An empty Changi Airport departure hall. Photo by Grace Lim on Unsplash.
When Covid-19 first arrived on Singapore's shores on Jan 23 2020, the government took swift action: taking the temperatures of all visitors to Changi Airport, stocking up masks and other essential medical equipment. The DORSCON level was also raised from yellow to orange on Februrary 7, when the first cases of community spread were suspected. A hitherto unprecedented amount of $93 billion (over four Budget packages) - with $52 billion taken from the country's reserves - was spent to alleviate the dire situations of affected businesses, citizens and the healthcare sector1. It was commensurate to the urgency of the situation, which could have severely damaged Singapore's economy to a state worse than it currently is. As always, the Singapore government responded promptly to the threat of an economic crisis, something that both Singaporeans and the government try to avert at all costs. But this then begs the question: if it's the economy the people, and by extension the government, are worried about, then why is so little action being taken to curb the climate crisis which would almost certainly bring more drastic long-term economic consequences?
A nation of crises
The Great Depression (1929-1933), World War II (1942-1945) and its post-war recovery, the full internal self-governance of Singapore (1959-1963), the merger (1963) and separation (1965) with Malaya, the Asian Financial Crisis (1997-1998), the SARS pandemic (2003), the Global Financial Crisis (2008-2009) and the Covid-19 pandemic (2020-present). These are just some of the more prominent crises Singapore encountered and overcame (barring Covid-19 which is still ongoing). Quite a miracle, isn't it? No doubt that it's worthy of commendation, something the government has constantly emphasised in the country's official narrative: Singapore overcame all odds through sheer will and determination. I'm not going to argue against this because it definitely holds a degree of truth, but I want to bring to light a similarity between all these different crises - the threat to Singapore's economy.
In every single one of these crises, the country's economic outlook was the cornerstone of all decision-making. A strong economy was - and still is, albeit arguably to a less extent - seen as paramount for the development of the country, and the government's initial response is always to reduce the impact of the crisis to Singapore's economy. Take the case of 1959, when the British granted Singapore full internal self-governance. Dr Goh Keng Swee, then Minister of Finance, envisioned a future of a regional fossil fuel hub in Singapore. He put this plan into action in 1960 by securing a $30million investment from Shell to build the island's first oil refinery2. This marked the beginning of Singapore's deep ties with the fossil fuel industry, boosting Singapore's reputation as a trusted and business-friendly country, further attracting large amounts of foreign direct investment. Without the swiftness and decisiveness which the government acted with, it is hard to imagine the prosperity of our nation today.
Jurong Island and the multitude of oil refineries and petrochemical industries. Photo by Jacklee (2011) on Wikipedia, 'Jurong Island'.
Such a determined stance was adopted despite the fact that 1959 was not the most urgent 'crisis' the country ever faced, unlike a pandemic or a collapse of the global economy. To understand this, perhaps, it is time to look into what the word 'crisis' actually means.
Decisiveness, inflection point, loss of courage
The root of the word 'crisis' is a Greek verb, κρίνω krinō, meaning 'distinguish, choose, decide'. The word was borrowed by Latin and subsequently English, where its first recorded usage was for 'a turning point in a disease'3.
What does the etymology of 'crisis' tell us? One would first need to distinguish the problem(s) and decide on the solution with conviction, just like how the PAP distinguished the need to attract foreign investment to Singapore, and decided on enticing Shell to invest in the nation. Such resolve in the government's actions elucidates the criticality of the situation - a turning point where the fate of the country could have entered two completely divergent paths; the first is where Singapore is today, a nation of prosperity where we engage in high-value activites; the second is a nation that still relies on its primary or secondary sectors - generally low-value activities - and thus struggles to put its name on the global stage.
The Singapore of today is facing yet another inflection point: the climate crisis. The National Climate Change Secretariat, a strategy group within the Prime Minister's Office, warns of the many dangers of the climate crisis to Singapore such as more drastic wet and dry seasons and global food shortages4. Given the potential long-term threats to Singapore, now marks another vital turning point where the nation's future could diverge into two vastly different paths: a fossil fuel free, zero-waste circular economy that incorporates sustainability into economic development (could we possibly even move away from the idea of 'growth'?), or an ever more risky fossil fuel reliant economy that could collapse once the 'fossil fuel bubble' bursts? The first would require ambition similar to, or even more than, that PAP possessed in 1959 when it envisioned Singapore as the fossil fuel hub of the region. Yet, the country appears destined for the second scenario, with its continued investments in fossil fuel companies.
