DISSERTATION

A study on the factors attributing to the Environmental Generational Amnesia in Singapore

KENNERVE TAN

Dr. Mitha Budhyarto/ Rachel Koh

Lecturers

AY 2019/20

Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the

Bachelor of Arts (Honours) in Product Design

LASALLE College of the Arts

Faculty of Design, School of Spatial and Product Design

Singapore

In submitting this work to LASALLE College of the Arts, I understand that I am giving permission for it to be made available for use in accordance with the regulations and policies of the college, and that the work is also subject to the college policy on intellectual property.

Contents

I. Introduction

a. Background of research

b. Overview of sections

II. Literature Review

a. A generation born with a silver spoon

b. A Strange addiction towards technology

c. Environmentalist efforts

III. Case Studies

a. Products of Tomorrow

b. Eco-Link @ BKE

c. Audi: A Drive Back in Time

IV. Primary research

a. Methods

i. Interviews

ii. Ethnography research

1. Jurong Lake Garden

2. Jewel @ Changi Airport

3. Gardens by the Bay

b. Findings

i. Interviews

ii. Ethnography Research

1. Jurong Lake Garden

2. Jewel @ Changi Airport

3. Gardens by the Bay

V. Analysis and interpretation

a. Nature as an expendable resource

b. Nature as a spectacle

c. Technology’s encroachment into nature

VI. Conclusion

VII. References

VIII. Image references

IX. Appendix

I. Introduction

a. Background of research

Since the dawn of the Industrial Age in 1784 to the present day, “humans are living at a point in time where their impacts on the environment are, for the first time, threatening not only the local but also the global functioning of ecosystems” (Running 201). The effects of environmental degradation trickle from one generation to the next, yet at no single point in time has there been any generation that understands the full extent of harm. Peter Kahn, Professor in the Department of Psychology of the University of Washington, introduces a condition called Environmental Generational Amnesia (EGA). It is a condition where “each subsequent generation perceives the degradation of the environment as normal” (Kahn 165). Therefore, each successive generation habituates to increasingly severe levels of degradation and they take the degraded condition as a non-degraded baseline. This results in successive increases in environmental degradation generation after generation.

Enter the Information Age (1990 - 2040), a period defined by the blending of material, biological, and digital elements driven by technological advancements (Schwab). Precipitated by the invention of the semiconductor, this period heralded a shift into a new human lifestyle, characterised by the ubiquity of digital technology. Philosopher Koert van Mensvoort describes people of the Information Age as “fish in the water that does not realise their wetness”; “submerged in technology, yet relatively oblivious to its omnipresence” (Mensvoort 14). Such transformations in lifestyle have altered how human beings perceive and experience nature, and redefined the mediums through which humans interact with nature, for instance through digital screens, robotics and virtual reality. This gave rise to the notion of technological nature - “technologies that… mediate, augment, or simulate the natural world” (Kahn 8).

Amongst countries, Singapore has differentiated itself through its extensive attempts to manipulate nature and its resources through government policies and technological prowess. From its founding stages beginning with Former Prime Minister Lee Kwan Yew’s vision of a Garden City to state-of-the-art technological gardens (with attractions such as Gardens by the Bay and Jewel), Singapore has had a long-standing fascination with nature. Yet, this carefully planned man-made natural environment in the 21st century seems to have distanced younger citizens with true nature; no longer do locals who grew up with orderly rows of planted trees and shrubs remember the untouched, unruly forests. Compounded with policies and laws enforced by the government on maintaining a facade of cleanliness and civility - such as hefty fines for littering and even chewing gum - young Singaporeans live and grow in an environment so protected, many have become oblivious and apathetic to local environmental issues.

This dissertation will focus on EGA and apathy towards the conservation and restoration of nature in Singapore. While a majority of Singaporeans are highly educated and thus can be expected to be more environmentally aware, a worrying observation to the contrary is apparent: Singaporeans appear to be apathetic towards nature conservation and restoration, potentially as an effect of EGA. Despite having common knowledge of global environmental issues, few Singaporeans have initiated environmentalist efforts to date (Tan), and remain indolent. This dissertation seeks to explore factors contributing to EGA in Singapore, through a study of government policies relevant to nature, local Technological Nature implementation, and environmentalist efforts.

b. Overview of sections

The bulk of this dissertation is divided into the following four sections. The first section establishes background research on the topic and the objectives of the dissertation. The second section reviews a series of selected literature pertaining to EGA in Singapore and is followed by the third section, where investigation of case studies and primary researches illustrate the points discussed. Lastly, the fourth section documents a thorough analysis of the topic aforementioned, and a summary that presents an outlook obtained from the scrutiny of the points discussed.

II. Literature review

a. A generation born with a silver spoon

Fig. 1. Straits Times. Tree Planting Day in Singapore: 5 things about the 51-year-old tradition. 2014.

To understand the way government policy has contributed to EGA in Singapore, one has to first understand Lee Kwan Yew’s vision of a Garden City Singapore. Garden City is an urban planning concept pioneered by Ebenezer Howard (1850-1928), a London-born philanthropist and visionary, who published a theoretical concept of the garden city as two editions of the book “To-Morrow: A Peaceful Path to Real Reform” (1898) and “Garden Cities of To-Morrow” (1902). In his book, Howard put forth the concept of a “self-contained settlement that would have the advantages of both urban and rural lifestyles while reducing and eliminating their disadvantages” (Ćorović 201). The concept behind Howard’s Garden City was not only a biophilic urban development plan but also one that “encompasses social movement and intervention” (Ćorović 202). He rationale that if a city was to be implemented with his Garden City concept, “it would be an attractive point for most of the unhappy inhabitants in the overpopulated industrial British cities, and thus resolve one of the major national problems of the time” (Ćorović 201).

The anglophilic views of Lee Kuan Yew could be linked to the strong influence from his education. Lee attended Raffles Institution and after the Second World War, went on to complete his tertiary education at the University of Cambridge. It was during this phase of his life where Lee related that “London has overwhelmed him and he sought the more pleasant surroundings of Cambridge” (Han et al. 85).

Returning to Singapore, Lee helmed the position of being the first Prime Minister of Singapore. The concept of Howard’s Garden City echoed through the vision he had for Singapore and its future. In the grand scheme of things, Garden City became the anchoring identity of Singapore on the world map. In his speech made during the first Tree Planting Campaign in 1963, Lee emphasised the importance that “Singapore must not be allowed to become a concrete jungle in the process of industrialisation and urbanisation” (Lau-Tan et al. 35). The rapid greening effort of Singapore in the early 1970s to 1995 was meticulously planned and enforced. His vision not only covered parks and nature reserves, but also a vast spectrum of infrastructures from “buildings and bridges to expressways with supplementary spaces available for planting flowering shrubs and other foliage” (Lau-Tan et al. 60).

Lee‘s vision was doubtlessly a great success. Singapore was often referred to as “the exemplary effort that has produced a city surprisingly green and full of nature and a role model of vertical green living” (Beatley 1) in many literature and media. It epitomises Singapore’s identity on the world map, boosting it as one of a tourism hotspot. As experienced by tourists, many praised Singapore for being a city that is “no longer a city that has beautiful gardens, but pervasive greenery, as well as biodiversity, including wildlife, all around you” (Lim 451). This evidently signifies the outcome of the government's “deliberate planning and management based on a utilitarian view toward nature rather than on the outcomes of an organic and comprehensive transition to a green society” (Han 7).

However, such an approach may not necessarily bring the intended result. French landscape architect Céline Baumann asserts that "greenery is not per se ecological, and the commodification of nature can lead in fact, to the reduction of biodiversity and higher pollution levels" (Block).

While it was the forefathers that put in the hard work, the fruits of the labour were most richly savoured by the subsequent generations since such greening efforts demanded time to bear fruit. This idea of contribution towards the future was affirmed by Lee, who said in a speech to the pioneers, “We (the pioneers) will not be able to enjoy these trees, but our grandchildren will be able to enjoy them” (Lau-Tan et al. 127). An unfortunate result of reaping the benefits of the previous generation is that younger Singaporeans begin to take it for granted. They become accustomed to the Garden City they were born in, remembering little of Singapore’s original and indigenous natural landscapes. Inheriting a country with abundant and strategically arranged nature, it has been brought to the attention that “the younger generation of Singaporeans cannot imagine a Singapore that is anything but a Garden City with abundant greenery, nearby parks, birdlife and lush street-side planting” (Lau-Tan et al. 127).

It is interesting to note that this amnesia of the past can be linked to the philosophical concept of “Tabula Rasa”. It is a term used by 17th-century English philosopher John Locke, who describes this state as “an absence of preconceived ideas” (Lawson 195). His concept parallels the issue that Singapore faces as each successive generation learns about nature from a blank slate, thus their earliest memories of nature are not of its true state, but of the degraded, artificial remnants of their predecessors.

This amnesia regarding Singapore’s environmental degradation in its bid to become a world-class Garden City has become one of its biggest criticisms. A collaborated study spearheaded by the National University of Singapore, University of Adelaide’s Environment Institute and Princeton University published in 2010 titled “Evaluating the Relative Environmental Impact of Countries”, ranks Singapore as the worst environmental offender among 179 countries in relative environmental impact. The study exposed that relative to its land size, the “intensive development of Singapore has significantly contributed to its forest loss, natural habitat conversion, marine captures, carbon emissions and biodiversity” (Bradshaw et al. 4). Moreover, the greening effort proved to be largely “superficial, too high-maintenance and, ultimately, not ecologically sustainable” (Bradshaw et al. 6). They also identified that the government has “prioritised the man-made greening of highways, streets and residential areas and not enough effort has been invested conversing and restoring the little natural areas left in Singapore” (Bradshaw et al. 6).

Hence, Singapore is in a position where the government has “mastered manipulating the environment, but at the cost of individual autonomy, and running the risk of unsustainability” (George 15). As a result, successive generations of Singapore are also observed to have “a very forgiving concept of what constitutes a degraded landscape” (Papworth et al. 96). The gradual environmental changes have also “exacerbated the acceptance of environmental change via generational amnesia syndrome, where knowledge is lost because younger generations are not aware of past conditions or as individuals forget their own past experiences” (Papworth et al. 97).

Fig. 2 & 3. Brooks. Loss of biodiversity: What have we lost. 2014.

Reports have shown that “Singapore has lost more than half of its native fauna” (Brook 421) and of “the remaining species left in Singapore, 77% of them are ‘threatened’, based on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) regional listing criteria” (Brook 422). With the lack of comparison of the past and present, Singaporeans are misled into believing that the “strong competency in government policies, equates to not many actions having to be done on an individual scale in regards to the environmental issues that Singapore is facing” (Tan).

Further cementing EGA in Singapore is the insidious influence of its singular, authoritative state narrative, and highly state-controlled education system. The state’s self-fulfilling narrative, which reinforces (with pride) the view that ‘nature’ in the Garden City constitutes artificial, man-made parks, trees, and gardens, remains part of the closely monitored and carefully curated curriculum in the education system (Bradshaw et al. 9). Along with the need for conformity and consensus, a lack of competing political discourse about such state-sanctioned narratives further crystallises aforementioned erroneous conceptions. It was only in the recent bicentennial celebrations that national narratives beyond the ones regularly promoted were raised. For instance, the narrative of Singapore being conceived only recently as a nation was extended to include up to the pre-colonisation era when it was part of the Majapahit Kingdom and a regional trading hub. (“The Land Before 1819”). Yet, even these alternative narratives are state-sanctioned and controlled, and serve to supplement instead of challenging the status quo.

b. A strange addiction towards technology

In recent years, technology has altered the human experience of nature. In “Technological Nature: Adaptation and the Future of Human Life,” author Peter Kahn defines technological nature as "technologies that... mediate, augment, or simulate the natural world" (Kahn 8). In his book, Kahn elucidated research on the use of technology to mediate physiological and affective experiences of nature. Kahn highlights two societal and environmental trends that could potentially transform the nature of human existence - one being the gradual erosion of nature, and the other, the explosion of technology within human lives (Kahn 16). These factors will inevitably alter the ways members of the public perceive, think about and engage with nature (Kahn 17).

This trend is especially prevalent in modern Singapore. To maintain its City in a Garden identity in this technologically-driven era, many of its infrastructures and attractions were designed and built to incorporate technological elements. Thus, in its current state, Singapore has become “more than a symbol of the island’s postcolonial ascendancy, with the turn to ecological infrastructure as a form of symbolic national power consolidation that also ramps up the city’s global appeal” (Lim 449). Taking Jewel and Gardens by the Bay as examples, through flamboyant floral exhibits, spectacular instalments that imitate natural waterfalls and Supertrees used for fancy light shows, Singapore’s efforts of “transcending the island’s spatial constraints into part of the future island’s dream of an electric tropicality” (Eng 446) are fortified.

These efforts appear to make what is deemed impossible in nature happen, such as a “perpetual spring in the equator” (Gardens by the Bay). Singapore’s futuristic green scapes implant a technological conception of “an island so dissonant with the native paradise of yesteryear that the validity of that colonial invention cannot but automatically expire” (Lim 499).

Such artificial landscapes may not bode well for the future of nature in Singapore and in turn altering the perception of what true nature is amongst Singaporean youths. Writing in an issue of the journal Current Directions in Psychological Science, Dr Peter Kahn along with two of his graduate students, Rachel Severson and Jolina Ruckert argued that, "humans are a technological species, but they also need a deep connection with nature in their lives” (Kahn et al. 39). Hypothetically, over time the increasing technologisation of nature will perverse the perceptions of what true nature is, contributing to EGA. This may result in further environmental destruction in future - as environmentalists have also argued, people protect only what they know. As humans are distanced from true nature, they will slowly lose their appreciation of, and thus their desire to protect and restore nature (Pergams et al. 2295).

While the technological supplementation of nature causing it to become bastardised is a pan generational issue, youths are the more vulnerable group as they are more heavily exposed to technology compared to the previous generations. In his book New Dark Age, James Bridle, a London writer and artist, unpacks a series of ideas on how technology is blurring man's understanding of the world around them. In one of the chapters titled “Climate”, Bridle put forth the idea that “high-tech society not only accelerates climate change, but it also destroys analogue sources of knowledge” (Bridle 52). By implication, younger generations learn from the relatively recent, and much newer, ‘high-tech’ sources which are likely to contain inherently distinct narratives of nature, in contrast to the ideas of ‘true nature’ embedded in ‘older’ analogue sources. This further exacerbates and perpetuates EGA.

Of the majority who have lived most of their lives submerged in an environment with increasingly converging technologies, many will find it “complicated to distinguish the digital from the non-digital in the future” (Redford et al.). With the heavy application of technological solutions towards environmental issues, “the lack of influence of civil society has created new environmental and social problems which potentially undermine stability and sustainability” (Ortmann 10). All seems to hold true that technological nature-based developments potentially have a strong impact on nature.

c. Environmentalist efforts

With a reputation for world-class education and forward-thinking government policies, Singapore has remained a clean and green nation. In a journal article, Jule Schulze and her peers from the Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research put forth the notion that “the depth of information about the natural world that is available, ranging from simple educational material and documentaries to cutting-edge earth observation systems, also means that people can better appreciate nature and threats to nature than ever before” (Schulze et al.).

