Managing Singapore’s residential diversity through Ethnic Integration Policy

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore Singaporeans’ view to a multicultural neighbourhood, specifically, their views on the Ethnic Integration Policy (EIP), a housing policy that promotes residential desegregation, and whether this policy has engendered a positive perspective to residential diversity. Design/methodology/approach A grounded theory approach is used to answer the following research questions: how do Singaporeans feel about residential diversity? Does the EIP influence attitudes to residential segregation in Singapore? What do these attitudes mean for governments and policymakers around the world? The research involved focus group discussions with 27 Housing and Development Board real estate agents, in order to tap onto their vast network of clients and better understand the prevailing sentiments on the ground. Findings The two major considerations when Singaporeans choose a flat are its price and location. Within the confines of these two factors, however, other considerations like race, nationality and the socio-economic makeup of a neighbourhood will influence their decisions. Social implications These considerations can be condensed into the factors of constrained choice and voluntary segregation. By limiting the impact of voluntary segregation, the EIP can be credited with bridging the racial divide. However, with constrained choice being unaddressed by the policy, the emerging formation of a class divide is an unintended consequence. Originality/value Because almost all developed economies are culturally plural, understanding Singapore’s approach to residential desegregation offers insights as to how other countries may learn from the Singapore experience in managing and encouraging multiculturalism, especially since ethnic residential concentration can reduce the formation of strong social relationships.

A Study on Urban Ethnic Segmentation in Kabul City, Afghanistan

“…The state tightly regulates the housing market in Singapore. The EIP quota limits each block to a maximum of 87, 25, and 15% of families that are Chinese, Malay, or other Asian nationalities, respectively [55]. Applying this model to Kabul city public housing, with a correct population and ethnic size numbers, can promote mixing and understanding across ethnic groups.…”

Do ethnic integration policies also improve socio-economic integration? A study of residential segregation in Singapore

“…The initial stated policy rationale for the EIP was the prevention of ethnic enclaves that might threaten ‘racial tolerance and harmony’ (Lim et al, 2019). Over time, EIP policy justifications shifted beyond the maintenance of social order towards extolling the benefits of integration of, and interaction between, different ethnic groups; providing good access to jobs and education opportunities; and allowing appreciation in home equity to be reaped by all ethnic groups (Ong, 2021; Tharman Shanmugaratnam, 2015).…”

A Multiethnic Asian Perspective of Presumed Consent for Organ Donation: A Population-Based Perception Study

“…3.2 million of the 4 million stayed in public housing (17). Within each public housing estate, there is a predetermined proportion of persons from each major ethnic group as part of the local ethnic integration policy (18). This ensures a distribution of various ethnic groups within each housing estate that is similar to the population distribution.…”