – 82% of the population in public HDB (high-rise) apartment housing; Chong W.Y., Head Estate Services Section, HDB, December 1997, Asian Urban Information Center of Kobe Newsletter No 29 – 90% of the population live in high-rise). By the 1990s, Singapore’s built-up area had almost doubled since 1960, to 49.1% (Wong 1989: 774), while the proportion of the workforce engaged in agriculture had dropped from around 6% to less than 1% between 1965 and 1992 (Ooi 1995: 3). Forest cover had decreased from 6.5% in 1960 to 4.6% in 1990, while swampland had fallen from 7.9% to 2.5%. National Master Plan reviews in 1970 and 1980 resulted in the de-gazetting of several nature reserves. The now rejuvenated MNS Singapore felt that it had no option but to mutate from a nature-lovers’ rambling society (Sharp 2002: 55), into a nature conservation lobby group.

11.3.6

New Players Change the Script

The MNS Singapore activists of the 1980s – 1990s were assisted and empowered by certain well-connected individuals. Distinguished trusted brokers came to conservationists’ aid (Francesch Huidobro 2005: 186–187, 209) – such as Law Professor Tommy Koh, Ambassador-at-Large with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Singapore’s representative at the Rio Summit, and eventually NSS’ Patron. Inside government, several conservationist-minded, overseas-educated young planners were now in decision-maker positions. British ornithologist Dr Chris Hails (now Director, Network Relations, at WWF International in Switzerland), recruited by MND on a consultancy attachment to the National Parks Board at the Singapore Botanic Gardens (1983–1988), was a quiet force behind the scenes. Similarly significant was the contemporaneous contribution of British academic and NSS member Clive Briffett, then lecturing at the School of Building & Estate Management, in the National University of Singapore

11 Singapore’s Natural Environment, Past, Present and Future

191

(NUS) Faculty of Architecture & Building (today Visiting Fellow of Oxford Brookes University, UK). A new generation of biological sciences students tutored by conservationist teachers such as former NUS botanist Dr Wee Yeow Chin (MNS Singapore /NSS President 1990 – 1995) (Interview: Sivasothi 2006) took jobs not only in science, but also in other sectors such as government, banking and teaching, where their views could influence society. A new culture of collaboration emerged among government, business, scientists, educational institutions and NGOs. Around these mentors clustered younger Singaporeans, for the first time giving Singapore’s embryonic nature conservation movement critical mass. While for the expatriates, the driver was a universalist concern for natural history heritage, among the younger Singaporeans there was an urgent desire to achieve a more holistic national identity, beyond economic success.

11.3.7

The Sungei Buloh Case

Singapore needs this reserve. Our descendants will be grateful for the preservation of a small fraction of what used to be typical Singapore … (The Malayan Nature Society (Singapore Branch) makes its national identity and heritage pitch in A Proposal for a Conservation Area at Sungei Buloh, October 1987: 6, 16.)

The mentor group’s biggest achievement, and possibly the most important catalyst for the nature conservation movement in Singapore, was the government’s decision in 1988 to conserve the Sungei Buloh wetlands in Singapore island’s far north. In 2002, Sungei Buloh, with Labrador Nature Reserve, would become the first new legislated nature reserve since Independence in 1965. That this was a decision taken as a result of NGO lobbying was even more remarkable, and proved to be a watershed for civil society in Singapore. A key actor in this case was another member of the mentor group, British expatriate bird-watcher Richard Hale, importantly also the Chief Executive Officer of the powerful Hong Kong & Shanghai Bank, who would become Vice-president of NSS (1992–1999). Not yet a member of MNS Singapore, Hale discovered the Sungei Buloh site while birding in 1986, and brought it to the attention of the Bird Group Conservation Committee of MNS Singapore. MNS activists, including Hale, former Society President and surgeon Rexon Ngim, nature guide R. Subharaj, and university philosophy lecturer Dr Ho Hua Chew, now chairman of the NSS Conservation Committee, supported by Hails and Briffett, then submitted a proposal to government for the conservation of the Sungei Buloh site. Following skilful, discreet and non-confrontational lobbying by this group, in January 1988, about nine months after submission of the proposal, government announced its intention to conserve Sungei Buloh, officially declaring the 87-hectare (215-acre) wetland a nature park in 1989. More than 100,000 people visited the wetland in the year following its opening on 6 December 1993 (SBWR website). From 2002, the now internationally renowned wetland was formally gazetted as a

192

M. Geh and I. Sharp

fully protected nature reserve of 130 hectares (321 acres) and renamed Sungei Buloh Wetland Reserve (SBWR). That the Singapore government could tolerate the sacrifice of land in a land-starved environment, in the midst of a development boom, was sensational news at the time. As one of the Sungei Buloh activists has said, “I think the instructive thing is the way we got it; through engagement and an informal approach.” (Francesch Huidobro 2005: 138). Another also said, “You must talk to the upper levels informally before any decisions are made. Otherwise, if decisions are already made, somebody loses face. They cannot reverse” (Interview: 2006). (The importance of maintaining the authorities’ “face” is reiterated by younger activist N. Sivasothi – Interview: 2006). The group’s “informal approach” was however one made to the top levels of government: this was to some extent a closed, elitist and top-down process on both sides. Civil society style would look very different when the next generation of lobbyists took up the baton in the 21st century on behalf of the Chek Jawa mudflats. The Sungei Buloh case may not have been as much of a lobbying victory as it appeared. There was some serendipity here (Francesch Huidobro 2005: 145,148). The two Ministers of National Development who first approved the conservation of Sungei Buloh (S. Dhanabalan) and then its gazetting as a national park (Mah Bow Tan) were both personally sympathetic to the idea of nature recreation as part of a more balanced lifestyle (Francesch Huidobro 2005:148; Interviews: 2006), as was the Minister for the Environment, Dr Ahmad Mattar (Francesch Huidobro 2005: 160). Additionally, the government was confident Singapore could accommodate its then projected population of around five million on available or reclaimed land. Lastly, the proposed mixed use of Sungei Buloh for aquaculture projects such as prawn-farming suited government’s preference for land to be productive. Thus, the government found the preservation of Sungei Buloh both affordable (Francesch Huidobro 2005: 145, 148), and politically beneficial (a General Election took place in September 1988, and Singapore planned to play an active role in the international Rio Summit of 1992).

11.3.8

Civil Society – Enabled, and an Enabler

I have also put in place a more consultative style of government, and opened up more political and civic space for Singaporeans. I believe that Singaporeans cannot be rooted to Singapore with just a physical stake in the country. They must have an emotional stake as well. This comes with active participation in the development of their community. Then they are less likely to quit Singapore. And even if they emigrate, they will not quit emotionally. They will miss their Singapore. (Singapore’s second Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong assessing his own legacy after 13 years, in his National Day Rally speech, 17 August 2003.)

Both the government and the conservation movement in Singapore gained confidence from the Sungei Buloh experience. For MNS Singapore, it also catalysed the