Although the numerous efforts to stem environmental degradation at the national scale seem promising, such as having a large number of public recycling bins placed around housing estates and companies putting in the effort to reduce plastic waste with the stoppage of providing straws, the same cannot be said at an individual level.

Despite placing a strong emphasis on recycling, the Singapore government has so far failed to implement a successful program to curb its massive volumes of waste produced on an individual level. Unlike Singapore’s neighbouring countries like Japan and Taiwan, “Singapore has not yet to implement any restrictions and penalties on the extensive use of plastic bags, demonstrating a lack of prioritisation of environmental considerations over economic concerns” (Ortmann 9). This journal also partially holds the government responsible for the apathy towards individual environmental responsibilities, as the failure of implementing a successful program suggests a lack of concern for environmental issues.

These issues seem set to persist if nothing else is done, evidenced by the pronounced apathy of Singaporean youths toward the environment. Many reports are criticising the lack of concern for environmental issues observed in Singapore. In an online news article posted by Today titled “more Singaporean youths aware of climate change but not doing enough to slow the crisis”, reporter Tessa Oh interviewed locals belonging to the Baby Boomer generation (1946-1964). With regards to the level of understanding of environmental issues perceived by youths being still superficial, many gave negative remarks with some stating that “even though the youths knew that the environmental issues are of major concern, they would still prioritise their needs and wants” (Oh). It is clear that such mindsets result in the observable attitude of youths taking things for granted, thinking that someone will take care of it so they do not consider the repercussions of their actions” (Oh).

It is true that currently, there are many young entrepreneurs whose companies are vocally engaged to reduce waste, especially in the younger and trendier food and beverage sectors. However, there are also criticisms that these pledges seem to be a marketing tool rather than genuine concern for environmental issues. The issue with this trend can be observed in a report by Matthew Mohan from Channel News Asia. In his report, his interviewee, Olivia Choong, co-founder of the environmental group Green Drinks Singapore, feedback that although “it’s a good first step (the reduction of straws by F&B companies), there are still a lot of business waiting for somebody to start first,” and she felt that “companies always need somebody to start and see that it is doable” (Mohan). This points to the possible fact that companies are prioritising monetary benefits over the actual cause of protecting the environment.

III. Case studies

a. Products of Tomorrow

Fig. 4, 5, 6 & 7. Folster. Products of Tomorrow. 2017.

Products of Tomorrow is a Facebook web store of envisioned products created by Brazilian art director and graphic designer Henrique Folster. By designing illustrations of products meant for a future dystopian world, he seeks to explore the feeling of nostalgia caused by the constant generational amnesia. In this way, Folster subverts present-day consumerism, highlighting the idea of mankind not being able to gain access to simple pleasures that they have taken for granted currently.

Each product, launched with a sensorial film, explores the bright side of a dystopian world, eerily similar yet provocatively different from their contemporary counterparts. Familiar, common consumables such as apples and bottled water are re-imagined as scarce resources, found only in traces of products in the future. Folster further uses Mars-inspired colour schemes, with subtle text revealing unsettling realities such as degradation of the ozone layer, lack of clean drinking water and, consequently soil infertility, which are the three major problems that are caused by global warming. Akin to political cartoons, these features are intentionally included to disturb the audience and to warn them of a new, grim future that may occur if generational amnesia continues to persist.

b. Eco-Link @ BKE

Fig. 8. Straits Times. Eco-Link @ BKE. 2015.

To reduce the travelling time for motor vehicles, the government of Singapore has invested huge reserves into building more roads and expressways. While these actions helped its citizens, there are many side effects caused such as the destruction of natural habitat and loss of wildlife. This issue was also put forth in a speech made by the noted historian and cinematographer, Dr Ivan Polumin. “In the past, there was a pipeline between which seemed to cut off the Bukit Timah reserve from the general catchment area. But in fact, the flying lemur and other little animals could still cross. Now with a big, broad highway, it’s just not possible" (Chew et al.).

Fig. 9. Straits Times. Wild sambar deer put down after a 3-vehicle accident on BKE. 2018

In a recent news article from Channel News Asia, it was reported that there have been 5 cases of road kills along the Bukit Timah Expressway and Mandai area (Fig. 9.) since the development of the Eco-tourism hub. Wild animals in Mandai such as pregnant boar, sambar deer, pangolin and leopard cats have been the victims of car accidents. These made news headlines possibly due to the size and scale of the accidents. Therefore, there are possibilities that the numbers of roadkill reported could be even larger as accidents with small critters are left unreported.

Fig. 10. Straits Times. Animals Crossing EcoLink @ BKE. 2015.

To curb this issue, a bridge spanning 140 meters named the Eco-Link @ BKE was built (Fig. 10) to serve as a wildlife only connector for the two buffer zones within the Central Catchment Nature Reserve. According to its developer, not only will the 140-meter bridge serve as a pavement for the wildlife to cross the expressway, but it will also “promote movement of animals from both sides to mate” and also boasted the feature of a “multi-layered forest habitat” with over 30,000 plants (Tan).

In an interview conducted by Straits Times with a conservationist, Mr Subaraj said that he witnessed the reserve becoming a forest island surrounded by a concrete jungle. “With the creation of the BKE, you take away all the forest that was once on the highway... so winds come in during stormy days and started knocking down trees on Bukit Timah Hill.” He also added that he “noticed certain animals that have almost gone extinct due to the moist rainforest drying up” (Chew et al.).

c. Audi: A Drive Back in Time

Fig. 11. Jedrek. Audi SG50 A Drive Back in Time. 2015.

Fig. 12. Straits Times. Audi SG50 Time Machine app: A drive back to 1965 Singapore. 2015.

Fig. 13. YouTube. Audi Singapore Presents: A Drive Back in Time. 2015.

Fig. 14. YouTube. Audi Singapore Presents: A Drive Back in Time. 2015.

To commemorate Singapore’s golden jubilee in 2015, Audi Singapore showcased “A Drive Back in Time'' (Fig. 11), the nation’s first immersive 360-degree virtual reality (VR) heritage tour experience. The ‘tour’ explores Singapore in 1965, recreated using archive materials and images (Fig. 12). As the saying goes, “the only time you should ever look back is to see how far you’ve come.” There is certainly a lot to see as Singapore’s growth has come a long way.

The experience, akin to a time machine, revealed the vast differences in the landscape of Singapore then and now. With virtual seas replacing the Marina Bay, younger attendees were taken aback as they were unaware that the majority of buildings forming the now iconic skyline stand on reclaimed land. On the other hand, older attendees were in awe. Many eagerly shared stories of their experiences, with one sharing “every Saturday the youngsters will lepak (a Malay term for relax) along the bay,” while pointing towards the Padang (Fig. 14). This disparity in responses highlights the contrast between younger and older Singaporeans’ perceptions of local landscapes.

