Liveability Framework: Part 5 – Dynamic Urban Governance

CLC launched the refreshed Liveability Framework (LF) at the World Cities Summit in June 2024. This is the fifth of a 10-part series on the LF that showcases its various components through bite-sized articles. Dynamic Urban Governance is one of the three systems underpinning the liveability framework. Explore the key principles guiding Singapore’s urban development and planning process over the years here.

Introduction

Liveability in urban environments is not a static concept. It is a continuously evolving construct that changes with each city’s development phase and is shaped by emerging individual perceptions and aspirations on urban lived experiences, as well as dynamic external forces.

Responding to current and emerging challenges, the Liveability Framework (LF) serves as a practical but non-prescriptive reference for city leaders, policymakers and planners to plan liveable and sustainable cities of the future.

In the above LF diagram, the three critical liveability outcomes – Competitive Economy, High Quality of Life and Sustainable Environment - are represented as intersecting circles. Collectively, they establish a holistic urban ecosystem that contributes to overall liveability in a city over the long run. Surrounding these is a "ring" structure consisting of three complementary systems - Integrated Master Planning and Development, Dynamic Urban Governance, and Collaborative Ecosystem - that provide the enabling conditions to achieve and sustain these outcomes.

Dynamic Urban Governance

Following its independence in 1965, Singapore faced immense socio-economic challenges, including widespread unemployment, substandard living conditions, and a civil service in need of reform. Despite these difficulties, its governance model transformed the nation into one of the world's most competitive economies, with high home ownership rates and globally recognised liveability rankings. Dynamic urban governance has been central to this journey, balancing pragmatism with visionary planning to create a sustainable, inclusive and resilient city-state.

The Evolution of our Urban Governance strategies

Over the past decades, Singapore's urban governance approaches have demonstrated that a proactive, dynamic model continues to be relevant. Such a model acknowledges the need to adapt to evolving urban complexities, and embraces principles of innovation, collaboration, and resilience. Recent key shifts signal the need to have greater focus on:

1. Adaptive Governance: Learning from outcomes and refining policies in response to uncertainties ensures resilience. Tools like foresight and scenario planning have enabled more evidence-based decision-making and adaptive policy formulation processes.

2. Collaborative Governance: With the understanding that community resilience is built through participatory processes, increasing civic participation and inclusiveness in shaping the urban environment has become a key strategy of Singapore’s urban governance approach.

3. Crisis Management and Resilience: By implementing governance structures and policies to effectively respond to and recover from shocks and stresses, Singapore aims to build a more resilient and adaptable urban environment that can withstand and recover from various challenges.

The 5 Principles of Dynamic Urban Governance

Much of Singapore’s successful transformation into a globally recognised liveable city is rooted in its dynamic urban governance approach. By embedding robust governance principles in its urban planning and development practices, Singapore ensures that it remains resilient to future challenges. Here is an in-depth look at the five implicit principles underpinning this system:

1. Lead with Vision and Pragmatism
   
   Singapore’s governance model is defined by its ability to balance visionary leadership with pragmatic decision-making. Recognising its vulnerabilities as a resource-scarce city-state, early leaders like Lee Kuan Yew adopted a governance ethos centred on strategic foresight, adaptability, and action.
   
   A defining example of this principle was Singapore’s bold decision to invest in container port infrastructure during the 1960s. This move — despite uncertain demand — secured Singapore’s position as a leading global port, proving the value of anticipating trends and taking calculated risks. This ethos of “planning for the worst while preparing for the best” continues to guide policymaking today, evident from the move of our container terminals to Tuas Port. This progressively frees up prime land from Shenton Way to Pasir Panjang for the future development of the Great Southern Waterfront.
   

2. Uphold a Culture of Integrity
   
   A culture of integrity is essential for maintaining public trust and ensuring effective governance. Singapore’s commitment to transparency and meritocracy underpins its public institutions, reinforcing the ethos that governance must serve the greater good. The Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) was established with a zero-tolerance policy for corruption, supported by stringent penalties and clear accountability structures. Public officers are required to declare assets and avoid conflicts of interest, while competitive remuneration packages reduce incentives for unethical behaviour.
   
   Integrity also extends to interactions with the private sector. Government-linked corporations (GLCs) operate on commercial principles, competing fairly for contracts. This transparent approach has fostered trust in both governance and the business environment, positioning Singapore as a global benchmark for ethical governance.
   

3. Cultivate Sound Institutions
   
   Sound institutions form the foundation of Singapore’s governance framework, ensuring that policies are not overly reliant on individual leaders, but are supported by robust structures and processes. This principle underscores the importance of institutional continuity and resilience.
   
   Singapore’s public service has evolved into a capable technocracy, guided by meritocratic recruitment and continuous talent development. Institutions like the Public Service Commission (PSC) ensure that individuals with the right skills and values are recruited, while leadership training fosters a culture of excellence and accountability.
   

4. Engage and Partner with the Community
   
   Singapore recognises that governance cannot succeed in isolation and has increasingly embraced participatory processes to foster shared ownership of urban development.
   
   This principle is exemplified by the planning process undertaken for the Rail Corridor - a 24-kilometre stretch of former railway land that was gradually transformed into an inclusive community space. Early and extensive public engagement enabled residents, advocacy groups, and other stakeholders to co-create the vision for the corridor. This collaborative approach not only ensured that the final plan reflected the diverse needs and aspirations of Singaporeans but also strengthened community bonds.
   
   Governance becomes more inclusive with the involvement of citizens in decision-making, while the long-term sustainability of initiatives is ensured by fostering a sense of ownership among residents.
   

5. Work with Markets
   
   Singapore’s ability to leverage market mechanisms while mitigating their failures demonstrates its pragmatic approach to governance. By combining pro-business policies with strong regulatory frameworks, Singapore ensures that economic growth does not come at the expense of societal or environmental well-being.
   
   Public-private partnerships (PPPs) are a cornerstone of this principle. Projects like the NEWater plants and Tuas Desalination Plant showcase how collaboration with private entities drives innovation and efficiency. In these arrangements, private firms are incentivised to optimise performance while maintaining high standards, delivering cost-effective solutions that benefit the public.

Conclusion:

Singapore's principles of urban governance will continue to evolve with the political and social landscape, bringing the potential for modifications and empirical experimentation in the future. This ongoing evolution in urban governance underscores a strong commitment to navigate urban complexities and balance global ambitions with rising population concerns, which include income inequality and social mixing. These pressures present obstacles but also present opportunities for innovative solutions in the face of future challenges.

The next edition in the series will delve deeper into the role of partnerships and collaborations in helping to achieve and sustain our liveability outcomes.

For more information on the Liveability Systems in the Liveability Framework, please refer to Chapter 3: The Supporting Systems, here.

If you prefer to download the full book, please click here.