11 Singapore’s Natural Environment, Past, Present and Future

193

idea that the Society must declare its Singaporean identity more firmly, by separating from the MNS in Malaysia and forming the independent Nature Society (Singapore) (NSS), as was done in 1992. The public on their part perceived for the first time that voicing their growing desire for nature conservation might actually bear fruit. Their voice gained statistical credibility in 2001 thanks to a Land Use Attitude Survey conducted by the Singapore Environment Council (SEC): surprisingly, it revealed that two thirds of the sample of 1,000 Singaporeans did not want to sacrifice nature or nature reserve land even for the sake of coveted landed property, and 85% felt that it was important to set land aside for nature reserves and parks. Similar figures have emerged from an online Internet survey conducted by the Ministry for the Environment and Water Resources (MEWR) during the three-year review of SGP 2012 (2002) that produced the revised SGP 2012 (2006): of 2,800 respondents, 97% felt that conserving the natural heritage was important, and 87% wanted to know more about Singapore’s flora and fauna. The government for its part responded to changing attitudes among the younger generation, aware that green issues had now begun to be important in the domestic political process in Singapore. It helped too that a change of style was in the air, since Singapore’s second Prime Minister, Goh Chok Tong, had taken over government in 1990, publicly committing himself to a more consultative style. Whereas in the 1970s and 1980s the government sometimes seemed reluctant to take conservationist ideas on board, since the 1990s it has often seized the baton from local NGOs and run ahead of them. Among the many government-driven achievements of this period: ° The National Parks Act 1990 – introducing the idea that even urbanized tiny Singapore, like neighbouring rain forest giants Malaysia and Indonesia, could have national parks, and establishing the National Parks Board (NParks) to manage them. ° A landmark five-year inventory-survey of all nature reserves, from 1992, the first systematic reprise of Cantley’s work in 1883. ° The nation’s first Singapore Green Plan (SGP), published in 1993, partly indebted to the NSS’ own Master Plan of 1990, and followed by the SGP 2012 (Ministry of the Environment 2002), with its 2006 revision. ° Completion by 2005 of new boardwalk trails in the nature reserves (six kilometres (3.7 miles) at MacRitchie forest (Singapore Green Map website); 2.6 kilometres (1.6 miles) on the coast at Changi (URA website). ° Completion by 2006 of more than 70 kilometres (43.5 miles) of a green park connector or corridor network (SGP 2012 (2006: 40), with a targeted total of 300 kilometres (186 miles) by 2022 (Singapore Budget 2007, Expenditure Overview, MND). ° The recent creation of the National Biodiversity Reference Centre (NBRC) under NParks, in fulfilment of a target first stated in SGP 2012 (Ministry of the Environment 2002), tasked with coordinating Singapore’s nature conservation programmes, biodiversity data and research, and regional and international conservation commitments (NBRC website).

194

11.3.9

M. Geh and I. Sharp

Coming Home – the Chek Jawa3 Case

There needs to be a strong emotional attachment to Singapore itself, as a country, so that people will say: “I want to live here.” One of the factors that hold a strong emotional attachment for us are the “places” we experience and which we remember – childhood haunts, neighbourhood hangouts, or where we had a romantic first date. Such places cannot be duplicated in another country. In fact, identity and conservation in the physical environment become increasingly important even as the mobility of Singaporeans increases. So, these will play a more critical role in the way URA plans … This is why reinforcing “identity” is a key thrust of the Concept Plan 2001 … (The Minister for National Development, Mah Bow Tan, speaking to a URA Corporate Plan Seminar, 8 April 2002.)

By the 1990s, the government was worrying about the younger generation’s degree of attachment to Singapore as home, as emigration outflows escalated (thousands a year, UNESCO website) There was, and still is, recognition of a need to tie Singaporeans more emotionally to their land. The nature conservation cause has benefited from this desire of the government to build national identity through attachment to the land and a sense of place. Once again, a serendipitous merging of separate, sometimes chance, factors favoured another nature conservation campaign: the 2001 drive to preserve the Chek Jawa tidal mudflats on Pulau Ubin, an island off the north-east coast. Many believe that the government then, as with the Sungei Buloh case, just happened to be in a certain comfort zone where it felt able to cope with population projections, housing needs, and security issues off the coast where Chek Jawa was located (Interviews: 2006). But another key factor in the Chek Jawa success was increasing public access to the Internet, a democratizing force that has produced much more public involvement in decision making. Interactive websites with vivid colour photographs of Chek Jawa’s photogenic biological treasures were particularly powerful persuaders, together with conservationists’ mass-emailed invitations to public tours of the area. The Chek Jawa story owed much to the precedents set at Sungei Buloh but the two experiences were quintessentially different in nature, reflecting a generational transition and a more passionate sense of local ownership. Sungei Buloh, as already described, was a discreet, somewhat elite, operation, and also one that did not require the reversal of any important previously announced policy or plan. The Chek Jawa experience was the reverse. Just like Sungei Buloh, Chek Jawa began with one individual’s discovery: botanist nature guide and NSS member Joseph Lai found the site in 2001 on the remote easternmost tip of Pulau Ubin, while leading a nature walk. It proved to be a rich patchwork of five coastal and intertidal ecosystems.

3 Co-author Dr Geh Min was intimately involved in the Chek Jawa campaign, hence sourcing of material for this account derives largely from personal experience.

11 Singapore’s Natural Environment, Past, Present and Future

195

NSS then made discreet enquiries at a high level, meanwhile carefully recording Chek Jawa’s assets. But hopes of repeating the Sungei Buloh success crumbled when it became plain that Chek Jawa was slated for land reclamation within a year. However, public interest was mounting, stimulated by Web activity, the public walks beginning from late 2001, and extensive media coverage of the area, including clips of young children pleading for Chek Jawa to be saved. Ordinary Singaporeans who had shown no previous interest in Singapore’s natural heritage, visited the site in their thousands, eager to view it “before it’s too late,” and came away captivated by its tidal wonders – mangroves, crabs, molluscs, jelly-fish, anemones, starfish, sponges, corals and so on. Volunteer guides from NSS and NUS’ Raffles Museum of Biodiversity Research (RMBR) struggled to cope. As well, conservationist organizations and private individuals lobbied government, submitting photos and CDs depicting the site. This spontaneous mass response imbued the nature conservation movement with true political significance, and ultimately would cause planners and politicians to reverse an already announced blueprint for land reclamation and development, an unprecedented outcome. Responding to the public interest, at least three ministers – the Prime Minister himself (Goh Chok Tong), the Minister for the Environment (Lim Swee Say), and the Minister of National Development (Mah Bow Tan) – visited the site to see it for themselves, in late 2001. Following this, Minister Mah Bow Tan (MND) invited key NGO representatives and scientists to give their views within two weeks on how the impact of land reclamation on the Chek Jawa site could be mitigated. Key actors from NSS and RMBR, unaffiliated individuals, professional hydrologists, geographers and marine biologists, burned the midnight oil to meet the deadline. NSS submitted that there could be no mitigation of the impact on Chek Jawa’s fragile biodiversity; deferring the land reclamation project was the only solution. At the next meeting convened by Minister Mah, on 14 January 2002, the government’s decision to defer was announced. This dramatic moment was greeted with stunned silence at first; not in their wildest dreams had any of the conservationists present imagined that their campaign would actually succeed (an article that Ria Tan managed to place in Asian Geographic magazine about Chek Jawa had been tagged an “obituary” – RMBR/Chek Jawa website). Relief and jubilation followed. “Till today we still don’t know what were all the factors in play at Chek Jawa,” says second-generation environmentalist N. Sivasothi, Research Officer at NUS’ Raffles Museum of Biodiversity Research (RMBR) (Interview: 2006); “That we could actually change their minds was too big a hope then, we didn’t even dare to say it, though it was at the back of our minds.” The conservationist movement was aware that government’s commitment to preserve Chek Jawa was only for the next 10 years, or “as long as it is not needed for development” (Mah Bow Tan in Tan & Yeo, 2003), but the sense of achievement was considerable. In many ways, Singaporeans had “come home.” The ensuing positive vibrations have generated many new green NGOs, and reaffirmed the role of existing ones, such as NSS, in contributing to national identity

196

M. Geh and I. Sharp

and nation-building. Clearly, government was as pleased with this win-win situation as the conservationists: three subsequent keynote National Day speeches by the Prime Minister have cited Chek Jawa as an example of government’s response to civil society action. In one of these, on 20 August 2006, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong confirmed the impact of green civil society groups on the nation’s political life, and on its sense of identity: We have got people who care passionately about the environment. A few years ago, Tanjung Chek Jawa. They got organised and they persuaded Mah Bow Tan to save Tanjung Chek Jawa and persuaded the Cabinet too. But they continued to work. So, these are the ingredients of “heartware”. They are individual pieces, they are not all organised top-down plans but they show people who care, they show people who are doing things and they show people who will get together and will feel that Singapore is a place where I did these things and I belong because I contributed and I made it happen and I made it different. (Singapore Government Press Release, Media Relations Division, Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts.)

Unlike Sungei Buloh, this was an unstructured, decentralized and very “postmodern” campaign, with a bottom-up dynamic. Nonetheless, in one respect, the Chek Jawa saga bore a resemblance to the Sungei Buloh case. Most local conservationists are agreed (Interviews: 2006) that the lack of any direct confrontation between policy makers and the public was important in achieving final resolution. This enabled the government to emerge as a conservationist champion, rather than appearing to have been forced to give in to public and lobbying pressure. Said RMBR’s Sivasothi, “Our partner in encouraging activism is the Government itself now” (Interview: 2006).

11.4 11.4.1

Evolution – the Present and Future Outcomes

The trend to a more consultative land use planning regime was already underway before 2002, but has been enhanced since the Chek Jawa campaign. As stated in SGP 2012 (2006), public–private collaboration is now the norm: an example is the joint public–private management of visitors to Chek Jawa. Similarly, the extensive public consultation involved in the 2006 review of the government’s SGP 2012 is evident from the fact that an estimated 17,000 Singaporeans gave feedback during the process, and that more than 90% of the recommendations raised by the three 60-member Focus Groups convened were incorporated into the final Plan (MEWR website, SGP 2012 three-yearly Review). However, there is potential for future negative consequences resulting from these largely positive recent events, as seen from the conservationist perspective: First, government could over-react by developing nature to improve public access. Koolhaas (1995: 1081) has noted this: “Almost ominously, it even seems as

11 Singapore’s Natural Environment, Past, Present and Future

197

if nature will be the next project of development, throwing the mechanics of the tabula rasa into a paradoxical reverse gear: after development, Eden.” The Singaporean urge to use, optimize and plan all available land is well known; it has not been in the national character to leave things alone. Like Singaporeans, nature too may be required to do national service. Second, future threats to the environment may emanate not from politicians or developers, but rather from the people themselves as they come to identify with, own and use (love to death) local nature resources. Weekend crowds at BTNR, Pulau Ubin and Sungei Buloh (as many as 700 visitors on weekends at the latter facility) are already having some impact on delicate environments (Ho 1999: 165). To quote the SGP 2012 (2006: 13): With the twin demands of economic development and “back-to-nature” recreational activities putting enormous pressure on our natural heritage, the future holds formidable challenges. One of these is the dilemma of competing land use. The Nature Reserves are Singapore’s natural heritage and must be protected. Yet the public feels they should not be denied access to them.

To manage these competing demands, NParks has already set in place a protective Nature Recreational Masterplan. It will be a tall order: some authorities (including contributors to The Singapore Red Data Book produced by NSS, 1994) have suggested that 77% of Singapore’s remaining species are threatened, according to IUCN criteria.

11.4.2

The Future

Hence Singapore’s most pressing nature conservation need in future will be for public education in the appreciation and protection of this fragile resource, if its exploitation is to remain sustainable, as confirmed in SGP 2012 (2006: 14, 53). Conservationist lobbying will doubtless centre on the current lack of any formally legislated or mandatory Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) or Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) mechanism in planning and development processes, outside of “brown” industrial pollution issues. There is provision for the new NBRC to conduct Biodiversity Impact Assessment (BIA) but again the process lacks a legislative framework and transparency. There is also public consultation regarding environmental impact, at the second layer of planning below the Concept Plan/Green Plan level, within the framework of the detailed Development Guide Plans (DGPs), for each of 55 planning areas. The SGP 2012 (2006: 50) further states that development proposals affecting the 18 terrestrial nature areas (i.e. sites outside of the four gazetted nature reserves) that are listed in the Master Plan must give “special consideration” to their “existing biodiversity”. But these are not binding requirements. The government indeed has hedged its bets on the nature areas, stating in its SGP 2012 (2006: 53) that its target is to “Keep nature areas for as long as possible.” It has also stated that “future developments affecting some nature areas cannot be

198

M. Geh and I. Sharp

entirely precluded given that there could be other competing uses for such areas, particularly if they are of national or strategic interest” (Ho 1999: 163). An example of strategic issues that could arise unexpectedly is Indonesia’s recent curbing of sand and granite exports to Singapore’s booming construction industry, resulting in the Singapore government’s announcement that it may re-open the old granite quarry on Pulau Ubin, now a prime eco-tourism venue (“S’pore may reopen Ubin granite quarry”, Straits Times Interactive (STI) 10 April 2007; “Singapore looking to re-open granite quarry”, ChannelNews Asia 9 April 2007). The urgent search for new water sources could have similar consequences. The latest population projection (not a target, says government – Minister Mah Bow Tan, Budget 2007/Parliament, 27 February 2007) of 6.5 million within about 40 years, announced in February 2007, also implies additional pressure on land resources as yet not fully assessed by the conservationist movement, but already described as “depressing” by one environmental activist (Personal communication 2007). For the moment, the government is sticking to its reassuring message that no green land need be used to accommodate the expected population increase, although “We will need to optimise land use” (ibid, 2007). Dr Ho Hua Chew of the NSS Conservation Committee agrees that this is feasible; he sees unused reclaimed land and abandoned “brownfield” industrial or other urban sites as the alternative (Personal communication 2007). Ingeniously, the government has flagged not only building higher and reclaiming more land but also “building downwards, using subterranean space” (Minister Mah Bow Tan, Budget 2007/Parliament, 27 February 2007). Whether government will be able to maintain its original target of 0.8 hectares (2 acres) open green space per 1,000 population, premised on a 5.5-million population (the current level is 0.67 hectares or 1.6 acres) remains to be seen (URA 1991, 2001). As we have already shown, a certain convergence of government needs with conservationist needs is required for nature conservation actually to proceed. Francesch Huidobro’s concept of “disciplined governance” is instructive in this regard, suggesting that the government will continue to set the agenda, and also the perimeters demarcating the freedom of the conservation movement to express itself – she sees civil society in Singapore as co-opted by the state “while also retaining a limited space for semi-autonomous action” (Francesch Huidobro 2005: 106–107). Others have commented in a similar vein on the government’s power to set the agenda (see Kong 1994: 2–3). Imprecision in the recent SGP 2012 documents (Ministry of the Environment 2002, 2006) does hint at some official wavering on green land use policy right now, perhaps because of the uncertainties raised by an escalating population and a restructuring economy. The original SGP list of 19 nature areas in 1992 has not been repeated in SGP 2012 (Ministry of the Environment 2002, 2006) (Ho, personal communication September 2006); neither do they all recur in the 2003 URA Master Plan, hence uncertainty about their exact identity lingers. Dr Ho has also pointed out that there are no estimates of Singapore’s total land area in the 2003 Master Plan; no recent reference has been made to the original

11 Singapore’s Natural Environment, Past, Present and Future

199

SGP 1992 commitment that 5% of Singapore’s total land area, including any newly reclaimed land, would be allocated for nature conservation (this was below the 10% recommended by the IUCN). Within this 5%, the existing nature reserves accounted for 3%. Total land area statistics can be drastically altered by new land reclamation. The NSS has asked government for a 3% increase on the SGP 1992 commitment, to 8% of Singapore’s total land area for nature areas (NSS 2002: 6), because, it says, reclamation projects are likely to increase Singapore’s total land area by another 100 square kilometres, or 38.6 square miles. Singapore planners’ new focus on water bodies and marine-oriented lifestyles under the approximately S$37-million dollar (almost US$24.5-million) Active, Beautiful and Clean (ABC) programme 2006–2009 (STI 31 January 2007; Singapore Budget 2007 Expenditure Overview, MND), could also overshadow the needs of terrestrial nature reserves. Still not fully factored in by either the government or the NGOs is any possible impact of climate change on Singapore’s natural environment; and global warming could conceivably impinge on the above-mentioned marine lifestyle projects. Some idea of this impact may emerge in 2008 when the preliminary findings of a recently established multinational 14-man team at the NUS Tropical Marine Science Institute are released, pending their full report in 2009 on Singapore’s vulnerability to climate change (“S’pore team to study local impact of climate change”, STI 7 April 2007). Hence, in assessing the future of nature conservation in Singapore, we are left with little more solid to go on than government’s statement in SGP 2012 (2006) (Executive Summary: 13): “With the twin demands of economic development and ‘back to nature’ recreational activities putting enormous pressure on our natural heritage, the future holds formidable challenges. One of these is the dilemma of competing land use.”

11.4.3

Lessons

Nature can thus nurture an abiding sense of place. It can contribute to a sense of rootedness, to the love and affection for a nation by way of an affective bonding with the land. (Conservation Committee Chairman, Nature Society (Singapore), Dr Ho Hua Chew (1999: 171.)

