Urban Governance and Smart City Planning

Lessons from Singapore

Zaheer Allam

• Publisher: Emerald Publishing Limited
• Year: 2020
• ISBN:
  9781839821066
• Topic: Politique et relations internationales
• Subtopic: Politique publique

In a world characterised by rapid urbanisation it is increasingly difficult to devise urban governance models which are resilient, safe and inclusive, and that also preserve the environment. This book takes Singapore, a leader in this field, as a case study, looking at its successes in urban governance and smart city planning.
Through the lens of environmental sustainability, the author examines Singapore's recent adoption of technological tools, which have led to increased efficiency and performance, and have also supported its economic ambitions. The book unveils a unique and critical insight into Singapore's approach. Considering the historical, political and technological context, the author shares the techniques and key projects that have contributed to the all-important improvement of liveability levels in the city state.

1

The Rise of Singapore: An Urban Perspective

Abstract

This introductory chapter sets the scene by introducing the island city-state of Singapore from a historical standpoint and expands on its economical ascension as a result of its strong political governance structure. This chapter also highlights how the role of the urban form has gained from this perspective. Singapore's strategic geographic location played a pivotal part in boosting its role in trade, both regionally and internationally, hence enabling the country to assert a strong geopolitical position and grow economic stronghold. This helped the country to successfully invest in its urban fabric, and is now a world leader in regards to high liveability standards.

Keywords: Singapore; economic resilience; urban history; political economy; urban planning; development

Introduction

Singapore is a small country, and can be termed as a city, both in terms of size and population. Singapore also carries a rich and vibrant history (Crinson, 2017; Tan, Chuah, & Luu, 2018), which can be paradoxically summed up through despair and massive triumph. Throughout history, Singapore's strategic position on the global map has rendered it a target to the earliest colonial and imperial powers, especially in regard to trade. Singapore eventually became a critical point for the British Empire from which it could access merchant from the larger Asian regions for trade (Findlay & O'Rourke, 2007). Furthermore, the British used Singapore, which was then just a port, as one of its control point for its broader agenda of conquering what Lloyd (1996) calls the Burmese coastline. By capturing such areas, the colony was assured of an expansive trade route covering almost the entire South Eastern Asia. This port as Findlay and O'Rourke (2007) explain was so significant to the British for the aforementioned objectives, such that they were ready to defend and protect it at any cost.

But, as Yong (2019) explains, the history of Singapore and its trading prowess did not start with the landing of the British. Before their arrival, Singapore was already an active trading point and widely engaged with its counterparts in flourishing trade and commerce. However, it was the developments started out by the British that brought about the impetus that marked the beginning of Singapore as a bustling port city, which has maintained its attractiveness as a trading centre to date. But, again, its standing today has little to do with the colonial administrations, but every ounce of success can be credited to the Singaporean and the sound leadership that took over after the departure of the colonialists.

Indeed, by the time the country gained independence, it was so crowded by numerous challenges: massive corruption, pollution, poverty, poor housing, lack of clean water and little infrastructural investments, amongst others (OECD, 2011; Quah, 2017). Unknown to many people, the fortunes of Singapore started to change after Lee Kuan Yew (LKY); the country's first prime minister took over the reins of leadership. From a vast ocean of literature, it is recorded how Prime Minister LKY proposed strong, quantifiable and workable measures that were geared towards uplifting the livelihood and lifestyle of all the inhabitants of Singapore. Today, Singaporeans rightfully take great pride in this uproar. Such pride, as expounded by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Singapore (2018), emanates from the fact that the country was ranked amongst the most competitive economies globally, due to its very promising and sustainable environment.

Such high standings are based on the practicability of the measures that were agreed upon by LKY, his government and the entire country. And, noting that Singapore is just a small country (approximately 719 km²) hosting only 5.7 million people, the measures taken were oriented on a city environment. The main reason for viewing the country as a city is that the country is not endowed with any tangible resources, aside from its position as port city (Civil Service College & Centre for Liveable Cities, 2014). However, unlike in most urban cases, Singapore cannot rely on hinterlands of its own to support the challenges it faces. Therefore, Singapore found itself treating neighbouring countries like Malaysia and China as its hinterlands (Tan et al., 2018; Wee, 1995). For instance, Malaysia is the source of Singapore's clean water, though at a price, while China has been very instrumental in providing numerous resources, especially food and building materials as explained by Kolesnikov-Jessop (2010). According to Chye (2014), the measures that LKY initiated revolved around making the country a leader in economic competitiveness, environmental sustainability and liveability status. And, as of the current ranking, those initiatives have been achieved. The Economist Intelligence Unit (2018) ranked Singapore 11th in Asia in terms of liveability.

