Strictly and ecologically speaking, I think that the population of Singapore is unsustainable given the high population density we have. Since Singapore does not have any hinterland to depend upon, we have to import almost all our food and half of our water. If we are to go back to just meeting the most basic needs such as food, shelter and water without degrading much of the natural environment, a population of about 300 people for the whole country is a good figure. However, if we are going to define the population of a city based on the infrastructure we have and our water supplies, a figure of 1.5 million is good enough. Sure enough, we have been complaining about the weekend crowds in the shopping centres and public transport as well as traffic jams on the road. This is the result of too many cars on the road due to rising levels of affluence. There is really no magic figure on whether the population numbers are sustainable. It really all depends on the needs of the country and the level of infrastructural developments in place. Surely, wealth is the primary development on the amount of resources we can draw upon. All cities are ultimately unsustainable as they depended on other areas to draw their resources upon. But at the same time, cities are the main generators of wealth. With money, it will be able to sustain a larger population. Singapore is doing well in terms of population management as the air is generally cleaner than many other cities of the world despite high population and vehicle densities. So you see, this definitive is really very subjective.
In Singapore, the greatest limiting factor is really land. Spatial constraint is really the limiting factor on population increase. Having limited sea space also poses challenges on how much land Singapore can reclaim having to give due consideration to port development. Water is getting less important as an issue as innovative technologies is gradually helping Singapore to become more self sufficient inj water in the years to come. Spatial constraints ultimately mean limits on the number of roads we can build and hence the number of cars on the road. Given the aspirations of Singaporeans, more people would want to buy cars if car population controls are not in place. Being too densely populated also degrades environmental quality, having less spaces that can be set aside for parks, recreation and nature reserve. For the case of Australia, I guess the main issue is water? This is because a large part of Australia is desert and it is by far the driest continent on earth. Any comments from the ANU counterparts?
Space is not an issue in Australia I believe but the actual space that people would prefer to live on is only concentrated along the coastlines and not the interior. So Australia has space but most is not utilised. In Singapore's case, we are running out of space. Both countries face water shortage problems but Singapore is overcoming its water problems slowly such as building new reservoirs, desalination and ultrafiltration of sewage water. Singaporeans have accepted drinking this treated sewage water which is really ultra clean. We have put it back into the reservoirs and supply the water to industrial plants that require such ultra cleaan water such as the silicon fabrication plants. The rest is being put back into the reserviours and let nature "re-treat" this water so as to gain more acceptance from the people. But for the Australian side, I believe that this will take some time for it to be accepted as there is alot of resistance on the ground.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Note: First Article could not be opened; therefore my answers may be limited.
ReplyDelete1. Your estimate of what population you think Australia can sustainably support.
o NUS students will think about a sustainable population target for Singapore.
Currently I would consider Australia’s population unsustainable; we already have issues with water usage and power supply so I cannot see us being able to support a higher population whilst maintaining sustainability. I think the issue at hand should be to operate sustainable before we decide how much our population should grow.
2. Briefly substantiate your figure by listing (in order of importance) the most significant resources that limit the population Australia can sustainably support
I believe the most important thing is space, obviously we can build upwards but this is a trend that is not supported in Australia as urban sprawl continues to dominate our landscape and development. Second after space would be materials used to build the housing and infrastructure required in that area such as sewage, electricity, telephone lines and maybe even subway stations. These resources would then require human hours to put in place and assemble, followed by extended hours of maintenance. Obviously economic resources will come into play and depending on whether it is being run by the government or a private institution this will dictate the time and money spent on the project. In Australia we have an abundance of space which is demonstrated in how loosely packed our population is, the key to population rise is to increase this density which in turn prevents further land clearing for the purposes of housing.
3. What are some of the similarities and differences between the resources that limit Australia's population to that of Singapore?
The main difference would be density; Singapore has a much higher population density, than Australia mainly because of the availability of space. With limited space this density must increase, however it also takes away the possibility of having agriculture close to housing. This is a problem that is facing many developing nations as infrastructure such as roads is required to truck all this food in as it is grown far away. Singapore would definitely depend on the amount of space available for this development while Australia’s would depend greatly on water and cohesion between state governments and also at the federal level. As Australia tends to spread out we would need more roads in place and subsequently more cars to move the population around. In Australia we also have a high population of commuters as more and more workers live in the suburbs rather than the city, this creates the need for public transport to operate at a higher level which places a drain on an already substandard system.