Land Use Policy 30 (2013) 167–176 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Land Use Policy jou rn al h om epa g e: www.elsevier.com/locate/landusepol Of fast lanes, flora, and foreign workers: Managing land use conflicts in Singapore Mayers Ng Mei Sze, Benjamin K. Sovacool ∗ Vermont Law School, Institute for Energy and the Environment, PO Box 96, 164 Chelsea Street, South Royalton, VT 05068-0444, United States a r t i c l e i n f o Article history: Received 26 August 2011 Received in revised form 4 February 2012 Accepted 13 March 2012 Keywords: Land use conflict Sustainability Singapore a b s t r a c t This paper presents a preliminary land use conflict resolution model and then evaluates how Singapore measures up with three examples of land use conflicts. The study begins by arguing that the criteria of efficiency, equity, sustainability, and compatibility should be utilized to manage conflicts in land use. Effi- ciency involves having quick and conducive development and transactions of land that promote economic growth. Equity encompasses having a fair system that involves all relevant stakeholders. Sustainability relates to how environmentally and socially sound land use is for current and future users. Compati- bility refers to how land use is integrated with other laws and regulations. The study then applies this framework to three case studies of land use conflict in Singapore: the demolition of a national library for the Fort Canning tunnel, the reprieve of Chek Jawa Wetlands, and the creation of a foreign workers dormitory in a residential neighborhood. We find that the Chek Jawa scheme scored the best according to our criteria, the workers dormitory second best, and the Fort Canning tunnel third. We conclude by offering implications for public policy and land use policy more broadly. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Introduction Managing land scarcity is a perennial challenge for Singapore. Following its independence from British rule on June 3, 1959, Singaporean government planners focused on housing, jobs, and minimizing corruption as their three key issues. Everything else came second, and the resulting industrialization has caused rapid economic development and rising standards of living that have since come to be known as the “Singapore model” (Wong et al., 2008). Driving factors behind the growth have been greater house- hold incomes, staggering investments in infrastructure, and a one-party democracy managed by a semi-authoritarian state capa- ble of implementing its ideas with an almost flawless efficiency (Chua, 2009; Wong et al., 2008; Dale, 1999). As one study surmised: The state-centered political economy of Singapore has bred a top–down land use planning system centrally controlled by the government. Not only has the government dominated the plan making process, the legislation has entrusted the public sector to scrutinize and guide private development through a discre- tionary development control system. The government is able to mobilize resources to implement plans with the tacit consent of a regulated and meritocracy-based society (Ng, 1999, pp. 2–3). Despite the scope and efficiency with which the government’s plans have been implemented, however, Singapore is also one ∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 802 831 1053; fax: +1 802 831 1158. E-mail addresses: sovacool@vt.edu, Bsovacool@vermontlaw.edu (B.K. Sovacool). of the most population-dense countries in the world. Therefore, planners must continuously balance various competing land uses to meet current and future needs. In striving for the best of all worlds—growing the economy, preserving the natural environ- ment, enhancing social equity—one is often confronted with land use conflicts. This paper presents a preliminary land use conflict resolution model and then evaluates how Singapore measures up. It first proposes that efficiency, equity, sustainability, and compatibility should be utilized to manage conflicts in land use. It then applies this framework to case studies in Singapore involving the demoli- tion of a national library for the Fort Canning tunnel, the reprieve of Chek Jawa Wetlands, and the creation of a foreign workers dor- mitory in a residential neighborhood. We find that the Chek Jawa scheme scored the best according to our criteria, the workers dor- mitory second best, the Fort Canning tunnel third. We conclude by offering implications for public policy and land use policy more broadly. Conceptualizing land use conflict As readers of this journal will already know, land use is a site of perpetual disagreement, since land is what Bogale et al. (2006) refer to as “the most fundamental resource.” Von der Dunk et al. (2011) define a land use conflict as “whenever land-use stakeholders (con- flict parties) have incompatible interests related to certain land-use units (geographical component).” Conflicts often center on who is to maintain control a particular area of land, who possesses the right to participate in decision-making about its management, and the 0264-8377/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.03.008