In regard to economic competitiveness, the country holds the top position, beating economies such as the United States and Hong Kong amongst other global economic giants (IMD, 2019). Pertaining to environmental sustainability, a 2018 report by Environmental Performance Index (EPI) (Environmental Performance Index, 2019) places the country at position 49 out of 180 countries globally. Noting its initial problems with the environment, notably the massive pollution of the Singapore River, the country's ranking is commendable as it holds the leading position in terms of water resource sustainability. From the report, it also ranks at the third position in regard to air quality and takes the first position in respect to household solid fuels use and also the first in terms of household sanitation.

In terms of liveability ranking, basing on factors like infrastructure, education, culture and environment, healthcare and social stability, the country ranks 37 as of 2018, but stands as the most liveable location for East Asian Expats, a position it has held for the past 14 years (Chan, 2018; The Economist Intelligence Unit, 2018). These rankings are credited to the country's effort to improve safety, hence considerably reducing the crime rate (Gallup, 2018; Singapore Police Force, 2016, 2017, 2018). It is also credited for its good and robust infrastructure development as well as its efficient public service. From the very beginning, the Singaporean leadership was based on corruption intolerance, and anyone reported to engage in the vice is punished severely (Yew, 2015b). The public service is also guided by other principles in the likes of pragmatism, commitment to sound institution, community participation and open to working with the markets. Furthermore, the country is guided by Singapore's Liveability Framework (Chye, 2014; Civil Service College & Centre for Liveable Cities, 2014), which outlines the baseline for master planning and the urban governance, which are applied in a strict manner. H. Han (2017) showcases that the master plan encapsulates issues like housing, community development, transportation sector, the economy, recreation and identity that target to enrich the liveability status of the Singaporeans.

Singapore as the Ideal Case Study for Urban Regeneration

The scale of Singapore brings about a compelling element of interest. First, as noted above, the country is small, and its size is comparative to that of a city. In perspective to scale, according to the United Nations (2016), there are approximately 31 megacities globally that host more than 10 million people and these are by far more populous than Singapore, yet they are not classified as countries. Singapore has an approximate population of 5.7 million people, and as classified by world ranking standards, thus, conventionally, Singapore is only fit to be considered as a large city. Its surface area is another factor that makes it a classical case study to consider. As noted above, by the time it gained independence, only 581 km² of its surface area was habitable, but the devotion and passion of the Singaporeans allowed them to reclaim further grounds from the sea to push the habitable grounds to 719 km² (Civil Service College & Centre for Liveable Cities, 2014).

Another factor that makes Singapore an interesting case study is its success despite its lack of resource endowment, hence had to intensely rely on its neighbours for almost everything that makes a city liveable. Nevertheless, as noted in a report by the Environmental Performance Index (2019), the country has managed to turn around some statistics in regard to clean water supply. Initially, it was relying almost entire on Malaysian supply for this, but over the years, through an elaborate water cleaning strategy, the country has been able to complement its importation. The EPI report ranks Singapore 13th globally in terms of clean water provision to its citizens. The cleaning process started back in 1977 and entailed the start of the cleaning of the Singapore River, which is now an attractive recreational environment (Tortajada & Joshi, 2014). The country has also managed to ensure food supply sustainability through projects like the Sino-Singapore Jilin Food Zone (SSJFZ), that is, a collaboration between Singapore and China (Ludher, 2016; Tortajada & Hongzhou, 2016).

In terms of social welfare and affordable housing, which is a constant struggle faced by cities globally, Singapore has shown the way. It is reported that Singapore's home ownership stands at over 90%, and this was enabled by the Housing and Development Board (HDB), a government agency that builds compact, mixed-use houses and sells to the locals at subsidised prices (Chia, Li, & Yang, 2017). These houses, unlike in many cities, are compliant with issues like environmental sustainability, especially in regard to energy and water usage and also in use of environmentally friendly construction materials (Kolczak, 2017).

The country's leadership structure and approach are another factor that make Singapore a worthy case study, and this is demonstrated by the number of countries that are borrowing the country's blueprint to duplicate in their own national and urban policies. As noted above, LKY set a pace and standards of leadership and vision that are worth emulating. He guided the country out of corruption, poverty and pollution to achieve the high rankings discussed in the Introduction section. Most cities faced with similar challenges have only struggled, and some have not done much to move out of such quagmires, and by taking the Singapore's challenge, they can ultimately start to experience some differences.

