Big houses on a small island: legislating Singapore’s ‘good class’ bungalows

IF 2.4 2区 经济学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES International Journal of Housing Policy Pub Date : 2022-09-04 DOI:10.1080/19491247.2022.2105193
Edward S W Ti
{"title":"Big houses on a small island: legislating Singapore’s ‘good class’ bungalows","authors":"Edward S W Ti","doi":"10.1080/19491247.2022.2105193","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Land reform in post-independent Singapore was led by compulsory purchase predominantly in the 1960s–70s and resulted in numerous kampungs or villages being demolished. With efficient assembly of land, high-rise public flats were built to accommodate the country’s burgeoning population. Today, 95 per cent of residents reside in high-rise dwellings and Singapore is the 3rd most densely populated country globally. Remarkably, planning regulations protect a housing typology known as ‘good class bungalows’ (GCBs). Though housing less than 0.2 per cent of Singapore households, GCBs collectively take up 7 per cent of the available land for housing. Numbering less than three thousand, GCBs have statutorily required large minimum lot sizes and are situated in Singapore’s choiciest residential enclaves. Development of GCB land to more intensive use is strictly prohibited. In this article, I examine the legal policies and socioeconomic rationale for maintaining this uniquely Singaporean institution, concluding that there are indeed cogent justifications for its existence.","PeriodicalId":47119,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Housing Policy","volume":"123 1","pages":"612 - 628"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Housing Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19491247.2022.2105193","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract Land reform in post-independent Singapore was led by compulsory purchase predominantly in the 1960s–70s and resulted in numerous kampungs or villages being demolished. With efficient assembly of land, high-rise public flats were built to accommodate the country’s burgeoning population. Today, 95 per cent of residents reside in high-rise dwellings and Singapore is the 3rd most densely populated country globally. Remarkably, planning regulations protect a housing typology known as ‘good class bungalows’ (GCBs). Though housing less than 0.2 per cent of Singapore households, GCBs collectively take up 7 per cent of the available land for housing. Numbering less than three thousand, GCBs have statutorily required large minimum lot sizes and are situated in Singapore’s choiciest residential enclaves. Development of GCB land to more intensive use is strictly prohibited. In this article, I examine the legal policies and socioeconomic rationale for maintaining this uniquely Singaporean institution, concluding that there are indeed cogent justifications for its existence.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
小岛上的大房子:新加坡“好阶级”平房的立法
新加坡独立后的土地改革主要在20世纪60年代至70年代以强制购买为主导,导致许多甘榜或村庄被拆除。随着土地的有效整合,高层公共公寓被建成,以容纳该国迅速增长的人口。如今,95%的居民居住在高层住宅中,新加坡是全球人口密度第三大的国家。值得注意的是,规划法规保护了一种被称为“好等级平房”(GCBs)的住房类型。尽管拥有住房的家庭不到新加坡家庭的0.2%,但gcb总共占据了可用住房用地的7%。gcb的数量不到3000个,法定要求最小地块面积较大,并且位于新加坡最高档的住宅区。严禁集约开发城建用地。在这篇文章中,我研究了维持这一独特的新加坡制度的法律政策和社会经济理由,得出结论,它的存在确实有令人信服的理由。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
14.30%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Housing Policy aims to be the leading forum for the critical analysis of housing policy, systems and practice from a social science perspective. It is published quartely. We welcome articles based on policy-relevant research and analysis focused on all parts of the world. We especially encourage papers that contribute to comparative housing analysis, but articles on national or sub-national housing systems are also welcome if they contain data, arguments or policy implications that are relevant to an international audience.
期刊最新文献
Analysis and Evaluation of Public Social Housing: tools for a Sustainable Regeneration A New Model for Housing Finance—Public and Private Sectors Working Together to Build Affordability Real estate for social purpose: varieties of entrepreneurialism in Toronto’s non-profit housing sector The Environments of Ageing: Space, Place and Materiality ‘The rent is too damn high’ meets ‘pay the rent’: practising solidarity with the dispossessed*
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1