Building for the future

Everywhere she went, there were displaced and homeless people sleeping on the street or squatting on corners, begging for food and money. The city smelt awful — of human excrement and trash rotting in the 40°C heat. Meanwhile, well-heeled executives, not unlike herself, would zoom past the rough sleepers on the sidewalks on e-scooters, AirPods plugged in, with nary a second glance at their fellow residents. “It made me very uncomfortable,” she tells The Edge Singapore. “I never imagined it would be that bad.”

San Francisco, home to the biggest tech companies in the world — Amazon.com, Google, Facebook and Apple — is one of the US’ most prosperous, economically vibrant cities. The Bay Area, in particular, is the epitome of what a smart city would look like: driverless cars, homes outfitted with the latest gadgets linked to the Internet of Things, and AI assistants that schedule the minutiae of life. In 2011, San Francisco was named the Greenest City in North America by the Economist Intelligence Unit, and has ranked among the top in the study’s subsequent editions.

And yet, homelessness in the city has risen by 17% in the past year, and 30% since 2017. The city has become the poster child of the negative effects of rapid urbanisation, gentrification and wealth inequality on the population. Rents have gone through the roof, driven by demand and the influx of well-paid tech workers, driving long-time and lower-income residents out of their homes.

Such situations worry Jeremy Kelly, global head of research for property consultants, JLL. He fears that in society’s pursuit of the latest and most innovative, city planners may have overlooked the human experience and what it takes to build an inclusive city.

Singapore is one of the cities JLL calls the “big seven” — examples of what a truly “smart” and developed city looks like. Yet, Kelly himself has doubts over what this really means.

“I’m hesitant [to define a smart city] because I think, increasingly, [it should be] about smart thinking, rather than smart technology,” Kelly tells The Edge Singapore. “It isn’t just about cutting-edge technology, it’s using smart thinking to improve the lives of its citizens, in their quality of life, and making sure that the services that they get is inclusive. We [shouldn’t be] digitising the world for a specific group of people; we [should] digitise for everyone.”

Kelly could well be right because San Francisco is not alone in its troubles. Driven by urbanisation in the name of progress, wealth inequality and homelessness have become growing problems in the world’s biggest cities.

A report by Yale Global written by Joseph Chamie, a former director of the United Nations Population Division, says, “People openly live on the streets of the world’s major urban centres — from Cairo to Washington, DC — [it is] a disconcerting reminder of homelessness. While some maintain homelessness is a solvable problem, others conclude that the condition is an enduring feature of modern urban landscapes.”

Statistics on homelessness have been hard to track, however. The last time a global survey was attempted was by the United Nations in 2005. At the time, it was estimated that 150 million people, or 2% of the global population, were homeless, while as many as 1.6 billion lacked adequate housing, according to Habitat.org.

There are many reasons for this, says Chamie. Among them is the lack of an internationally agreed-upon definition of homelessness.

In fact, in Hong Kong, more than 200,000 people live in “coffin homes”, which are rooms the size of cupboards in sub-divided low-cost flats. While these people are not considered homeless, their undesirable living conditions are little better than those of rough sleepers.

Homelessness is also considered embarrassing and a taboo, leading many governments to understate the problem, according to Chamie. In India, there is an estimated 1.8 million homeless people, 52% of which are based in urban areas. But in 2017, the authorities demolished 53,700 homes, evicting 260,000 people for reasons such as slum-free “city beautification” projects. This despite the existence of the government’s Housing for All by 2022 scheme.

As an increasing number of people move to urban areas — 55% of the world’s population now lives in cities — and skyscrapers redefine our skylines, the twin concerns of wealth inequality and homelessness have grown in tandem. How then should a city’s planners reconcile progress with an equitable distribution of benefits? Singapore, in particular, cannot afford to exclude itself from the discourse. To be sure, as a city state with limited land and rising concerns of inequality in close quarters, its planners are cognisant that the future Singapore must have inclusiveness at the very heart of its infrastructure.

‘Urban intelligence’

The Urban Redevelopment Authority’s (URA) Singapore Master Plan (see sidebar) is a statutory land use plan that guides the country’s physical development over the next 10 to 15 years. Reviewed every five years, it translates broad, long-term strategies of the concept plan into detailed plans for the development of land and property in Singapore.