Where are the hallmarks of swiftness and decisiveness of the government when it comes to transitioning to a fossil-fuel free economy?
Before I sound like an overly angry environmentalist asserting unachievable goals, let me acknowledge that the government has done a commendable job in many areas of the environment. From the Land Transport Authority's mass construction of new MRT lines (such as the Thomson-East Coast Line) and the Singapore Food Authority's target of producing 30% of the country's food locally, it is evident that the government has thorough plans to adapt to an uncertain future in the era of the climate crisis. While these actions are certainly laudable, little has been said and done about the elephants in the room, namely the fossil fuel industry, shipping bunkers and the aviation sector. I shall not bore you with the statistics, but just do a quick Google search if you're interested and you will definitely find out how much carbon these industries are releasing into the atmosphere year by year.
Rather, I'm more concerned about how our country's unprecedented success has seemingly dwindled our courage and willingness to take risks. This risk-aversion is so deeply entrenched in all levels of Singaporean society; parents disapprove their children pursuing 'unconventional' fields like art and history; youths are unwilling to set up their businesses in Southeast Asian countries; lastly and most pertinently, the government's unwillingness to take bolder steps to decarbonise our economy. Even if we have constraints for adopting renewable energy, we can always finance our neighbours' green energy projects rather than investing in fossil fuel projects. After all, Singapore's enormous wealth and global investments allow us to exert an influence much larger than our geographical size.
Maybe, the narrative that we 'overcame all odds' to reach our present day prosperity has created a psychological barrier that we must cling onto what we have, unwilling to let it go and try novel things.
Yet, the climate crisis is slowly but surely spreading its insidious tentacles towards us. Just the first two days of 2021 saw 318.6mm of rain in Changi, more than the average for the whole month of January at 238.3mm5. The cause? A combination of a Northeast Monsoon surge and La Nina, a global phenomenon likely to increase in frequency and intensity as the planet warms. While the cooling weather was met with much enthusiasm on social media, I doubt many of us will be feeling the same way when flash floods destroy our vehicles or damage our property.
Flooding in NTU's Pioneer Hall. Photo from The Straits Times6
Riding with the inflection point
The climate crisis is here and will not wait for us whether we transition away from the fossil-fuel economy. Combatting this crisis requires a nationwide change: inculcating in the young the importance of a circular economy, increasing awareness within society of how our jobs and economy can and will be affected, and lastly, the government taking greater risks to drive a green shift in our industries. Even if you don't believe in 'saving our Earth', the very threat to Singapore's economy should make you pay more attention to the climate crisis.
Stop saying 'climate change'. Say 'the climate crisis' instead. Only by recognising it as an emergency can we even harbour any hope to solve the crisis.
In math, an inflection point is where the curve changes sign. The climate crisis' inflection point is here. Either we change our sign and follow the curve, or we follow our original path into inexistence. Let us distinguish, choose, decide.
This article was inspired by the many chapters in 'Eating Chilli Crab in the Anthropocene', allowing me to think about Singaporean society from a different perspective. Do give the book a read if you have the time!
References
1. Han Fook Kwang, (2020, June 2020). Covid-19: Make sure the $93b is well spent. The Straits Times. URL: https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/covid-19-make-sure-the-93b-is-well-spent
2. Ng, Singapore, the Energy Economy, 12.
3.Wikipedia, (2021, Jan 2021). Crisis. URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis
4. NCCS, (2020, 30 Dec). Impact of Climate Change in Singapore. URL: https://www.nccs.gov.sg/singapores-climate-action/impact-of-climate-change-in-singapore/
5. Cheryl Teh, Ng Wei Kai. (2021, Jan 3). Rainfall on Saturday among highest in Singapore in past 39 yeras. The Straits Times. URl: https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/wet-and-windy-start-to-the-new-year-continues-into-saturday
6. Ibid.
Comments
Post a Comment