Deriving lessons from the Singapore experience seems at first sight specious, since the country’s small size and style of government make its experiences unique. However, Singapore does offer a case study in the management of fragmented tropical forests, and is a model green city for the developing world. Tan, Lee, Wee and Foong have articulated this role (Ooi 1995: 197). Singapore’s SGP 2012 (2006) also emphasizes the contribution that Singapore can make as an environmental Research and Development centre. In the Asian context at least, there may be other lessons to take on board:

200

M. Geh and I. Sharp

• National identity and loyalty can be strengthened by developing ties with the land; hence nature conservation can be a political tool for governments. • Having very little land at one’s disposal – Singapore’s “advantage” – imposes the obligation of foresight and stringent management, to avoid squandering resources. (However, Singapore’s “land-starved” status is questioned by NSS’ Dr Ho Hua Chew, who says, “The notion of land scarcity is a relative matter. It is relative to our demands on it. Everything will be scarce if we subject it to excessive or unrealistic demands” – 1999: 175). • Even in poor countries, the early implementation of environmental planning and an enabling institutional and legal framework is crucial to the evolution of a sustainable land use policy that can integrate nature conservation and meet the demands for natural space that inevitably will arise from future generations. You cannot fix later what is not there. • Flexibility – willingness to review green plans and legislation constantly according to changing circumstances – should be a constant companion of governments. • For governments, consulting and partnering with civil society groups is more productive than distancing them; such groups often provide reservoirs of knowledge, ideas and energy that constructively complement government’s own resources. Bringing civil society on board minimizes conflict and may harvest a high level of community consensus for government. In short, civil society is an asset, not a threat.

11.5

The Globalization Factor

Being a citizen in an increasingly globalized world becomes meaningless sometimes when the place you were born in might likely not be the place where you die. … Politics without place is just talk. … Most people do need to feel a sense of belonging to their countries. For that, one needs ownership, but not in the material sense of having a title deed. That, anyone with the cash can accomplish. No, own it in a way that goes beyond the birth certificate, identity card or passport. It is about feelings that are invested in a place. (Straits Times Political Editor Zuraidah Ibrahim, Straits Times 5 August 2006, Singapore.)

Separation from Malaysia in 1965 deprived Singaporeans of a true hinterland; there has been an aching subconscious sense of loss ever since. This loss has impacted on Singaporeans’ sense of national identity. Many have asked themselves, can you have a real nation without a hinterland? Singapore is now redressing the balance, by allocating commercially valuable land to public and community gardens and preserving wilderness, thus recreating her own hinterland. Could the globe itself become Singapore’s hinterland, rendering Singapore’s own natural heritage irrelevant, or will that heritage acquire added rarity value, spurring Singaporeans to protect it even more forcefully? Where once Singapore’s need was to shuffle off her colonial fetters, in more recent times she has striven to reconcile her self-image as a global city with her base identity as an Asian tropical island. Globalization is one of the many challenges that confront both Singapore’s national identity and her natural heritage.

11 Singapore’s Natural Environment, Past, Present and Future

201

But what does the term “global city” mean? Is a global city really complete if it comprises no elements of local identity at all? Otherwise, a global city would just be one of many identical clones. Surely, a degree of local identity is not only a form of ballast against the impact of an increasingly globalized world, but also a characteristic that is integral to global identity itself? And a crucial part of that local identity must surely be a distinctive local biota. While Singapore shares many facets of her biota with the Southeast Asian region, she does host a degree of endemism. And she is fast creating her own distinctive version of tropical biodiversity. Whereas the great forest reserves of Malaysia and Indonesia remain external to the city, in smaller Singapore, the forest is not only very close to the city but is actually beginning to envelop it, via planned plantings and conservation programmes. Singapore has integrated nature, including the rain forest (e.g. BTNR), with her city, to become a “City in a Garden”. This may well be regionally and globally unique. Global citizenship is not new to Singapore, but the latest wave of globalization that her leaders are so keen to surf, may further erode her sense of national identity. Take for example, the ongoing deliberate importation of immigrant foreign talent, possibly with a weaker sense of Singaporean identity; currently, about a quarter of the total population is foreign (Department of Statistics 2006). Global citizenship brings responsibilities. Singapore’s wounded reaction (SGP 2012 (Ministry of the Environment 2002: 51) to a report (preliminary study for an Environmental Sustainability Index commissioned by the World Economic Forum (WEF), K. Samuel-Johnson 2000–2001) initially ranking her among the 10 worst countries (of 122) for environmental sustainability, revealed her concern for her global image and therefore gave hope for future stewardship of her biodiversity.

11.6

Conclusion – Less is More

To the extent that maps are ideological constructs that encourage an impulse to efface blank surfaces by colouring them in (Cooper 1994:152), the planners have left no space on the island unaccounted for. Singapore is already a fully conquered island in the imaginary, in that every foot of space is already assigned to a particular use, as signified by the multicolour coded planning maps. No space has been left to chance and even nature has to have the permission of the planning agencies to survive. (Chua Beng Huat 1997: 50)

The future will bring even greater pressure to bear on Singapore’s limited land bank. In the past, decisions on land use were very much driven by a sense of economic urgency and executed in a top-down fashion. Today, more dialogue and consultation have been incorporated into the planning process. But feedback may not forever be pro-environment: will future, even more urbanized generations one day say something like, “Never mind the forest, we’d rather have more roads for our cars”? The fundamental question is, will Singaporeans have the confidence to evolve their identity and to be a country, not just a city; to value their “island-ness” as the URA has put it, and their tropical geography, rather than aspire to the potential anonymity and homogeneity of physical and cultural globalization?

202

M. Geh and I. Sharp

As has been discussed, Singapore exists very much as a planned entity and if nature is to continue to survive, at least in the foreseeable future, it seems that it will have to be with the planners’ and politicians’ approval. It cannot survive by chance or by laisserfaire. But perhaps there could be a lighter touch, less micro-management. Sometimes, doing nothing – the planner’s and developer’s anathema – is the best form of action. The aesthetic of a Chinese painting values the spaces as much as, if not more than, the painted surfaces. Singapore’s nature areas should be regarded as the space that allows the whole to breathe and not as a blank canvas to be filled in.

References Brook BW, Sodhi NS, Ng PKL (24 July 2003) Catastrophic extinctions follow deforestation in Singapore. Nature 424: 420–423 Buruma I (12 June 1988) Singapore. New York Times Magazine, p 58 (cited Koolhaas 1995: 1083) Cantley N (1884) Report on the forests of the Straits Settlements. Singapore Printing Office, Singapore. (Cited Corlett RT (1995) The History of Bukit Timah Nature Reserve. The Gardens Bulletin Singapore, Supplement no 3. Singapore Botanic Gardens) Chua BH (1997) Political legitimacy and housing, stakeholding in Singapore. Routledge, London & New York Chuang SH (ed) (1973) Animal life and nature in Singapore. Singapore University Press, Singapore Corlett RT (1992) The ecological transformation of Singapore, 1819–1990. Journal of Biogeography 19: 411–420 Department of Statistics (various years) Yearbook of statistics. Singapore Francesch Huidobro, M del Mar (July 2005) A ‘disciplined governance’ approach to governmentNGOs relations: The structures and dynamics of environmental politics and management in Singapore. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Hong Kong (Department of Politics and Public Administration) Goh KS (1972) Population control: Singapore’s first decade of development. In: Goh KS (ed). The economics of modernization. Asia Pacific Press, Singapore, pp 150–253 Ho HC (1999) The place of nature in Singapore. In: Kwok KW, Kwa CG, Kong L, Yeoh B (eds) Our place in time, exploring heritage and memory in Singapore. Singapore Heritage Society, pp 156–177 Koh KL (2007) Singapore: from garden city to city in a garden – An aspect of sustainable development? Bayan vol v, pp 85–100, Simorgh Women’s Resource and Publication Centre, Lahore Kong L (1994) ‘Environment’ as a social concern: democratizing public arenas in Sojourn, Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia, 9(2): 277–287 Koolhaas R, Mau B (1995) Singapore songlines: Portrait of a Potemkin metropolis … or thirty years of Tabula Rasa. In: Koolhaas R, Mau BS, . Office for Metropolitan Architecture, Monacelli Press, New York, pp 1008–1089 Lee KY (2000) From Third World to First: The Singapore story 1965–2000, Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew. Times Media Private Limited, Singapore Lee SK (1995) Concept of the garden city. In: Ooi GL (ed), Environment and the city, Sharing Singapore’s experience and future challenges. Times Academic Press, The Institute of Policy Studies, Singapore, pp 129–148 Lim William SW (2002) Architecture, art, identity in Singapore, is there life after Tabula Rasa? Mah Bow Tan (2007) Parliamentary Debates, Official Report, 11th Parliament, Session 1, Vol 82. Sitting no 11, 27 February – Question Time, Minister for National Development to a question from MP Dr Lily Neo (Jalan Besar)