Yet, while the master plan is a wide-ranging and comprehensive outline of what a Singapore of the future looks like, pundits have concerns. They argue that it will take more than skyscrapers and smart buildings to bring Singapore into the future.

In JLL’s “Smart Cities Success: Connecting People, Proptech and Real Estate” report, launched in June, the real estate consultancy says smart city initiatives in Asia-Pacific will not reach their potential if they focus on delivering cutting-edge technologies without paying enough attention to the needs and experiences of citizens. “While it’s important to plan for the future, the main effort should focus on delivering solutions in the near future that benefit existing cities, the businesses operating in them, and the people living, working and playing in them.”

JLL’s Kelly, who led the research, urges the use of so-called urban intelligence when designing urban spaces. “I do think the term ‘smart cities’ can be overused and everybody wants to be a smart city; that’s why we produced this report to try and get beyond the hype and see what it really means, and what the real estate industry can do to help.”

Improving lives need not be about the latest technology. “A really good example for me is Melbourne. They have an urban forest policy and their aim is to increase their canopy cover in the city by as much as 40% by 2040,” Kelly says. “And it helps with biodiversity and liveability, [even though] it is not high-tech per se. It’s just really about intelligent thinking.”

He points out that in some cases, many elements of a city are over-designed. “Smart cities and innovation shouldn’t only be about technology but also the human experience. I’ve been at events where technologists [talk] about how you can talk to your fridge, about robot receptionists and flying vehicles and drones. But if no one can use them, what’s the point?” He cites several examples of the most cutting-edge buildings in the world, where some of the applications of technology were not useful to the buildings’ inhabitants.

“I think you could potentially sort of strip some of those back, and they can still focus very much more on the energy conservation, recycling of water, to make sure that the building is healthy,” Kelly adds.

He believes that real estate players can contribute to inclusiveness. “Many cutting-edge technologies are often targeted at one group — millennials, for example. You know, you have apps that help you find a desk [to work at] in a building or a space. But I think some of the greatest value can be in helping the underprivileged, the disabled or the elderly, in creating apps or devices that monitor their health or get them medical help,” he says. “Real estate, I think, has the potential to act as the glue in creating truly smart, inclusive city ecosystems.”

Designing inclusion

In Singapore’s case, its increasing population and land space constraints necessitate urbanisation, as well as efforts to make the city more inclusive, says Hsu Wen-Tai, associate professor of urban economics at Singapore Management University. He points out that the city state has the physical capacity for only a limited population and urbanisation can only alleviate overcrowding to a limited extent.

Hsu says the URA’s Draft Master Plan 2019 has sound housing concepts, with a wide range of housing options available. There are plans to equip townships with technology and smart facilities that can enhance residents’ quality of life.

But, he warns that this may also exacerbate inequality, by excluding clusters of people in the city, based on their socioeconomic status. For instance, the more affluent may congregate in a particular estate. In Singapore, those clusters already exist and include the areas around Holland Road, Bukit Timah Road and on Sentosa. Nonetheless, Hsu adds that while it is not possible to avoid this entirely, the government has managed to keep it to a minimum with effective housing policies — such as the use of the racial quota system and ballot system in applications for public housing.

“There is only so much the government can do and I think the new master plan helps to overcome such challenges. Through its introduction of technologies, each neighbourhood becomes up to date with state-of-the-art facilities, so the social economic differentiation may be reduced.”

Kuan Chee Yung, director at multi-disciplinary consultancy firm CPG Signature, observes that cities have grown from a place where people simply go to find work, to a place where they go to find meaning in their work. To him, this change in purpose remains unmet by today’s cities, and that poses a problem when shaping a future where cities are more than just places of economic activity.

“The master plan is a solid case of great infrastructure planning and providing facilities for living and working, but the new challenge is allowing sufficient ‘white zones’ for ground-up participation in creating new urban spaces and building typologies for the constantly evolving purposeful work, novel experiences and meaningful collaborations [of city life],” he says.

Kuan points out that, apart from dealing with the changing needs of populations, cities need to be resilient. That includes being able to deal with rising temperatures and other environmental challenges that would severely impact liveability and progress. “Cities have ceased to be simply urban sprawl, glass-and-concrete jungle production spaces,” he says. “Are our cities dealing with people searching for meaning and work, and better work-life balance? Do we need a totally new approach to working from home, shared co-working spaces or fine-grained Innovation Villages? Break out of the glass and concrete box to design for urban, green eco-habitats, maybe even urban farming on biotic structures?”

Digital resilience

Shashi Jayakumar, senior fellow and head of the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies’ Centre of Excellence for National Security, tells The Edge Singapore that Singapore has to pay close attention to creating a citizenry that is digitally resilient for the future.

“In our push to be a smart nation, can we afford to ignore not a hardening of our system’s [defences], which is more or less resilient, but a hardening of our people’s [defences]?” he said, on the sidelines of the INTERPOL World 2019 forum recently. “If we look at the recent successful cyber hacks in Singapore — for example, the SingHealth breach — it wasn’t necessarily a weakness of our antivirus systems. There was a weakness of people, and this is not solely a Singapore problem.”

The SingHealth breach last year was the city state’s largest breach of data in recent memory. About 1.5 million SingHealth patients, including Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, had their data accessed, and copied, as a consequence of poor controls at SingHealth and the ministry’s IT arm. Then, less than six months after that, it was discovered that the highly sensitive HIV-positive status of 14,200 people, along with other information such as their identification numbers and contact details, had been leaked online. A doctor with access to the database had taken screenshots of the information; his former partner posted the data online.

Shashi says the digital age has isolated societies and pulled them further apart. This is why no conversation about digital literacy can ignore the increasing division found within society, he argues. To this, he suggests a return of “heritage skills”.

“A smart nation needs a wise citizenry, and wisdom is gleaned from all the ‘old school skills’, such as deep learning, reading, conversing face to face, not from reading tweets,” he said. “It’s deep learning and conversations that put more emphasis on understanding, tolerance and acceptance of how unique Singapore is.”

Flexible and adaptable master plan

What will the Singapore of the future look like? How is it dealing with the challenges of major demographic, social and economic changes?

Hwang Yu Ning, Singapore’s chief planner, tells The Edge Singapore that the URA has several key focus areas through which its plan will come to fruition.

She is cognisant of the need to adapt, especially as the world changes more quickly than ever.

“Given an increasingly complex and fast-changing environment, we need to incorporate flexibility and adaptability into our plans from the onset, so we can remain nimble and adapt to changing scenarios quickly,” she says. “For example, we have piloted the first Enterprise District in Punggol, where land uses are controlled at the district level, rather than for individual land parcels.”

She says the URA will continue to champion the co-location of compatible uses on a single site, instead of having multiple single-use sites. “Such integrated developments not only reduce the amount of land needed for all these uses, but also bring convenience to residents, allow for synergistic activities to take place, and foster a sense of community. Some good examples of co-location are Kampong Admiralty and Our Tampines Hub. We will also explore greater use of underground space for utilities and storage to free up surface land for more people-centric needs,” she adds.

Parks, and paths that connect them, are also set to be a key feature of the Singapore of the future. According to Hwang, URA has planned for 1,000ha of parks and park connectors, so that over 90% of households will be within a 10-minute walk of a park in the future.

Hwang says URA’s plan focuses on liveable and inclusive neighbourhoods. “We envisage future residential precincts that are sustainable, age-friendly, green, community-centric and car-lite, with easy access to a wide range of public spaces and amenities to meet residents’ needs.” Using data analytics and geospatial capabilities, the URA aims to better understand changing demographic trends and usage patterns to help make decisions on where to locate new facilities, or convert existing ones to cater for new needs.

Hwang adds that there are plans for three major gateways, in the east, west and north of Singapore, to support economic growth and bring jobs and amenities closer to homes.

“These gateways will support the growth of synergistic industries and businesses that can capitalise on these hubs. By developing these nodes, we can tap potential synergies between the gateways, and diversify and deepen our air, sea and rail linkages to external markets,” she says. “This will strengthen Singapore’s hub status and ensure opportunities remain open to our people and businesses.”

But planners are also renewing parts of Singapore. “Even as we develop new areas, we are rejuvenating familiar places such as the Central Area, mature towns and major recreational corridors to give them a new lease of life, while retaining heritage and a sense of identity,” adds Hwang.

“To maintain our competitive edge and dynamism in the face of growing global competition, we will increase the live-in population within the Central Area by planning for a variety of homes and amenities so more people can live near workplaces and amenities.” This will go hand in hand with housing and amenities in mature estates, such as around Dakota Crescent and Farrer Park, while retaining familiar landmarks that will celebrate the country’s heritage.