IV.Primary Research

a. Methods

i. Interview

2 semi-structured interviews were conducted (Appendix A.) to understand Singaporeans’ opinions of nature, specifically on the redevelopment of the Jurong Lake District. Interviewees from 2 different age groups residing in Taman Jurong were selected to obtain distinct perspectives and responses to the interview questions. The first interview was conducted with Madam Chen Lee May, 58 years old, resident of Taman Jurong for over 25 years while a second interview was with Mr Darren Yeo,18 years old, resident of Taman Jurong for the past 14 years.

ii. Ethnography Research

1. Jurong Lake Gardens

Lakeside Garden is a 53-hectare western sector of the newly redeveloped Jurong Lake Gardens, which was opened to the public on April 27 2019. It is the first phase to open as part of the 90-hectare Jurong Lake Gardens - Singapore’s third national gardens and its first in the heartlands (NParks). Field research was conducted in Jurong Lake Gardens not only because of its nature as a park but firstly, it is located next to the future second central business district of Singapore, the Jurong Lake District. ("Plans for Singapore’s Second CBD Unveiled: Jurong Lake District | MND Link | Ministry Of National Development") and secondly it is also located next to Jurong west, which is a matured district with residential estates some over 40 years old. Besides, hefty sums of money and planning are pumped into the Jurong Lake District development by the government, therefore Jurong Lake Gardens is a prime candidate for conducting field research on the topic of environmental degradation linking to environmental generational disorder

2. Jewel @ Changi Airport

Conceptualised by the renowned Israeli-Canadian architect Moshe Safdie, Singapore Changi Airport’s Jewel is a completely indoors “mythical garden” cum shopping complex, where nature and technology intersect. Built upon Singapore’s vision of a City in a Garden, the glass-enclosed geodesic dome houses a vast variety of foreign faunas originating from countries such as Australia, China, Malaysia, Spain, Thailand and the United States.

Ethnographic research was conducted there as Jewel Changi is now one of Singapore’s iconic landmarks, and is a prime example of how government policy has shaped technology and nature into spectacular entertainment for visitors and locals alike.

3. Gardens by the Bay

Gardens by the Bay (GBTB) refers to a collection of giant greenhouses and outdoor gardens housing lush greenery and flower displays. The GBTB’s Flower Dome is a cooled conservatory in the form of a giant glasshouse, and contains thousands of species of flora and fauna of Mediterranean and semi-arid subtropical origin. The GBTB’s Cloud Forest is also a giant glass dome housing green tropical plants, an artificial ‘mountain’ and waterfall covered in greenery. Finally, outside these domes are Supertrees, tall man-made structures covered in plants, on which nightly light shows are held.

Ethnographic research was conducted there as not only will GBTB cements the findings in Jewel @ Changi, it also showcases how the use of technology and nature can be used not only as a spectacle but one which also educates its visitors on environmental issues.

b. Findings

i. Interview

During the interview, Madam Chen highlighted that in the process of the Jurong Lake District Redevelopment, she noticed a decline of flora and fauna. She stated that “in the past, that area used to be covered with trees and mangroves. Not only that, look at the building (pointing to PAssion WaVe a People’s Association Water Venture Facility), it used to be a nesting spot for the migrating birds. Now with the trees removed, I seldom see the birds anymore.” Mr Yeo, on the other hand, did not feel otherwise. His only observation after the redevelopment were the increase of younger audience and attractions.

When asked about their opinion on whether younger Singaporeans should be made to know about the environmental impact caused by land redevelopment, Madam Chen believes that just by knowing would not help much. She highlighted the fact that youths nowadays, having the capability to be better versed through mediums like the internet, seems to be lacking in genuine concern of environmental degradation. In her words, “she just hopes that they will make full use of it if not, it would only be a pity making the redeveloped park a white elephant.”

Mr Yeo shared his views that it would be good for the youths to know what are the environmental impact caused by land redevelopment and hopes that if there are, that the government will take it into consideration for future land redevelopment.

ii. Ethnography Research

1. Jurong Lake Gardens

Fig. 15 & 16. Tan, Kennerve. Evidence of trees being relocated. 2019.

Upon stepping into Lakeside Garden, the pungent smell of animal waste filled the air. It is observed that multiple matured trees are surrounded with freshly filled soil with fertilisers encircling them. Further examination showed metal poles supporting the trees (Fig. 15 & 16).

Fig. 17. Tan, Kennerve. A huge empty patch of grass observed. 2019.

A huge patch of flat grass (Fig. 17) was seen located beside an activity centre where many park-goers sought shelter due to the imminent rain. Referring to older maps stated the location was once a wooded area.

Fig. 18 & 19. Tan, Kennerve. Freshwater stream habitat signage. 2019.

Fig. 20. Tan, Kennerve. View of the artificial freshwater stream. 2019.

Fig. 21. Tan, Kennerve. Information plate describing the Heron Island. 2019.

Fig. 22 & 23. Tan, Kennerve. Metal structure erected to facilitate nesting for migratory herons 2019.

Taking a short walk along the asphalt paved walkway leading into the northern side revealed the Heron Island. It is located at the mouth of Neram streams where the main bulk of matured trees are preserved and artificial bodies of water are seen as stated in the information plate (Fig. 18, 19 & 20). These clusters of man-made islands are home to some of the migratory birds such as herons and bitterns. Upon further trekking off course into the Heron Island sanctuary, a couple of gigantic vertically erected structures was observed (Fig. 21, 22 & 23). These structures, as stated in the information plate are “additional platforms that are built among the trees in the islands to provide a permanent shelter for these birds.”

Fig. 24. Tan, Kennerve. Neram streams bank. 2019.

Stones were observed, laid neatly along Neram streams bank and accessible grass surrounding it are kept trimmed showing tell-tale signs of human intervention of nature (Fig. 24).

While overall the whole of the Jurong Lake Gardens created a welcoming ambience with its newly renovated scenic view, many hints pointing towards the degradation of natural habitat happening there. Not unless one delves deeper or had prior understanding of what Jurong Lake Gardens used to look like, the current beauty of the redevelopment overshadows the underlying issue. From the replanting and replantation of trees for aesthetic purposes, and the removal of what used to be a large cluster of trees to make way for a patch of grass for recreational activities, to the erection of metal nesting structures for the migrating herons to rest.

2. Jewel @ Changi Airport

Fig. 25. Tan, Kennerve. The Rain Vortex Photograph. 2019.

Upon stepping into Jewel, the overwhelming sound of gushing water was heard from a distance. Following where the sound originates, visitors are greeted by the spectacular view of a man-made waterfall (Fig. 25). Named the ‘Rain Vortex’, it is the centrepiece of the mall and crowds can be seen taking and posing with it as backdrops. The ambient temperature of the mall was also discernibly cooler than other malls in the heartland.

Fig. 26. Tan, Kennerve. Concealed ambient Speakers. 2019.

One of the prominent attractions of the Rain Vortex is the free hourly light show that starts from 7:30 pm to 11:30 pm. A walk around the perimeters just before the start of the light show revealed multiple concealed projectors and speakers located in shrubs, away from the public’s view (Fig. 26). The shrubs and trees consisted largely of imported fauna. Only a small percentage of native fauna can be seen.

Fig. 27. Tan, Kennerve. Audience during the show. 2019.

At 8:15 pm, 15 minutes before the second light show of the night begins, an announcement for the light show can be heard echoing through the mall. Crowds were observed flocking towards the rain vortex with some who had come early and managed to grab seats (Fig. 27). The light show displayed flamboyant visuals and paired with synchronised melody, wowed the audience as they were seen capturing the experience with their mobile phones.

Fig. 28. Tan, Kennerve. Audience after the show. 2019.

Possibly due to the overwhelming sensory experience, the 5-minute experience passed in the blink of an eye. Reality struck when the waterfall returned to its normal lighting and the audience was seen leaving the area (Fig. 28). In less than a minute, the area was cleared.

One interesting point to note is that the crowd seems to form because of the show. More were noticed snapping pictures of the Rain Vortex and its light show, instead of the surrounding plantations.

3. Gardens by the Bay

Fig. 29. Tan, Kennerve. View of the Supertrees from the main entrance. 2019.

Fig. 30. Tan, Kennerve. Supertrees. 2019.

Upon stepping into the entrance of GBTB, the sight of the magnificent Supertrees greets its visitors (Fig. 29), which consisted of a mix of locals and tourists. These huge metal structures not only act as a prominent landmark of GBTB, but also constitute a vertical gardening system clad with ferns and orchids. Visitors were observed hanging around its base (Fig. 30).

Fig. 31, 32, 33 & 34. Tan, Kennerve. Informational signages regarding the plants exhibited. 2019.

Further in, two paid attractions (Flower Dome and Cloud Forest) were seen. Entering the flower dome, informational signage showing the origins of the plants and theme of the area are displayed. It was observed that many plants exhibited were of non-native origins (Fig. 31, 32, 33 & 34). The cool climate-controlled environment, which is a stark contrast to Singapore’s natural tropical climate, provides foreign plants with a controlled growing environment.

Fig. 35. Tan, Kennerve. Cloud Dome 35-meter man-made waterfall feature. 2019

The second dome, similar to Jewel, houses a man-made waterfall (Fig. 35). As waterfalls do not occur naturally in Singapore, many locals can be observed mesmerised by it. Unlike the Rain Vortex, this waterfall sprouts from a structure made to replicate a hill covered with plants.

Fig. 36. Tan, Kennerve. Cloud Dome waterfall concealed spout. 2019.

It was noted that only at a specific location at the top of the Cloud Forest can visitors spot the man-made source of the ‘waterfall’ (Fig. 36).

Fig. 37 & 38. Tan, Kennerve. Hidden old air ducts and ambient speakers blended into their surroundings. 2019.

While a cool breeze can be felt and the chirping of birds can be heard, no birds nor air conditioners can be seen. Only after careful inspection are the ventilation holes and speakers revealed (Fig. 37 & 38). They are seamlessly concealed outside of the regular line of sight, camouflaged in areas where visitors would not normally pay much attention to. This makes it evident that immersion is an important aspect of consideration, and the designers are careful to craft such an illusion.

Fig. 39. Tan, Kennerve. Digital animation showcasing current climate issues. 2019.

Fig. 40 & 41. Tan, Kennerve. Projections showcasing future climate issues. 2019.

At the basement of the hill, the Cloud Forest Gallery exhibits digital animations discussing the adverse effects of climate change to humans, detailing projections of disasters that will occur should global warming persist (Fig. 39, 40 & 41).

One thing observed was that none of the media seems to discuss the environmental impact that Singapore is generating. All of the case studies and disasters shown are of other countries' doings or the world as a whole. It seemed as though there is a lack of self-reflection of the environmental impact Singapore has faced.

V. Analysis and Interpretation

The issues and case studies discussed earlier point to EGA as an insidious, growing issue in Singapore. Given the city’s rapid urban transformation since the 1950s and 1960s, unsurprisingly, many youths do not have lived experiences of places that are already gone. This is corroborated by stark contrasts in the responses during interviews conducted with a 58-year-old resident (Madam Chen) and an 18-year-old resident (Mr Yeo). While Madam Chen lamented the extensive changes in flora and fauna in the Jurong Lake District, Mr Yeo did not appear to recognise that such changes had been made, suggestive of a lack of knowledge of the original natural landscape of Singapore. More disturbingly, even the Jurong Lake District that the Madam Chen remembers may not be Singapore’s original natural form. Thus, the EGA apparent from this interview may simply be suggestive of an even greater issue. That people have forgotten, and worse, are unconcerned about preserving nature in Singapore is evidenced by an apparent apathy on environmental conservation.

The extensive literature review conducted and summarised earlier suggests that concern for the environment in Singapore is primarily represented by recycling initiatives (led by the government) and climate change movements (led by climate change groups). Even these movements have not gained significant traction in Singapore. For instance, the government-led recycling initiative has not successfully reduced usage of disposables such as plastic bags. Further, even privately-led movements such as the anti-straw wave are slow to catch on (Mohan). Most tellingly, thus far, these examples mask the fact that few meaningful efforts have been made to remember or preserve Singapore’s native wildlife or natural state, especially bottom-up movements initiated by residents or activists.

Unfortunately, even government efforts to stem the loss of native wildlife and fauna are piecemeal and ineffective. The Eco-link @ BKE was constructed to conserve the wildlife and fauna that once occupied the space that BKE was built on, and is intended to serve as a bridge on which vegetation can grow, and on which wildlife can cross the expressway safely. However, the Eco-link fails to serve this purpose, as wild animals continue to wander into – and be killed on – the expressway, evidenced by numerous reports and even high-profile incidents of animal carcasses found (Chew et al.). However, nothing further has been done about this issue, suggestive of either resignation toward the idea that wildlife simply has to give way to urbanisation, or simply of the lack of recognition that we should pay more attention to preservation and restoration. In the following, three reasons for EGA are discussed – namely, that

a. Nature is primarily viewed as an expendable resource.

b. Nature is treated as a spectacle, putting further distance between the people and nature,

c. An insidious encroachment of technology into nature which obscures its erasure.

a. Nature as an expendable resource

Evidence from government narratives, individual views and even design features in parks suggest a prevailing treatment of nature as an expendable resource, rather than as an asset inherently worthy or conservation. This perpetuates the constant erasure and re-creation of nature, in turn promoting EGA.

The idea of the ‘Garden City’, which has come to represent Singapore, has its roots in utilitarian motives: to improve the liveability of urban spaces. This was the primary reason behind Singapore's tree-planting campaigns and country-wide greening efforts and has also served as a defining brand for the nation. Yet, this rationale promotes the view that greenery and nature should be incorporated into people’s lives insofar as they improve them. That greenery in Singapore serves as a tool for improving urban living, rather than an act of conservation or natural restoration, is evidenced by assertions of critics who maintain that Singapore’s greening efforts have failed to reduce the destructive effects of its intensive urbanisation, and are ultimately unsustainable (Bradshaw et al. 5), and Singapore’s failure to make efforts to rectify these shortcomings even in the face of such criticism. Such a utilitarian view undermines the recognition of nature as an inherently important asset that should be conserved.

Additionally, responses from the interview also revealed that individuals appear to concur with this view of nature as an expendable resource. Despite remembering how Jurong Lake District used to be prior to extensive redevelopment, respondent Madam Chen expresses the view that she “hopes that (Singaporeans) will make full use of it if not, it would only be a pity making the redeveloped park”. Her statement reveals an underlying belief that imminent gains justify sacrificing nature, a clearly utilitarian view. Her views may echo the views of many other Singaporeans who continue to allow extensive redevelopment – and erasure – of natural spaces in Singapore, which perpetuates EGA through the constant transformation of Singapore’s natural landscape.

Finally, the incorporation of man-made features into parks, which are primarily intended to serve the needs of the populace, further perpetuate a utilitarian stance on nature. Jurong Lake, the main attraction from which the Jurong Lake Gardens has obtained its namesake, is a natural stream which has also been converted to a reservoir – ‘an artificial water (body) which facilitates the storage and drainage of large volumes of water’, as stated on the first sentence on an information panel in the park. As such, the utility of the lake for storage and drainage is of primary emphasis, rather than its natural ecological value. This again suggests that natural features are worthy of conservation insofar as they are of value to residents, rather than of inherent value.

A utilitarian view of nature justifies the transformation of natural features, which perpetuates further ‘amnesia’ for nature. This ultimately solidifies a misguided belief that nature can be sacrificed – and thus forgotten – for the sake of fulfilling human needs, manifesting in EGA.

b. Nature as a spectacle

Another prevailing sentiment towards nature in Singapore encompasses its treatment as spectacle, evidenced by the aggressive promotion of Singapore as a ‘Garden City’, a penchant for the constant construction and reconstruction of parks, and the recent creation of new artificial gardens made to impress audiences.

Singapore’s conceptualisation as a ‘Garden City’ (as opposed to ‘Forest City’, for instance) (Han et al. 12), nature is treated as something to be neatly planted, curated and admired. Singapore’s greening effort, starting from the 1970s, was carefully planned and controlled, and deliberately designed to be spectacular, rather than ecologically sustainable (Bradshaw et al. 7). The well-planted flower bushes and roadside trees, at best, create a façade of eco-friendliness that mask not only the natural degradation that was a product of their development but also the original flora and fauna that once populated the island.

Further, Singapore’s numerous large-scale park construction and redevelopment efforts (as opposed to conservation or natural restoration efforts) betrays its treatment of nature as spectacle. From the Botanic Gardens to the Jurong Lake Gardens, neatly-trimmed grass and carefully-planted trees betray how nature is treated as an object to be on display and admired. This attitude is further captured in the recent creation of new ‘gardens’ anchored on man-made installations and microcosms. The main attraction of the Gardens by the Bay, for example, include Supertrees – towering structures that by no means resemble trees that can be found in nature. Another example can be found Jewel Changi, where the main attraction, the Rain Vortex is an artificial glass installation meant to mimic a waterfall. Both attractions boast periodic light shows as main draws at night, meant to wow tourists and visitors. In this manner, such ‘natural’ phenomena are treated as objects to be spectated.

In treating nature as spectacle, a boundary between man and nature is created, just a stage puts distance between a performer and an audience. Distracted by flashy displays and carefully curated landscaping, visitors and residents alike are led into a misleading representation of nature in Singapore. Further, as these parks and installations become primary representations of Singapore’s nature, succeeding generations begin to forget what Singapore’s true natural inhabitants are and also forget that man should live as a part of nature, not apart from it.

c. Technology’s encroachment into nature

The widespread replacement of natural features with technological installations is also a prevalent feature in Singapore which reinforces EGA. For instance, in the Jurong Lake Gardens, the lack of nesting areas for herons (i.e. trees) is compensated not by the further restoration of trees. These trees are replaced by metal structures meant to serve as nesting spots for these herons. Similarly, the Supertrees in the Gardens by the Bay, towering structures are erected in place of trees. The outright replacement of actual trees with such artificial installations naturalises the lack of nature in Singapore and unfortunately does not promote the restoration of nature in any way.

Further exacerbating this problem is the high-profile use of technology promoting imported views of nature that in no way represent ecology native to Singapore. The recent construction of massive greenhouses, housed in the Gardens by The Bay Flower Dome, Cloud Forest and Jewel Changi, create artificial, incubated microcosms that present highly stylised views of nature to visitors. On top of replacing plants that should be growing naturally in Singapore’s natural climate, these technologies are even designed to allow exhibitions of imported plant and flower displays. Unfortunately, such technologically-enabled displays now also serve as primary attractions in Singapore seemingly with the pure intention to ramp up the city’s global appeal. In the long term, such widespread replacement of Singapore’s natural features with man-made, technological installations naturalises the replacement of nature with technology. This contributes to EGA as visitors and residents begin to forget what Singapore’s native flora and fauna should be.

Nonetheless, although technological nature in Singapore currently centres around replacement and spectacularisation of nature, technology can also be used to augment and improve conservation and restoration of nature in Singapore. The Eco-link @ BKE is, while not perfect, evidence that Singapore is capable of investing in and creating structures to augment nature. Despite its failure as a perfect solution to the negative repercussions of the construction of the BKE, it shows the willingness of the Singapore government to make steps towards truly living with nature. ‘Products of Tomorrow’ by Henrique Folster exemplifies how design can be used to remind users of the forgotten effects of consumer culture, by presenting present-day commodities such as apples and water as scarce resources in an imagined future. Similar methods can be used to design artworks or exhibitions relevant to apathy towards nature in Singapore. Finally, Audi’s “A Drive Back in Time” demonstrates how VR technology can be used as a direct means of reminding users of forgotten landscapes; similar technologies can be applied to nature to remind viewers of natural landscapes in Singapore’s past. In these ways, these case studies offer promising ways in which EGA can be ameliorated through deliberate design and well-conceived technologies in Singapore.

VI. Conclusion

In conclusion, this dissertation has discussed several factors attributing to EGA observed in Singapore. Succeeding generations, especially youths, are particularly vulnerable as technological advancements within these few decades have pushed new boundaries as to how designers can manipulate the world around them, and infrastructural changes have long altered the appearance of natural landscapes. As such, successive generations will gradually experience an increasing lack of first-hand experiences, perpetuating the issue of EGA in Singapore.

In the first part of this thesis, literature relevant to EGA in Singapore was reviewed, specifically: government policies such as heavy marketing and infrastructural redevelopment of Singapore as a ‘Garden City’; the way technological nature is used in Singapore; and the environmentalist efforts in Singapore. In the subsequent section, case studies namely Products of Tomorrow, Eco-Link @ BKE, and Audi’s “A Drive Back in Time” are presented to showcase how technology and design can be used to alleviate the effects of EGA.

In the next section, primary research is conducted to further investigate EGA and perceptions of nature in Singapore. Firstly, interviews were conducted with two local residents to elicit their views on the Jurong Lake Gardens redevelopment project, which involves a major overhaul of one of Singapore’s largest natural areas. Then, fieldwork was conducted in the Jurong Lake Gardens, Jewel @ Changi Airport, and Gardens by the Bay to further investigate how infrastructural and technological elements of these environments may influence perceptions of nature and, in turn, EGA.

Based on the evidence from extant literature and the case studies, an analysis can be form from EGA in Singapore being a widespread issue, evidenced by Singaporeans’ apathy towards natural conservation and restoration efforts, an analysis of the responses garnered in the interview, and the lack of efforts even by the government toward this cause. This can be attributed firstly to the treatment of nature as an expendable resource, evidenced by interview responses, government policies, and park design features suggesting that nature can be altered or removed insofar as this poses benefits in the long run. Secondly, nature in Singapore is widely marketed as a spectacle to be carefully curated and viewed rather than a cherished resource, evidenced by aggressive marketing of GBTB and Jewel Changi’s faux-nature as hallmarks of Singapore. Thirdly, the way technology has thus far largely been used to replace nature, rather than supplement it, as seen in the way infrastructural features are used to replace and simulate nature in Singapore rather than to supplement its organic growth, further contributes to its amnesia.

However, an analysis of the case studies suggest possible ways in which technology and design can help to ameliorate EGA, and boost efforts to conserve and restore nature in Singapore. Given that Singapore has the resources and capability to fund such efforts, and is also a keen investor in technologies such as VR, there is hope that the issue of EGA in Singapore can ultimately be mitigated.

VII. References

"The Land Before 1819". www.Roots.Sg, 2020, https://www.roots.sg/learn/stories/the-land-before-1819/the-land-before-1819. Accessed 14 Nov 2019.

Beatley, Timothy. "Singapore: How To Grow A High-Rise City In A Garden". Sitelines, vol 8, no. 1, 2012, pp. 14 - 17. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/24889419?seq=2#metadata_info_tab_contents. Accessed 16 Oct 2019.

Block, India. "Greenery Is Often "Sole Legitimisation" For Unsustainable Projects Says Céline Baumann". Dezeen, 2019, https://www-dezeen-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.dezeen.com/2019/10/31/celine-baumann-landscape-architecture/amp. Accessed 12 Nov 2019.

Bradshaw, Corey J. A. et al. "Evaluating The Relative Environmental Impact Of Countries". Plos ONE, vol 5, no. 5, 2010, pp. 1 - 16. Public Library Of Science (Plos), doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0010440. Accessed 4 Dec 2019.

Bridle, James. New Dark Age. Verso, 2018, pp. 50 - 53.

Brook, Barry W. et al. "Catastrophic Extinctions Follow Deforestation In Singapore". Nature, vol 424, no. 6947, 2003, pp. 420-423. Springer Science And Business Media LLC, doi:10.1038/nature01795. Accessed 9 Nov 2019.

Chew, Hui Min, and Rebecca Pazos. "Eco-Link@BKE: Safe Passage For Creatures Over Busy Highway". The Straits Times, https://graphics.straitstimes.com/STI/STIMEDIA/Interactives/2015/11/feature-ecolink-BKE-national-parks/index.html. Accessed 18 Dec 2019.

Ćorović, Dragana. The Garden City Concept In The Urban Discourse Of Interwar Belgrade. Leuven University Press, 2014, pp. 201 - 221

George, Cherian. The Air-Conditioned Nation: Essays On The Politics Of Comfort And Control. Landmark Books, 2000, pp. 15.

Han, Fook Kwang et al. Lee Kuan Yew. 1st ed., Marshall Cavendish Editions, 2015, pp. 79 - 86.

Han, Heejin. "Singapore, A Garden City". The Journal Of Environment & Development, vol 26, no. 1, 2016, pp. 3-12. SAGE Publications, doi:10.1177/1070496516677365. Accessed 17 Oct 2019.

Kahn, Peter. Technological Nature. 1st ed., The MIT Press, 2011, pp. 27 - 87.

Kahn, Peter H. et al. "The Human Relation With Nature And Technological Nature". Current Directions In Psychological Science, vol 18, no. 1, 2009, pp. 37-42. SAGE Publications, doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01602.x. Accessed 8 Oct 2019.

Lau-Tan, Aileen et al. Garden City Singapore. Suntree, 2014, pp. 32 - 133.

Lawson, Anton E. "The Acquisition Of Biological Knowledge During Childhood: Cognitive Conflict Or Tabula Rasa?". Journal Of Research In Science Teaching, vol 25, no. 3, 1988, pp. 195-199. Wiley Online Library, doi:10.1002/tea.3660250304. Accessed 2 Dec 2019.

Lim, Eng-Beng. "Future Island". Third Text, vol 28, no. 4-5, 2014, pp. 443-453. Informa UK Limited, doi:10.1080/09528822.2014.929879. Accessed 4 Sept 2019.

Mensvoort, Koert Van. Pyramid Of Technology: How Technology Becomes Nature In Seven Steps. Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, 2013, pp. 25 - 30.

Mohan, Matthew. "Phasing Out Plastic Straws Helps The Environment, But More Needs To Be Done, Say Observers". CNA, 2019, https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/phasing-out-plastic-straws-helps-the-environment-but-more-needs-11605108. Accessed 17 Oct 2019.

Oh, Tessa. "More S’Poreans Aware Of Climate Change But Not Doing Enough To Slow Crisis, Say Activists". Todayonline, 2020, https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/more-singaporeans-are-conscious-climate-change-awareness-enough-slow-unfolding-crisis. Accessed 27 Dec 2019.

Ortmann, Stephan. "Environmental Governance Under Authoritarian Rule Singapore And China". Southeast Asia Research Centre (SEARC) Working Paper Series, no. 189, 2016, p. 10., https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4fa3/9674d2b390f5ab87167755d8fd677e44bd62.pdf. Accessed 5 Oct 2019.

Papworth, S.K. et al. "Evidence For Shifting Baseline Syndrome In Conservation". Conservation Letters, 2009, pp. 93 - 100. Society For Conservation Biology, doi:10.1111/j.1755-263x.2009.00049.x. Accessed 26 Oct 2019.

Pergams, O. R. W., and P. A. Zaradic. "Evidence For A Fundamental And Pervasive Shift Away From Nature-Based Recreation". Proceedings Of The National Academy Of Sciences, vol 105, no. 7, 2008, pp. 2295-2300. Proceedings Of The National Academy Of Sciences, doi:10.1073/pnas.0709893105. Accessed 15 Dec 2019.

"Plans For Singapore’S Second CBD Unveiled: Jurong Lake District | MND Link | Ministry Of National Development". Mnd.Gov.Sg, https://www.mnd.gov.sg/mndlink/2017/Nov-Dec/plans-for-singapores-second-cbd-unveiled.htm. Accessed 26 Oct 2019.

Redford, Kent H. et al. "Synthetic Biology And Conservation Of Nature: Wicked Problems And Wicked Solutions". Plos Biology, vol 11, no. 4, 2013. Public Library Of Science (Plos), doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001530. Accessed 28 Nov 2019.

Running, Steven. "A Measurable Planetary Boundary For The Biosphere". Science, vol 337, no. 6101, 2012, pp. 1458-1459. American Association For The Advancement Of Science (AAAS), doi:10.1126/science.1227620. Accessed 29 Aug 2019.

Schulze, Jule et al. "Design, Implementation And Test Of A Serious Online Game For Exploring Complex Relationships Of Sustainable Land Management And Human Well-Being". Environmental Modelling & Software, vol 65, 2015, pp. 58-66. Elsevier BV, doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2014.11.029.

Schwab, Klaus. "The Fourth Industrial Revolution: What It Means And How To Respond". World Economic Forum, 2020, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/01/the-fourth-industrial-revolution-what-it-means-and-how-to-respond. Accessed 25 Aug 2019.

Tan, Audrey. "Young Activists Planning 'Green Dot' Gathering On Sept 21". The Straits Times, 2019, https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/environment/young-activists-planning-green-dot-gathering-on-sept-21. Accessed 14 Nov 2019.

The Straits Times. Mandai Wildlife Bridge Unveiled To Reduce Roadkill | THE BIG STORY | The Straits Times. 2020, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBozaat8RM0&feature=youtu.be. Accessed 20 Nov 2019.

"The Land Before 1819". www.Roots.Sg, 2020, https://www.roots.sg/learn/stories/the-land-before-1819/the-land-before-1819. Accessed 14 Nov 2019.

VIII. Images ReferenceS

Figure 1. Straits Times. “Tree Planting Day in Singapore: 5 things about the 51-year-old tradition.” 2014. Web. Accessed 14 Dec 2019. Image. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/tree-planting-day-in-singapore-5-things-about-the-51-year-old-tradition.

Figure 2. Brooks. “Loss of biodiversity: What have we lost.” 2014. Web. Accessed 22 Dec 2019. Image. http://blog.nus.edu.sg/quekxiaotong/2016/08/20/what-have-we-lost/#_ftnref2.

Figure 3. Brooks. “Loss of biodiversity: What have we lost.” 2014. Web. Accessed 22 Dec 2019. Image. http://blog.nus.edu.sg/quekxiaotong/2016/08/20/what-have-we-lost/#_ftnref2.

Figure 4. Folster. “Products of Tomorrow.” 2017. Web. Accessed 2 Dec 2019. Image. http://www.masoheck.com/?work=products-of-tomorrow-natural-conservancy.

Figure 5. Folster. “Products of Tomorrow.” 2017. Web. Accessed 2 Dec 2019. Image. http://www.masoheck.com/?work=products-of-tomorrow-natural-conservancy.

Figure 6. Folster. “Products of Tomorrow.” 2017. Web. Accessed 2 Dec 2019. Image. http://www.masoheck.com/?work=products-of-tomorrow-natural-conservancy.

Figure 7. Folster. “Products of Tomorrow.” 2017. Web. Accessed 2 Dec 2019. Image. http://www.masoheck.com/?work=products-of-tomorrow-natural-conservancy.

Figure 8. Straits Times. “Animal crossing Eco-Link@BKE: Safe passage for creatures over busy highways.” 2015. Web. Accessed 9 Dec 2019. Image. https://graphics.straitstimes.com/STI/STIMEDIA/Interactives/2015/11/feature-ecolink-BKE-national-parks/

Figure 9. Straits Times. “Wild sambar deer put down after a 3-vehicle accident on BKE.” 2018. Web. Accessed 10 Dec 2019. Image. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/wild-sambar-deer-causes-3-vehicle-accident-on-bke-taxi-driver-injured.

Figure 10. Straits Times. “Animal crossing Eco-Link@BKE: Safe passage for creatures over busy highways.” 2015. Web. Accessed 9 Dec 2019. Image. https://graphics.straitstimes.com/STI/STIMEDIA/Interactives/2015/11/feature-ecolink-BKE-national-parks/

Figure 11. Jedrek. “Audi SG50 A Drive Back in Time.” 2015. Web. Accessed 18 Dec 2019. Image. https://clairejedrek.com/audi-sg50-a-drive-back-in-time/.

Figure 12. Straits Times. “Audi SG50 Time Machine app: A drive back to 1965 Singapore.” 2015. Web. Accessed 18 Dec 2019. Image. https://brandinsider.straitstimes.com/audi/tag/a-drive-back-in-time/.

Figure 13. YouTube. “Audi Singapore Presents: A Drive Back in Time.” 2015. Accessed 18 Dec 2019. Web. Image. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAIztSfFJd4.

Figure 14. YouTube. “Audi Singapore Presents: A Drive Back in Time.” 2015. Accessed 18 Dec 2019. Web. Image. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAIztSfFJd4.

Figure 15. Tan, Kennerve. “Replanting of trees.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 16. Tan, Kennerve. “Replanting of trees.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 17. Tan, Kennerve. “Empty field.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 18. Tan, Kennerve. “Freshwater stream habitat signage.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 19. Tan, Kennerve. “Freshwater stream habitat signage.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 20. Tan, Kennerve. “Freshwater stream habitat.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 21. Tan, Kennerve. “Heron Island signage.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 22. Tan, Kennerve. “Heron nesting structure.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 23. Tan, Kennerve. “Heron nesting structure.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 24. Tan, Kennerve. “Neram streams bank.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 25. Tan, Kennerve. “The Rain Vortex.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 26. Tan, Kennerve. “Ambient Speakers.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 27. Tan, Kennerve. “Audience during the show.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 28. Tan, Kennerve. “Audience after the show.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 29. Tan, Kennerve. “GBTB Drop-off point.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 30. Tan, Kennerve. “Supertrees.” 2019 Photograph.

Figure 31. Tan, Kennerve. “GBTB Information signages.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 32. Tan, Kennerve. “GBTB Information signages.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 33. Tan, Kennerve. “GBTB Information signages.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 34. Tan, Kennerve. “GBTB Information signages.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 35. Tan, Kennerve. “Cloud Dome.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 36. Tan, Kennerve. “Cloud Dome.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 37. Tan, Kennerve. “Hidden features.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 38. Tan, Kennerve. “Hidden features.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 39. Tan, Kennerve. “Digital animations.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 40. Tan, Kennerve. “Projections.” 2019. Photograph.

Figure 41. Tan, Kennerve. “Projections.” 2019. Photograph.

IX. Appendix

a. An excerpt of the transcription of the interview with Madam Chen Lee May, 58 years old, resident of Taman Jurong for over 25 years on the redevelopment of the Jurong Lake District. (Translated from an interview conducted in Chinese)

Q: Can you tell me more about the redevelopment of Jurong Lake district comparing the past to the present?

A: All the while I’ve been living in Redhill and it's only in the 1990s that I first moved into Taman Jurong. I have chosen the Taman Jurong estate because it's located near the Chinese Garden. I love the view and would frequently visit it with my husband. In the past, there were a lot more trees. Way more than the redeveloped Jurong Lake Gardens now. But I have to say, the park now is much more beautiful as compared to the past. In the past, further down this path (the stretch heading toward the expressway), you will see areas where there that overgrown trees and shrubs which look like no one have attended to them for ages. Nobody goes there except for a few wild fruit pickers and anglers. It's a pity that the whole park was not fully utilised back then as compared to now.

Oh yes! Do you know that this is not the first redevelopment of the Jurong Lake District? About 10 years ago, the whole park was renovated. Bicycle tracks and wider pedestrian walkways are built. There are also playgrounds and flying foxes. I guess the government is trying to attract younger generations to the park.

Q: On the topic of attracting younger generations to the park, can you elaborate more on why you felt so and who are the common visitors do you observe in the park?

A: Before the development, walkways are narrow, and there is not much to do in the park except for looking at wildlife and appreciating the garden ambience. Frequently in the morning, you will get to see middle-aged residents gathered along the lake doing tai-chi (a form of Chinese martial art practised for its health benefits and meditation) and others brisk walking. Rarely do you see teenagers in the park. Even if they are there, mostly because they are trying to take a shortcut to the train station. But look at the park now, there are so many youths here! Many of the park spaces now are designed to look good in photographs. Don’t believe me? Let me show you my daughter’s picture. She pulled me to the park the other day just so she can post something on the internet!

I would say that now more than half of the people here are youths. There are still other generations here but the youths seem to be the group that frequent more often.

Q: Back to the topic of the redevelopment of the park, do you observe any change in the ecosystem of the flora and fauna here, and what impact do you think it poses be it positive or negative?

A: You see the Lalang field? There, the one with a lot of people taking photographs? In the past, that area used to be covered with trees and mangroves. Not only that, look at the building (pointing to PAssion WaVe a People’s Association Water Venture Facility). It used to be a nesting spot for the migrating birds. Now with the trees removed, I seldom see the birds anymore. This is not just from my point of view. In the past Jurong Lake Park used to be a hotspot for wildlife photographers. Many came here to photograph migratory birds. One of the photographers once told me that after the reduction of the bird’s natural habitat, there are way lesser birds seen therefore they stopped coming to the park for photography.

Then again, with these newer attractions, it attracts the younger generations of park-goers. I doubt they can visualise how it looks like in the past because it's totally different now.

Q: Do you think that Singaporean youths should be let known of the environmental impact caused by land redevelopment?

A: To be honest, so what if they know. Youth nowadays knows way more stuff at a young age than we did. They are exposed to the internet and the education system is also getting better. What can they do even if they know? Will they even do anything about it? The activities here are much more interesting than those of the past. I just hope that they will make full use of it if not, it would only be a pity making this place a white elephant.

b. An excerpt of the transcription of the interview with Mr Darren Yeo, 18 years old, resident of Taman Jurong for the past 14 years on the redevelopment of the Jurong Lake District.

Q: Can you tell me more about the redevelopment of Jurong Lake District comparing the past to the present?

A: Last time during my secondary school days there used to be a huge sandpit playground where my friends and I used to hang out after school. We played catching and even sat at the top of the playground, chatting for hours. The park used to be very boring because there is not much to do here except for the playground. Now after the redevelopment of the park, there are a lot of instagrammable spots. Just a few days back, I saw a few online influencers here taking selfies. The park is so much nicer now I have to say.

Q: Do you think that the so-called “Instagrammable spots” is a sign that the government is trying to attract younger generations to the park, also can you highlight who are the common visitors do you observe in the park?

A: Of course! In the past, many more uncles and aunties were strolling in the park. The only teenagers will be those who are like me who choose to hang out with friends after school. It's obvious because we are all in our school uniforms. But now the tides have changed. Just after opening, the park is flooded with youths rushing towards the said instagrammable spot clicking away.