Sustainable Cities – but at what cost?

This week, I will be talking about sustainable urban development in Singapore. As a small, resource-scarce nation-state, sustainable development is more crucial as we do not have many resources to spend on (that said, even if we do have a lot of resources, we should still develop sustainably. psst: other countries in the world).

Singapore has plans to ensure we consume and produce goods sustainably (take a look at my post last week!). The “Walk Cycle Ride SG” vision aims to encourage commuting using greener methods[1], and if having a car still seems essential, ICE vehicles will be phased out by 2040 in favour of hybrid and electric vehicles[2].

For this post, I will focus on sustainable housing. In my opinion, sustainable housing isn’t just about using sustainable materials or sustainable technologies to treat waste or consume energy in the buildings, it is also about developing the entire estate in an environmentally-friendly manner.

As you read this post, development for the new Tengah Town is underway. Touted as a “forest town”, it is the newest town to be developed and is set to feature a “car-free” town centre and allow close interactions with nature[3]. When I first saw the news of Tengah Town, I was quite excited about having a residential town so close to nature and was quite intrigued by how the town surface would be car-free (although all the roads are underground…).

Car-free town centre in Tengah Town (Image: Housing & Development Board[8]) 

However, as the title of this blog suggests, Tengah Town seems like a great town, but at what cost? The town is sited on a patch of secondary forest, which acts as a key eco-corridor for wildlife linking the Central and Western Catchment areas[3] and is home to several threatened species[4]. In response to this, wildlife will be shepherded to other locations[5], and a 5km-long, 100m-wide forest corridor will be set up to allow wildlife to traverse between the two catchment areas[6]. Native plants will also be reintroduced into the site[7]. However, are these measures practical?

The eco-corridor runs through the town, with hiking trails for residents to enjoy (Image: Housing & Development Board[8])

Sited within an urban town, the 100m-wide forest corridor will be too disturbed for it to serve as a useful eco-corridor[4]. Shepherding of wildlife essentially squeezes them into a smaller area which may not even be a suitable habitat for these species and will place greater pressure on these habitats[4].

I’m not here to say no to development. I understand the importance of development. However, as with the running theme of this post (and future posts in fact), it boils down to the question of “at what cost?”. Will the mediating measures implemented help reduce the impact significantly? While the town boasts many eco-features that make it seem more sustainable than existing towns[8], isn’t it ironic that the “Forest Town” is built on land that once used to be a forest?

Sustainable development cannot just mean developing sustainably. It must also consider the resources lost to make way for development.

 

SDG11: Sustainable Cities and Communities


References:

[1] LTA. (2020). Getting Around. Retrieved September 9, 2020, from https://www.lta.gov.sg/content/ltagov/en/getting_around.html

[2] MOF. (2020). D. Sustaining Singapore’s Success For Our Future Generations. Retrieved September 9, 2020, from https://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/budget_2020/budget-speech/d-sustaining-singapores-success-for-our-future-generations

[3] Cheng, K. (2016, September 8). A peek into Tengah, the next new HDB town the size of Bishan. TODAY Singapore. Retrieved September 9, 2020, from https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/peek-tengah-next-new-hdb-town-size-bishan

[4] NSS. (2020, July 20). Nature Society’s Feedback on HDB’s Tengah Baseline Review. Retrieved September 9, 2020, from https://www.nss.org.sg/report/6e9da7c0-9NSS Feedback- HDB’s Tengah Baseline Review.pdf

[5] Tan, A. (2017, April 04). Parliament: Environmental study, wildlife shepherding plan to be done in Tengah. The Straits Times Singapore. Retrieved September 9, 2020, from https://www.straitstimes.com/politics/parliament-environmental-study-wildlife-shepherding-plan-to-be-done-in-tengah

[6] Chua, A. (2017, April 4). Tengah environmental study findings to be out soon. TODAY Singapore. Retrieved September 9, 2020, from https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/key-findings-environmental-study-tengah-new-town-be-released

[7] Chong, F. L. (2019, January 24). Measures in place to reduce impact on environment. The Straits Times Singapore. Retrieved September 9, 2020, from https://www.straitstimes.com/forum/letters-in-print/measures-in-place-to-reduce-impact-on-environment

[8] HDB. (2020). Tengah. Retrieved September 9, 2020, from https://www.hdb.gov.sg/cs/infoweb/about-us/history/hdb-towns-your-home/tengah

2 thoughts on “Sustainable Cities – but at what cost?

  1. Hi Ernest, I wanted to ask about your views on the current ongoing use of a wildlife corridor like the Tengah Nature Way (https://www.nparks.gov.sg/news/2014/2/singapores-longest-green-corridor-will-enhance-biodiversity-in-the-south-west-district).
    Do you think that the issue is that the 100m-wide forest corridor is too small or that there should’t be plans to develop of the Tengah Town in the first place? Personally, I feel that wildlife corridors are a stop gap measure. They are of course better than nothing, yet as forest fragmentation increases on our tiny island nation and forest area decreases is it possible to convince the government of the value of forests or is all our forests doomed to be urbanised plot by plot?
    Another thing that surprised be was the number of nature ways that have been constructed in Singapore, totalling in length of 130km (https://www.nparks.gov.sg/gardens-parks-and-nature/nature-ways).

    • Hi Li Zhe, thanks for your input! I do agree with you that the forest corridor is better than nothing. To be honest, with how much development there is, and with a majority of the forests gone, there isn’t much left to conserve. But at the same time that increases the significance of each small plot of land, because that’s all we have left.

      With regards to the issue you pointed out, with policies, there are always multiple perspectives to a single matter. I do agree that with a rising population, we will need to convert more space for residential etc. Yet, can this be done in a more sustainable manner? If it were up to me, I would have chosen to develop only part of that plot of land. This is to retain as much of the natural habitat as possible and still have some area for development. If you do look at the second link you’ve provided, the width of each corridor is much narrower, so it begs the question. How effective are those corridors? Not just about retaining a small population of existing plants, but what about the larger animals? It might be too late to take any measures for Tengah Town, but perhaps what we can do now before further developments are made, is to map out what we have now and which areas must be retained to maintain a wide enough corridor between preserved patches of forests.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *