Political tool or quality experience? Urban livability and the Singaporean state’s global city aspirations

Abstract

In this article, I argue that the concept of urban livability is used as a political tool by the Singaporean state to further its pursuit of global city status. I show how the state uses neighborhood “upgrading” as a mechanism to inscribe strategic meanings of livability onto Singapore’s residential landscapes with the expectation that residents will align their experiences of livability with the former. I use an embodied approach to analyze state manipulation of two residential landscapes—condominiums and public housing—as an active means of official attempts to create two types of citizen-subjects. By juxtaposing the state’s operationalization of livability against livability as understood in the context of residents’ localized lifeworlds, I show how indeterminate outcomes arise from the state’s livability project.

Keywords:

• global city
• governmentality
• housing
• livability
• place
• Singapore

Acknowledgments

I am indebted to Harvey Neo for his support and enlightening suggestions. I also thank Richard Shearmur and the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments. I am solely responsible for the content of this paper.

Notes

1. HDB Flats refer to public housing built by the HDB, the state arm for public housing provision in Singapore. The state sells these apartments at a subsidized rate to residents who meet certain demographic and financial criteria.

2. Void decks are typically found on the ground floor of HDB apartment blocks, where accommodation units begin on the second floor. These are sheltered spaces that have been deliberately left empty to encourage mingling amongst residents living in the block. They are often used for functions and gatherings (Goh, 2005).

3. Pseudonyms have been used for all respondents to protect their privacy.

4. According to the Singapore state, cosmopolitanism is a quality—one who is familiar with global trends and lifestyles and feels comfortable working and living in Singapore as well as overseas (Singapore 21 Committee). There is then a need to distinguish between local and expatriate people who exhibit elements of cosmopolitanism.

5. Local slang for coffee without milk.

6. Singapore’s prime shopping and entertainment district.

7. Local slang for Caucasian foreigners.

8. While research findings have indicated the emergence of three different subjects, such a categorization can only be used as a heuristic to instantiate the indeterminate outcomes of the State’s livability project. These categories are by no means fixed; not every single Singaporean resident must fall into one of the categories.

9. This dichotomy is generally witnessed in Singapore, but is unable to fully account for the fluidity and layers of physical and metaphorical spaces that exist in reality, and is more a civilizational than topographical issue. For instance, members with a “cosmopolitan” profile may choose to inhabit and frolic in heartland spaces, and vice-versa (Soh & Yuen, 2011).