11 Singapore’s Natural Environment, Past, Present and Future

203

Malayan Nature Society (October 1987) A proposal for a nature conservation area at Sungei Buloh. Singapore Branch Malayan Nature Society (October 1990) Master Plan for the conservation of nature in Singapore. Singapore Branch Ministry for the Environment & Water Resources (2006) The Singapore Green Plan 2012. Singapore Ministry of the Environment (1992) The Singapore Green Plan: Towards a model green city. Singapore Ministry of the Environment (2002) The Singapore Green Plan 2012 (2002). Singapore Nature Society (Singapore) (January 2002). Feedback on the Singapore Green Plan 2012, pp 185–200 Samuel-Johnson K (December 2000–February 2001) An environmental scorecard. issues 2001: Trends and people to watch in the year ahead), Newsweek Special Edition, 24–25 Sharp I (2002) Nature Society (Singapore): A child of our own. In: Singam C, Tan CK, Ng T, Perera L (eds) Building social space in Singapore. The Working Committee, Select Publishing, Singapore, pp 53–61 Tan WK, Lee SK, Wee YC, Foong TW (1995) Urbanization and nature conservation. In: Ooi GL (ed), Environment and the city, sharing Singapore’s experience and future challenges. Times Academic Press, The Institute of Policy Studies, Singapore Turnbull CM (1989) A history of Singapore 1819–1988. Oxford University Press, Singapore Urban Redevelopment Authority (1991) Living the next lap – Towards a Tropical City of Excellence, Singapore Urban Redevelopment Authority (2001) Concept Plan 2001. Singapore Wee YC, Corlett RT (1986) The City and the forest, plant life in urban Singapore. Singapore University Press, Singapore Wheatley P (1954) Land use in the vicinity of Singapore in the eighteen-thirties. Malay. Journal of Tropical Geography 2: 63–66 Wong PP (1989) The transformation of the physical environment. In: Kernial Singh Sandhu and Paul Wheatley (eds) The Management of Success: The moulding of modern Singapore. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore, pp 771–787; cited Kong L 1994: 7

Interviews and personal communications – conducted by Ilsa Sharp Mr Richard Hale, former Vice-president, NSS; Advisory Council member, NSS, interview 24 November 2006 Dr Ho Hua Chew, Chairman, Conservation Committee, Nature Society of Singapore (NSS), interview 22 November 2006 Mr N. Sivasothi, Research Officer, Raffles Museum of Biodiversity Research (RMBR), Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore (NUS), interview 22 November 2006 Ms Ria Tan, Honorary Museum Associate, RMBR, Department of Biological Sciences, NUS; NGO activist, editor of Chek Jawa Guidebook 2003, interview 23 November 2006 Dr Wee Yeow Chin, botanist, former President NSS (personal communications 2006–2007)

Website resources Channel News Asia: www.channelnewsasia.com Chek Jawa campaign: http://chekjawa.nus.edu.sg http://chekjawa.nus.edu.sg/backgrd.htm – ‘From research to education’

204

M. Geh and I. Sharp

Government of Singapore www.gov.sg Ministry for Environment & Water Resources www.mewr.gov.sg Ministry of National Development www.mnd.gov.sg National Environment Agency http://appnea.gov.sg National Parks Board www.nparks.gov.sg National Biodiversity Reference Centre www.nbrcnparks.org Raffles Museum of Biodiversity Research rmbr.nus.edu.sg Statistics Singapore www.singstat.gov.sg Straits Times Interactive http://straitstimes.com Sungei Buloh Wetland Reserve www.sbwr.org.sg The Singapore Green Map www.street-directory.com/sec UNESCO Asia Pacific Migration Research Network Issues Paper From Singapore, www.unesco. org/most/apmrnw13.htm. Urban Redevelopment Authority www.ura.gov.sg

Abbreviations BIA – Biodiversity Impact Assessment done by NBRC; BTNR – Bukit Timah Nature Reserve; DGP – Development Guide Plan, a micro-planning document issued within the framework of Singapore’s Master Plan/Concept Plan; EIA – Environmental Impact Assessment; ERA – Environmental Risk Assessment; GNP – Gross National Product; HDB – Housing & Development Board; IUCN – International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources/World Conservation Union; MEWR – Singapore’s Ministry for the Environment & Water Resources; MND – Singapore’s Ministry of National Development; MNS – the Malayan Nature Society(1940–1993)/Malaysian Nature Society (1993-); NBRC – Singapore’s National Biodiversity Reference Centre, within NParks; NGO – NonGovernment Organisation; NParks – the National Parks Board, as reconstituted in 1996; NSS – the Nature Society (Singapore), created in 1992, formerly Malayan Nature Society (Singapore branch) 1954–1992; NUS – National University of Singapore; PAP – the People’s Action Party, Singapore’s ruling party in government since 1959; PRD – the Parks & Recreation Department (defunct), inside MND; PWD – the Public Works Department, inside MND; RMBR – the Raffles Museum of Biodiversity Research, in the Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore; SBWR – Sungei Buloh Wetland Reserve; SEC – the Singapore Environment Council, a quasi-NGO; SGP – Singapore Green Plan; STI – Straits Times Interactive; UNCED – the United Nations Conference on Environment & Development, or ‘Earth Summit’; UNDP – the United Nations Development Programme; URA – the Urban Redevelopment Authority, a statutory board of MND; WEF – World Economic Forum; WWF – the former World Wildlife Fund, now the World-Wide Fund for Nature.

Chapter 12

Conclusion: Beyond Sustainable Development? Belinda Yuen

Despite rapid urbanization, Singapore has increasingly integrated greening and sustainable development principles to maximize its environmental capital. Categorized as a “water-stressed” country, Singapore imports about 40% of its water needs. This has necessitated capacity planning for its water resources, including water demand management, specifically, a Water for All policy to conserve, value, and enjoy water (Ong 1999). Under that policy, Singapore has begun to promote the 3Rs reduce, reuse and recycle water by integrating and managing the complete water cycle, from source, collection, stormwater management, purification, and supply of drinking water to treatment of used water and turning that into NEWater. In the process, Singapore has diversified its freshwater supplies to include water from its local catchment, imported water from a neighbouring country (Johor, Malaysia), reclaimed water or NEWater (2003), and desalinated water from the sea (2005). What this and other reflections in this book serve to illustrate is that Singapore is restructuring towards sustainable development, driven by a commitment to investment and innovation. Singapore’s policies, programmes, and objectives on environmental sustainability have been presented at a world forum – the UN World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in 2002, and more recently, during the 14th Session of the UN Committee on Sustainable Development in 2006, where it shared its views on energy use and climate change. The overarching aim of these policies and programmes is to make Singapore a “better place to live”. As reviewed by the various chapters in this book, the strategy is seemingly bringing the desired results, though challenges remain. Mercer HR Consultants has recently ranked Singapore the best city to live in in Asia while others are describing Singapore as “becoming the Zurich and Monaco of Asia” (speech by Minister for National Development, 10 April 2007). The quest to enrich livability is a major development theme of many cities around the world (Brotchie et al. 1995; Partners for Livable Communities 2000). As often, it would require sustainable

School of Design and Environment, National University of Singapore, 4 Architecture Drive, 117566, Singapore, Republic of Singapore, e-mail: [email protected]

T.-C. Wong et al. (eds.), Spatial Planning for a Sustainable Singapore, 205–209 © Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2008

206

B. Yuen

development, and place-based strategies to create a positive and high quality image of the city (Harvey 1989; Paddison 2001). For reasons, as recounted by the contributors to this volume, Singapore too cannot afford to ignore sustainable development. At the crux is the city’s territorial configuration, and ambition to be a global player. As globalization deepens, the role of cities will change further. As Florida (2002) argues, the cities of the future are those that manage to attract and keep creative workers and entrepreneurs. In his analysis of what would attract the creative class to the city, Florida (2002) offers six growth magnets that help enhance place quality: a “thick” labour market, lifestyle, social interaction, social diversity, authenticity, and identity. Creative workers, Florida (2002) claims, value easy access to natural environments, environmental heritage, diversity, and livability of a place. Against the global trend, Singapore, as illustrated through the papers in this volume, has taken steps over the past decade to strengthen sustainable development, and create an attractive, vibrant city. Guided by its long-term Concept Plan, the keystone to Singapore’s sustainable development lies in improving quality of life (1991), and place identity (2000).