A Historical Perspective

Singapore's history is quite unclear before the third century. Only some tales exist of Singapore during that time, and a verifiable account of the city is only available after the arrival of Raffles, the first British to land on the island. Findlay and O'Rourke (2007) describe this history as obscure and somehow disjointed. Nevertheless, the first account is that of a Chinese record that shows that the current city was just a marshy island at the end of the Malay Peninsula. They had named it Pu Luo Chung (a Malay name for an ‘island at the end’). The tale twists and Prince Sri Tri Buana (as also known as Sang Nila Utama) of Srivajaya is introduced as the one who discovered the Island in the thirteenth century (Hack, Margolin, & Delaye, 2010). Leyden and Raffles (1821) explain that the prince was in a hunting expedition when he caught sight of a strange looking animal that he thought was a lion, following which he named the land ‘Singhapura’, which in Sanskrit dialect means a ‘Lion City’. In the fourteenth century, it is said that a number of traders, some from the Mongol Empire and others from China, also described to have made stops in an island which they called Tamasek or the Sea Town, which is believed to be the modern-day Singapore. During this period, another Srivajaya prince by the name Parameswara is noted to have fled his country to Tamasek, and later to Melaka where he gained control and founded the Sultanate of Malacca (Malacca Strait). The sultanate became a successful one, especially in regard to trade, and was a solid trade partner with Singapore, in its previous form. Yong (2019) explains that, indeed, by then, Singapore was already engaged in an intricate web of trade with other autonomous ports and was also a centre for power and politics.

It was the arrival of Sir Stamford Raffles in the nineteenth century that led to the international focus on Singapore. This propelled the island as the regional trade hub as well as a political and power point. Cangi (1993) credits Sir Raffles with, amongst other things, bringing civilisation to the island city, by proposing an elaborate and robust city plan that changed the port from a mere sea city to strategic port city that served as the doorway between the entire Southeast Asia and Britain. Astonished by the political regimes that reigned in the region, and specifically the city, Raffles made it his duty to persuade the locals to adopt such proactive, good practices like accepting democracy, allowing free trade with the neighbours and preaching the need for administration of justice. His motivation was driven by the tyrannical and capricious nature of the rulers ruling the Straits, especially in regard to how they treated their subjects. In respect to his view on trade practices in the area, Raffles was baffled by and disliked the Mercantilism approach by which those who controlled the port employed. He therefore advocated for a free trade system that eventually led to the growth of Singapore as an admirable port city (Donnithome, 2003). Changes in the cities fortunes directly affected its demographic distribution. This led an amalgamation of cultures including Europeans, Chinese, Malays, Arabs, Indians and Bugis tribesmen (Buckley, 1984).

By 1824, five years after Raffles first landed in Singapore, the trading was acquired by the British East India Company, as annual payment by the Sultan who controlled the Islands. By then, the city had an approximate 10,683 inhabitants (Buckley, 1984), but the population was growing fast. By 1826, Singapore joined Melaka and Penang to form what was known as Straits Settlements, but the union did not last long. Due to issues with politics, Singapore separated from the settlement, and in 1867, it became a Crown colony, meaning that it was directly under the British government and not the British East India Company that controlled the Straits Settlements. Turnbull (2009) explains how political, economic and social issues like piracy, unfair taxation, unstandardised currencies and inhumane transportation of convicts who also experienced delayed judicial process are amongst issues that prompted Singapore to be separated from the Straits Settlements. From there, in 1867 (BBC News, 2018), it became a crown colony; meaning that it was directly under the British government and not the East India Company that controlled the Straits Settlements. Buckley (1984) shares that merchants, especially those based in Singapore, were instrumental in the separation, as they were not comfortable with trading environment, which they thought could be stronger if the aforementioned challenges were addressed. After becoming a crown colony, Singapore's port started to thrive, and this attracted more people who came to live and work in the port city, and by 1870, the population had reached 100,000 people (Lambert, 2019). A map situating Singapore is represented in Figs. 1.1 and 1.2.

Source: © OpenStreetMap contributors.
Fig. 1.1: Location Map of Singapore.

Source: © OpenStreetMap contributors.
Fig. 1.2: Closeup Map of Singapore.

By 1942, Singapore was captured by the Japanese who ruled until 1945 when they were defeated by the British who again re-occupied Singapore. The following year (1946), the Straits Settlements that were part of crown colony were dissolved and Singapore was separated from Malaysia, and in 1954, a strong political movement, the People's Action Party (PAP), was formed and through its agitation, Singapore's new constitution was inaugurated. Under this constitution, a new election was conducted in 1957 for members of the legislature and out of the available 51 seats being contested for, PAP won 43 seats. In 1959, LKY as the leader of the PAP led the country to self-governance and became the first prime minister. In 1963, to form a formidable regional block, Singapore joined the Federation of Malaysia, but the association was short-lived; thus, in 1965, Singapore pulled out to become an independent state (Lambert, 2019; Lim & Lee, 2016). In 1971, the last British military forces were withdrawn from Singapore (BBC News, 2018), and from then, with true independence and political and governance freedom, the country embarked on an expansive, robust and ambitious transformative journey.

From a Third Worl...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• List of Figures
• About the Author
• Foreword
• Preface
• Acknowledgements
• 1. The Rise of Singapore: An Urban Perspective
• 2. Singapore's Governance Style and Urban Planning
• 3. Seeking Liveability Through the Singapore Model
• Conclusion
• References
• Index