wild places | wild happenings | wild news
make a difference for our wild places

home | links | search the site
  all articles latest | past | articles by topics | search wildnews
wild news on wildsingapore
  The Straits Times 15 Dec 06
Staying clean and green - it's not just binning litter
Geh Min

SINGAPORE as a clean and green city has been one of our most successful and enduring images. Singaporeans are proud of it as an integral part of our national identity.

Visitors admire it as a key component of the Singapore brand. It should come as no surprise that the founder of modern Singapore, M inister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, is also the visionary architect of our Garden City. Like everything else that bears his stamp, it is deliberately conceived, meticulously planned and effectively executed.

It should also come as no surprise that the motivation behind Singapore's greening is politico-economic. In MM Lee's own words, 'greening raised the morale of people and gave them pride in their surroundings' and 'greening is the most cost-effective project I have ever launched'.

A clean and green Singapore is a visible demonstration of our transformation from a Third- to a First- World country, a symbol of a clean, effective and forward-looking Government and a responsible, educated and disciplined people.

But since the launch of our clean and green initiative 40 years ago, the global environment has changed dramatically.

Man-made global warming, a phenomenon few had conceived of then, together with other environmental assaults like pollution, depletion of natural resources and biodiversity loss, is threatening to tilt the world into crisis.

It is now acknowledged that the earth's capacity to constantly renew itself is finite.

Can our clean and green formula, even with constant renewal, cope with these challenges?

Singapore's green effort has been criticised as artificial, superficial, too high-maintenance and, ultimately, not ecologically sustainable; not surprising in a largely urban landscape. In addition, the value of indigenous biodiversity was then not widely recognised and the irreversible destruction of ecosystems was seen as an accepted component of development rather than as an act of environmental degradation.

I recall an environmental seminar six years ago, where the guest of honour, a former MP, proclaimed to a stunned audience that Singapore was an outstanding example of green practices because we had so many golf courses. He cited as an example that he drove past three on his way to work.

Today's politicians are far more environmentally sensitive and savvy. They are more likely to cite the rich biodiversity of Bukit Timah Nature Reserve or Tanjung Chek Jawa and emphasise the Government's key role in their conservation.

Much more is now done to integrate environmentally friendly practices into development rather than to destroy everything first and add a cosmetic overlay of green at the end. The National Parks Board has strengthened its conservation arm in line with its greater powers in the revised National Parks Act, and regularly consults with green groups at the conceptual stage of planning and also with other agencies making an effort to be green, such as the National Environment Agency (NEA) and Public Utilities Board.

But while our natural landscape is taking on a more authentic shade of green, what of our built landscape?

Green architecture has taken off in many countries, where higher standards of energy efficiency, water conservation, indoor air quality and other benchmarks can reduce the environmental impact of buildings by 50 per cent to 70 per cent.

Even China's Olympic Games Committee has announced that it will host the world's first zero-net emissions games by using green architecture principles.

Technology in this area has reached the stage where it is possible to be cutting-edge without bleeding. In fact, we are more likely to be haemorrhaging in both energy and costs in the long term if we do not make the transition soon.

For example, it is estimated that up to 40 per cent of our present energy needs could be supplied by solar power based on our present built-up area. The Government, as our largest developer and consumer, should take the lead in adopting green procurement policies and practices.

It has also been said that while Singapore may be clean and green, Singaporeans are not clean and green. We need an army of paid cleaners to keep our public areas litter-free and another army of horticultural workers to maintain our greenery.

Even when our health is at risk, the prevailing attitude appears to be 'leave it to the Government'. During the last dengue epidemic, a repeated blitz by NEA officers, led by the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources, was required to re-emphasise that everyone had a role to play in reducing mosquito-breeding sites.

But are Singaporeans that lacking in environmental civic-consciousness? The many and ever increasing examples of environmental civil society initiatives suggest otherwise.

My personal impression is that where the Government is perceived to be already doing a good job, the pragmatic Singaporean feels little inclination to compete.

Why soil your hands or risk a quarrel with a neighbour by emptying his flower pot dishes when a quick call to the NEA will solve it? And why bin your rubbish at a hawker centre when paid cleaners abound and you would be putting them out of work?

Nature areas also seem to inspire a greater sense of ownership and responsibility among Singaporeans. Even if someone is misguided enough to litter these areas, it is not unusual to find others cleaning up or even reprimanding him.

Yet there are still many areas, such as recycling, resource conservation and responsible consumer practices, where we are lagging behind other countries.

While 40 years of clean and green campaigns have raised our standards of expectation, our practices are still wanting. The sad truth is that being clean and green in today's environmentally wounded world requires far more from us than just binning our litter and not vandalising our roadside greenery.

Every action or choice in our daily lives is fraught with a maze of environmental consequences which even the civic-minded citizen finds bewildering.

To make things worse, the chain of cause and effect is not confined to national boundaries but increasingly, like climate change and the haze, has regional and global impacts that the average citizen may be unaware of or indifferent to.

The Indonesian farmer who sets fire to his land as a means of livelihood is unlikely to make the connection with air pollution in neighbouring countries. Conversely, the Singaporean who is profligate in the use of paper or fuel consumption does not realise that this raises the demand for paper and biofuels, and gives more economic incentives for the Indonesians to clear land.

Corporate greed and corruption thrive on this lack of connectivity and the environment and humans are the ultimate losers.

Whether we are policymakers, corporate business leaders or citizens, every action or decision we make or take will have environmental consequences for better or worse in this globalised world.

This is the challenge we face if we wish to continue being clean and green in the 21st century.

The writer is a former Nominated MP and president of the Nature Society Singapore. Guest writers alternate with Chua Mui Hoong in this weekly column.
links
Related articles on Singapore: general environmental issues
about the site | email ria
  News articles are reproduced for non-profit educational purposes.
 

website©ria tan 2003 www.wildsingapore.com