12.1

The Essence of Sustainable Development

The shift towards sustainable development raises consideration about nature in the city. Every city offers some opportunity for designing with nature (Alexander et al. 1977). As Dale, Geh and Sharp argue in this volume, under a post-independence policy of economic and urban growth, Singapore’s built environment is increasingly being designed with nature to increase diversity of land use, stimulate community stakeholding, and create that feel of a city in a garden. Tree-lined streets, parks, green corridors, protected natural areas, and more recently, rooftop and vertical greenery represent sequestration of nature in the rapid restructuring of the compact built environment. More than aesthetics and recreational benefits, the green landscaping is increasingly seen to be necessary for reducing ambient temperatures and energy demands. In this regard, a planning tool, the green plot ratio, is being developed to quantify and balance the amount of greenery in development projects. Maintaining a green city involves not just provision of green spaces, but also sustained prevention, remediation, and redevelopment of polluted areas as demonstrated by Chou, Dale, See Toh and Ong’s chapters. The aim, as Dale explains, is to promote Singapore as a working model city of sustainability. This has fuelled policies of sustainability in various urban land uses. The innovations in accessfocused and mobility-focused urban transport, and urban consolidation around public transport hubs, for example, are detailed by Barter, while Guillot, Tan and Wong explicate the Singapore high-rise housing model. At a time when cities are revisiting high-rise as the housing option for compact development, Singapore’s widespread vertical living, particularly what Guillot describes as its multi-scale housing recycling process present compelling analysis and reading.

12 Conclusion: Beyond Sustainable Development

207

The quest of sustainability is, however, never easy. To achieve long-term environmental goals, as Dale describes, requires the combined efforts of government or public planning, infrastructure programmes and the capital interests at work in the economy. Among others, it calls for a holistic approach to environmental sustainability which, as Chou writes in this book, involves greater sensitivity, and consideration of natural habitats as an integral part of the natural environment. The narrative of natural environment in the city is widely documented and requires no repetition (Kaplan and Kaplan 1989; Sherlock 1990; Low et al. 2005). Suffice to note that to improve the appearance and safety of the urban environment, Sherlock (1990) has advocated a minimum level of open space provision: every urban district needs one substantial park with plenty of forest trees, and an area of grass large enough to survive universal use, and the provision of formal recreational spaces in every neighbourhood. Jacobs (1965), however, discounts the notion of parks as lungs as science fiction. She argues that this thinking has led to settlement dispersal, which in turn leads to greater use of cars, and to the production of more carbon monoxide in the atmosphere. Managing such risks has taken several cities towards integrating the environment into land use planning, and returning to the virtues of land use mix and multifunctional urban development (Elkin et al. 1991; Aldous 1992; Landry 2000). Integrated land use planning, as See Toh and Ong argue in their chapter on sustainable industrial development in Singapore, provides for a compactness that encourages greater land optimization, social interaction, while at the same time conserve resources. Increasingly, mixed use development solutions are being emphasised to create opportunities to enjoy a more natural environment, and thematic clusters of live-work-play-learn in the city. As with experiences elsewhere, many of those thematic clusters of economic activities are constituted in eco-sensitive developments, including eco-industrial parks, and conservation buildings. The key feature of the eco-industrial parks is the practice of 3Rs such as the “closed loop zero waste” environment, energy efficient architecture, and district cooling. Most of the city’s remaining 19th century shophouse buildings, such as those along Singapore River, and other historic districts of Singapore are conserved, and reinvented for culture, amusement, recreation, and entertainment activities. As Dale, Low and Wong trace in this volume, from the mid-1980s onwards, a new dimension of arts, culture, and entrepreneurial urbanism has been added to promote consumption-based economic development in Singapore. As Harvey (1989), Hannigan (1998), and many others have pointed out elsewhere, a common strategy of such development is the creation and expansion of new cultural, leisure, and consumption-oriented spaces in once abandoned old areas and buildings. Against the increasing identity crisis brought about by globalising influences, the old buildings with their traditional and unique architectural design present “signifying precincts” that offer place identity generators (Evans 2003; Hutton 2004). The desire for place identity and image enhancement has also witnessed the introduction of new-build multi-functional arts, resort, and entertainment spaces in Singapore’s gentrified downtown area. These multi-functional patternings further reinforce the implementation of sustainable development embodied in Singapore’s Concept Plan.

208

12.2

B. Yuen

Climate Change and Future Challenges

Singapore has a strong commitment to economic development that in practice takes precedence over other considerations, and may dilute sustainable development principles. This dilution tendency which manifests itself in the spread of urbanization, the erosion of agricultural land, and threatened green spaces amplifies the challenge of urbanity. More recently, the city as with the rest of the world has been looking at the unavoidable impacts of climate change. Climate change is taking priority. In April 2006, Singapore acceded to the Kyoto Protocol. The government is commissioning studies to better understand the impacts of climate change on Singapore. At the same time, government agencies are tasked to work together to establish national systems to actively monitor and manage vulnerabilities, take necessary precautionary measures, including reducing energy consumption, and improving energy conservation and efficiency in all sectors. Singapore has adopted a national climate change strategy with action on three levels: internationally, to support international actions to mitigate climate change; regionally, to share climate-friendly practices and technologies with countries in the region; and domestically, to play its part by taking actions to reduce domestic emissions. A key action on the domestic front is to empower and engage the local communities in climate change. Increasingly, people’s role in planning and development are acknowledged. Besides raising public awareness and participation on the issue of climate change, to pass on best practices, the Green Mark, and Energy Smart labelling schemes have been introduced in 2005 to recognize new buildings that are designed with environmentally friendly features. To incentivise business, building owners can apply for assistance to conduct energy audits. A sum of S$10 m has been allocated for this purpose under the government’s energy efficiency improvement assistance scheme. On a broader scale, as stated by the UK Royal Town Planning Institute News (30 March 2007), planning can help to mitigate and adapt climate change. As with European cities, Singapore planners are looking at creating sustainable and energy-efficient towns and housing estates. To all intents, the strategies are wide-ranging, covering both demand management and supply regulation. Going forward, the policy challenge for Singapore remains that of a nation with no indigenous energy and limited water resources. Specifically, it has to ensure that its energy supply is not just affordable and reliable, but also provided and used in a sustainable manner (Singapore’s National Climate Change Strategy Consultation Paper, 2006:43). National and urban policy mechanisms are accordingly needed to conserve, protect, and enhance resource usage, and minimise the interference of urban development with the ecological system. A long-standing argument of the sustainability agenda is that cities will prosper or wither according to how they deal with the issue of livability (Partners for Livable Communities 2000). In this spirit, the Singapore-focused discussion in this book reminds us of the possible action that cities might take to promote the redevelopment of obsolete inner city quarters, and place-making of a culturally appealing, innovative, and dynamic urban fabric while

12 Conclusion: Beyond Sustainable Development

209

creating more local accountability, tackling resources limitation, and strengthening sustainable development. Continued progress on this front demands rigorous monitoring, impact assessment, and more research to promote positive outcomes.

References Aldous T (1992) Urban villages. Urban Villages Group, London Alexander C, Ishikawa S, Silverstein M (1977) A pattern language. Oxford University Press, New York Brotchie J, Berry M, Blakely E, Hall P, Newton P (eds) (1995) Cities in competition: Productive and sustainable cities for the 21st century. Longman Australia, Melbourne Elkin T, McLaren D, Hillman M (1991) Reviving the city: Towards sustainable urban development. Friends of the Earth, London Evans G (2003) Hard-branding the cultural city, from Prado to Prada. Journal of Urban and Regional Research 27(2): 417–440 Florida R (2002) The rise of the creative class and how it’s transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life. Basic Books, New York Hannigan J (1998) Fantasy city. Routledge, London Harvey D (1989) The condition of postmodernity. Blackwell, Oxford Hutton TA (2004) The new economy of the inner city. Cities 21(2): 89–108 Jacobs J (1965) The death and life of great American cities. Pelican, London Kaplan R, Kaplan S (1989) The experience of nature. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA Landry C (2000) The creative city: A toolkit for urban innovators. Earthscan, London Low S, Taplin D, Scheld S (2005) Rethinking urban parks. University of Texas Press, Austin Ong HS (1999) An overview of Singapore’s water supply. In: Foo AF, Yuen B (eds) Sustainable cities in the 21st century. National University of Singapore, Singapore Paddison R (2001) (ed) Handbook of urban studies. Sage, London Partners for Livable Communities (2000) The livable city: Revitalizing urban communities. McGraw-Hill, New York Sherlock H (1990) Cities are good for us: The case for high densities, friendly streets, local shops and public transport. Transport 2000, London

Index

A Amsterdam Ijburg, 151–152 ASEAN, 50 urban planning, 3–5 Asia-Pacific region fundamental change in, 23–24

B Batam Industrial Park, 50–51 Bintan industrial park, 50 Biopolis environmental technologies and practices implemented, 129 Boat Quay, 86–87 British urban planning tools, 18

C Canada Centre for Sustainable Transportation, 98 Casino, 74–75 Central business districts, 19, 59–79 aspirations for ascent towards global city, 70–72 casino as planned entertainment machine, 74–75 changing functions, 60–63 conventional theory of economics, and, 72–73 evolution, 59–60, 61–62 financial services, 67 “free trade”, and, 72 functional differentiation, 66–67 global market forces, and, 60 “humanizing economic relations”, 76 integrated resort, 59–79

integrated resort, aim of, 73–74 key actors in land use planning process, 70 “knowledge-intensive” spaces, 74 land use planning, 59–79 local Singapore tourism, 64–66 Marina Bay. See Marina Bay merger of financial and leisure services, 62–63 New York, 60–61 post-modern dimension, 76 rationale of integrated resorts, 63–67 rise in global tourism, and, 63–64 strategies to render more attractive, 62 sustainability, 59–79 sustainability paradigm, 76 sustainable economic development, 72–75 sustainable social development, 72–75 total expenditure of visitors 1994–2003, 65 tourism and sustainable development, 73–74 tourism: global trend, 63–64 towards knowledge-intensive economy, 66–67 urban tourism business district, 62–63 Chek Jawa, 171, 194–196 Clarke Quay, 87–88 Climate change, 208–209 Colonialism Singapore city centre, and, 32 Concept Plan, 36–37 Copenhagen Orestad, 151 Cyberjaya, 4

D Development guide plans (DGPS), 26

211

This page intentionally blank

212 E Electronic City of Bangalore, 4 Environmental quality concern about, 27

F Free trade zones, 19

G Gambling, 74–75 Garden city, 151–167 adjustment mechanisms, 156 aspirations of post-industrial society, 163–164 building regulations, 162 Bukit Timah Condominium Belt, 159 comparison of condominium and public housing developments 1980–2002, 166 condominium as eco-architecture, 165–166 Design Guidelines Waiver Committee, 165 East Coast Condominium Belt, 159 extending vertical living through privatization, 157–159 extension of vertical living to middle class, 157–158 green landscaping, 160–162 growth of condominium units, 166 Howardian concept, 153–155 increase in construction of condominium, 158–159 meaning, 153–154 micro planning schemes, 162 “modernist dream”, 155–156 point block building, 155 Pungoll 21, 163–164 Queenstown, 154 reality of Singapore, and, 154 reconceptualizing HDB heritage, 163–164 recycling condominium formula, 161–162 recycling process, 156–164 Rivergate development, 165 Sentosa Cove, 164 sustainable development as multidimensional recycling process, 156–157 sustainability of urban figure, 151–167 Tanjong Rhu, 164 urban design work, 160–161 vertical living, and, 151–167 verticality and greenery, 155–156 verticality of building, 157–159 West Coast Condominium Belt, 159

Index Global cities urban planning in, 2–3 Global city as a project, 17–21 urban basic tools for modern city-state, 17–21 Globalization influence of, 5 national identity, and, 200–201 role of cities, and, 206

H Hyderabad Knowledge Park 4

I Integration issue and challenge importance of, 24–25

J Johor Strait, 173–174 Jurong Island, 127–129 cluster development, 128 condominium concept, 128–129

K Kallang Basin, 179 Kuala Lumpur Multimedia Supercorridor, 4

L Labrador shore, 173 Las Vegas Sands, 68–70 Legal framework revision of, 23

M Malayan Nature Society, 189–190 Marina Bay, 61–79 integrated resort, 61–62 land use plan, 68–70 Las Vegas Sands Proposal, 68–70 planning of integrated resort, 67–72 proposed financial centre, 71 proposed integrated resorts, 71 Revised Concept Plan, 68 Marina Bay Sands, 54–55 Marine environment, 169–182 balance between economic activities and environmental quality maintenance, 181

Index bioactive compounds isolated from mucus of hard coral, 177 case studies of sustainability, 177–179 challenges, 173–177 Chek Jawa, 171 coastal development, 169–170 container port built on reclaimed land, 170 development, 170–172 economic valuation of natural resources, 174–175 EIA process, 171 environmental groups, 171–172 habitat loss, 172 holistic approach, 170 impacts, 172–174 innovative approaches, 180–181 intrinsic value of natural heritage, 175 islands and reefs restricted to visitors, 180 Johor Strait, 173–174 Kallang Basin, 179 Labrador shore, 173 management, 170–172 mangroves, 176 minimization of loss and degradation, 175–176 nature of, 176–182 opportunities for use, 176 Pasir Ris Park, 179 reef habitat degradation, 173 role of, 169 seashore profiles 172–173 sediment, 181 Semakau landfill, 177–179 shipping, 180 Singapore River, 179 species diversity, 174 sustainability, 169–182 utilization of marine resources, 180 value of natural habitats, 174–175 vessel arrivals, 169 Model city Singapore as, 28 MRT/LRT integration, 26 Mumbai-Pune Knowledge Corridor, 18

N National Green Plan, 6–7 National identity, 183–205 achievements, 193 changing attitudes to green issues, 193 Chek Jawa, 194–196

213 civil society, 192–193 climate change, 199 colonial experience, 185–186 conservationism, 187 conservationist needs, 198 curbing the “tropical beast” from within, 184 evolution, 196–200 exports, 185 external factors, 188–189 from jungle to garden, 184–185 future developments, 197–199 Garden City concept, 187–188 globalization factor, 200–201 government’s role: greening a nation, 186–187 “indigenous tropicality”, 183 internal factors, 189–190 international community, role of, 188–189 lessons from Singapore experience, 199–200 limited land bank, 201 Malayan Nature Society, 189–190 Ministry of National Development, 186 new players change script, 190–191 pioneer greening budget, 187 plantation crops, 185 population projection, 198 post-colonial experience, 185–196 public consultation, 196–197 role of catalytic NGO, 189–190 strategic issues, 198 Sungei Buloh, 191–192 traders, 185 transients, 185 “Tropical City of Excellence”, 184 Netherlands Ring City, 152 New York Central Business District, 60–61

O Olympic Games, 4 One-North, 129–130 biomedical hub of Singapore, 129–130 Oslo Bjorvika, 151

P Pasir Ris Park, 179 Planning for the future, 21–23

214 Political continuity, 22 Public housing, 20–21, 135–150 asset enhancement scheme through estate renewal strategies, 143 blocks, 147–148 Central Provident Fund, 137–138 commercialization of HDB, 141–142 compact pattern, 145 comprehensive new town planning, 145–146 Concept Plan, 146 “design & build” model, 144 design of new towns, 146 economic elements, 141–142 economic sustainability, 141–144 environment-driven principles, 145 environmental sustainability, 144–148 estate management, 141 executive condominium, 144 financial mechanism, 137–138 graying population, 140–141 high-density living, 135–136 Housing and Development Board, 136 interim upgrading programme, 143 Land Acquisition Act, 137 legislative provisions, 148–149 legislative support, 136–137 lower-income groups, 137 Natsteel Ltd, 142 neighbourhood, 147 new town, 146–147 1960 to 1970, 139 1970 to 1978, 139 1978 to 1984, 139 1984 to 1990, 140 partial privatization of HDB, 142 phases of development, 138 planning of new towns, 146 precincts, 147–148 Public Housing Programme, 136 rejuvenation, 140–141 renewal, 140–141 rental flats, 138 selective en-bloc redevelopment scheme, 143–144 social sustainability, 136–141 spatial distribution 2003, 147 studio apartment, 144 sustainable housing form and development, 135–150 units, 148 upgrading, 140–141 Pungoll 21, 163–164

Index R Rajaratnam, S. “global city” strategy, 18–19 Re-Asianization policy need to address, 26–27 Ring City, 152–153 Netherlands, 152 Rivergate development, 165 Robertson Quay, 88

S Semakau landfill, 177–179 Sentosa Cove, 164 Seoul Media Valley High-Tech Development Corridor, 4 Singapore economic-centred national planning programme, 5 Marina Bay, 5 model of sustainability planning, 6 National Green Plan, 6–7 “park connector” system, 5 search of status as global city, 5–7 Sentosa Island, 5 Singapore city centre, 31–57 air-conditioning, 52 Area Licensing Scheme (ALS), 40–41 ASEAN, 50 building design, 53 built environment, 35 colonialism, and, 32 comparison with other Asian cities, 49 Concept Plan, impact of, 36–37 conservation, 43–46 crises, 47 cultural sustainability, 43–46 culture, 34–35 developments, 33–46 disabled, access for, 42 ecological footprint, 51 economic globalization, and, 54 economic restructuring, 50 Economic Review Committee, 47–48 economic transformation, 48 Electronic Road Pricing (ERP), 40–41 energy conservatism, 52–53 energy consumption, 51–52 energy, pollution and regional cooperation, 50–53 entertainment, 34–35 environmental challenges, 56 ETTV, 53

Index evolution of, 32 external impacts, 46–50 future developments, 55–56 garden city concept, 36 government, role in transformation, 33 high-technology society, 48 housing, 33–34 imported ecological capacity, 51 increased travel demand, 43 industrialization, 46–47 interdependence of culture, identity and commercial tourism, 45–46 land acquisition, 41–42 land and labour costs, 48 LRT, 41–43 managed transportation system, 42–43 Marina Bay Sands, 54–55 “Master Plans”, 37 MRT, 41–43 National Green Plan, 36 natural gas, 52 overall planning guidelines, 35 pedestrian movement, 42 planning standards, 53 population density, 33 prestige projects, 49 production and use of energy, 51–52 public housing estates, 34 public transport, 41–43 regional cooperation, 49 rent control, 45 restructuring of economy, 34 retail shopping, 34 shophouse environments, 43–44 social and economic policies, 47 SS 530, 53 sub-regional cooperative framework, 48–49 sustainable development, 31–57 tourism, 34 tourist industry, 44, 54 traffic, 40–43 transport usage, 52 tree planting, 36 URA sale of sites to private sector, 35–36 urban scale, 49–50 Vehicle Quota System (VQS), 40 waterfront city in a garden, 55 world, and, 46–53 Singapore Concept Plan, 7–8 economic strategy, and, 18–19 effects, 18 innovation in, 23–25 principles of spatial distribution, 20

215 reputation, 7 sustainability planning, and, 7–8 Singapore Green Plan, 27–28 Singapore River, 37–40, 79–92, 179 al fresco dining, 89 Boat Quay, 86–87 Clarke Quay, 87–88 Development Guide Plan 1994, 83 development mix, 89 easy public access, 90–91 far-sighted planning, 81–83 government agencies, role of, 82 Government Land Sales programme, 84 history, 79–81 land use plans, 39 leveraging on private-public-people sector synergies, 83–85 life cycle, 37–38 maintaining water quality, 85–86 mixed use encouraging, 89 night lighting, 84–85 Orang Laut, 80 piracy, 80 pivotal historic role, 91 pollution, 37–39, 81 promenade, 90 public consultation, 83–84 redevelopment, 81–83 restoration of historic fabric as character-giving asset, 86–91 six pistons, 81–91 six strategies for sustainability, 79–92 statistics, 38 three development zones, 82 tongkangs, 37–38 traffic, 39, 90 tree planting, 84 visionary leadership, 81–83 water margin, 79 waterfront settlements, 79 Spatial arrangement holistic and innovative machine, as, 20 Spatial planning for sustainability objective, 2–3 statutory boards, as, 22 Strategy for World Metropolis, 25–28 Structural continuity, 22–23 Sungei Buloh, 191–192 Sustainable development climate change, 208–209 conservation, 207 Energy Smart Scheme, 208 essence of, 206–207 Green Mark Scheme, 208

216 Sustainable development (cont.) holistic concept, 4 integrated land use planning, 207 long-term environmental goals, 207 maintaining green city, 206 meaning, 31, 96 policy change, 208 Sustainable industrial development, 113–133 Action Programme Committees, 121 approaches, 123–127 case studies, 127–130 cluster concept, 125 cost and operational efficiencies, 125 environmental considerations, 125 comprehensive planning system for whole of Singapore, 123–124 Concept Plan, 119 concepts, 123–127 early strategy, 114 eco-industrial park concept, 126 economic success, 130 environmental protection, 120–121, 131 FDI, 130 functional and sustainable industrial master plan, 124 gaps in, 131–132 high standard of living, 131 Industrial Funding Agency, 123 industrial land, 119–121 industrial symbiosis, 126 Industry Investment Promotion Agency, 122 infrastructure coordination for availability, quality and reliability, 127 investment promotion programme, 115 JTC Corporation, 116, 120 JTC Corporation, physical planning by, 118–120 Jurong Island, 127–129 labour-intensive industries, 114–115 live-work-play-learn concept, 126 long-term physical planning, 118–120 Manpower Training and Development Agency, 123 meaning, 113 Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources, 120–121 National Environmental Agency, 120–121 ONE-North, 129 petrochemical hub, 127–129 phasing strategies, 124–125 pollution control, 120–121 recommendations, 132 Research and Statistics Department, 122

Index shared infrastructure, 126 shared supporting services, 126 Singapore’s economy from the 1960s to 1990s, 116 Singapore’s experience, 130–132 Singapore’s framework, 117–123 Singapore’s industrial transformation 1960–2005, 115 social benefits, 131 Standards and Quality Agency, 122 strategic planning by EDB, 118 supporting governmental agencies, 121–123 system of strategic planning and implementation, 113–133 Trade Development Board, 122 UNIDO’s definition, 132–133 United NationsAgenda 21, 113 Urban Redevelopment Authority, physical planning by, 118–120 WMRAS, 131 Sustainability planning and its theory and practice, 2–13

T Tanjong Rhu, 164 Tropical City of Excellence, 25

U UN Committee on Sustainable Development 2006, 205 UN World Summit on Sustainable Development 2002, 205 Urban development catalyst for growth, as, 24 Urban innovation constraint, as, 17–29 tool for global change, as, 17–29 Urban planning export of expertise, 27 global cities, in, 2–3 new trends in Asia, 3–5 Urban renewal, 21 Urban sprawl, 151 Urban transport, 95–112 access focus, 97 air pollution, 106 aspiring to be world class, 107 balancing objectives, 108 bicycle policy, 109 car ownership restraint, 103–104 coincidental resemblance to sustainable transport, 107–109

Index congestion, 105 deliberate slowing of traffic growth, 102 demand for cars, 101 developmental approach, 106 differences between sustainable transport and Singapore’s priorities, 102–104 energy thrift, 106 evolutionary processes, 98 fossil fuel, 96 level of motorization, 99–100 long-term perspective, 97–98, 110 low car use, 98 low impact system, 99–100 mobility focus, 97 motivations in policy priorities, 104 movement-related indicators, 97 multi-dimensional approaches, 98–99 national-level spatial constraints, 107 pathways, 109 policies, 100–101 progressive strategy, 101–102 public transport improvements, 101 rationales for key choices, 104–109 reasons behind key policy choices, 105–107 road deaths, 103 road-related priorities, 103 road space arguments, 105 SCP project, 100–101

217 Singapore as examplar of sustainable development, 99–104 space constraints, 110 spatial strategy for urban development, 106–107 successful system across various dimensions, 101–102 sustainability, 95–112 sustainable, dimensions of success in defining, 97 sustainable pathway well entrenched, whether, 102 sustainable transport as low-impact transport, 96 “sustainable transport metropolis”, 95 “traffic, mobility, access” framework, 108

W Water policy, 205 World Metropolis functions and requirements, 28 planning on island-city scale, 17–29

Y Yangtze pollution, 85–86