Perspective Type: Connectivity & Infrastructure

Multi-level industrial buildings are commonly found in land-scarce countries. They are developed in response to high industrial land prices and rents, and suit tenants whose operations have higher throughput volumes.

 As we see the upward trend of building such multi-tiered complexes in land scarce Singapore, Ms Siah Puay Lin, Deputy Director of Surbana Jurong Infrastructure Pte Ltd, shares insights on the feasibilities and strategies of Singapore’s industrial landscape and its future.

Q1: In a nutshell, how has Singapore’s industrial landscape evolved since the country’s Independence? 

A: During the 60’s and 70’s, Singapore attracted labour intensive industries and provided ready-built standard factories to facilitate speedy set-up for the companies – local and foreign. Economic growth and job creation were seen in quantitative terms, based on the number of jobs that could be created and the amount of foreign investment that could be attracted. Two distinct forms of industrial environments emerged during this time:

• large industrial estates in the rural parts of Singapore;
• light industrial estates located close to housing estates or fringing the central area.

The 80’s saw the development of Singapore into a modern industrial economy. It resulted in a shift to capital and technology focused industries with a better-equipped work force and higher capabilities. To support and meet the needs of new businesses, the type of industrial parks that evolved took on a new dimension:

• Upgrading and refurbishing of industrial parks through new product creation;
• Purpose-built science parks and business parks. These parks are set in high quality environments catering to the needs of modern businesses.

The birth of Information Technology in the 90’s saw many businesses competing to increase their worth in the value chain. Advancement in technology also meant industrial developers had to find ways of addressing new business needs.

The 90’s also introduced “stack-up factory” – a new building typology that Jurong Town Corporation (JTC) came up with, designed to intensify land use by stacking standard factories on top of one another to create multi-storeyed factories. The use of ramps to gain access to upper levels allowed occupants to enjoy the same convenience as those at ground level – for loading/unloading goods.

By the millennium, the path towards a full-fledged knowledge-based economy was clearer. In tandem, the master planning of industrial land adapted new concepts such as ‘industry clustering’ and ‘integrating Live-Play-Learn environments’. A good example is the 200-ha One-North estate which features mixed-use industrial spaces. Its Vista Exchange area was designed and developed into a lifestyle, business, hotel, entertainment and transport hub.

Q2: How has the role of an architect / industrial urban planner changed over the different periods?

A: The architect/planner has had to adopt a multi-dimensional approach to solving problems. He/she has had to have a deeper understanding of industry needs as well as the effects of technological advances. He/she then has had to translate these into the built environment – not merely by checking for compliances – but by going beyond to provide more flexibility, cost effectiveness and to create healthy work environments.

Q3: The 2010’s is seeing Land Intensification Strategies being rolled out. Please share how industrial developers are creating more spaces within a same plot of land.

A: An example of how intensely single plots of land are used is the Jurong Rock Caverns, Southeast Asia’s first underground liquid hydrocarbon storage facility that goes as deep as a 9-storey building. It helped to solve problems of oil storage and made available land for further industrial expansion.

Besides building downwards as in the case of Jurong Rock Caverns, the drive towards more urbane and smart solutions with regards to building typologies was accelerated to allow companies to build higher and utilise available space optimally.

The other example is the consolidation of similar industrial facilities and common amenities – to eradicate duplication and optimises valuable space for production needs. We implemented this in our projects in One North (Biopolis), CleanTech and Medtech Hub by providing centralised utilities and common facilities unique to the target industries.

The 8-Storey Sin Ming Auto City is a continuum of the revolutionary concept and design where motor workshops are fully-integrated and operate under a multi-tiered industrial complex – providing one-stop vehicular solutioning, meeting motor repair needs and maintenance services in an up-to-date, clean and modern environment. It comprises 14 heavy vehicle units, 117 motor workshop units and 30 spray painting units.

Q4: Using the 8-Storey Sin Ming Auto City as an example of smart building solutioning in land-scarce Singapore, please discuss the integrated approaches to spatial planning for such industrial complexes.

A: The 8-storey Sin Ming Auto City boasts of passive design strategies that enhance the work and living environment through the staggering of the building mass, and the introduction of air-wells – bringing in good daylighting and ventilation. The concept of “work-live-play-learn” resonates as part of the build plan in 2012.

All units are fitted with an ancillary mezzanine office and dedicated workers’ living quarters – providing on-site living accommodation to workers. Ensuring that the respiratory health and living standards of workers in the complex are not compromised, ventilation and exhaust shafts for expulsion of engine emissions were carefully integrated (please refer to illustration 1 for the building’s approach to total sustainability). The building also holds essential amenities such as a staff canteen, a recreational centre, and convenience store.

The introduction of balconies, self-sustaining vertical greening and rainwater harvesting further enhance green building initiatives, making it an all-inclusive eco-system. (The Sin Ming Auto City was awarded Gold for Building and Construction Authority’s Green Mark in 2015). Please refer to illustration 2 for the building’s green initiative.

Q5: Multi-tiered industrial buildings seem to be the way to go for Singapore’s industrial landscape. How different is it to design and plan for residential estates versus industrial estates?

A: Planning objectives are similar in that we are essentially building for people and creating communities. The former would require provisions that meet the needs of families and individuals, and how they will interact and contribute positively towards the good of the larger community. The necessity for schools, town centres, parks, recreational and neighbourhood amenities must be considered; and this is underscored by good traffic network, transportation, utilities network and internet connectivity.

In the same way, the industrial estate needs to be planned for the work and business community – with good traffic network, transportation, and the appropriate utilities provisions. It has to be sensitive to the type of business, products and workforce it serves in and around the estate precinct. Clustering of similar industries is important as it allows for systematic planning, and adequate provisions for shared facilities and amenities – all to be made from the onset.

Q6: Are there existing global industrial projects which are modelled after Singapore’s?

A: Building upon our legacy from Jurong Town Corporation (JTC), Surbana Jurong has been successful in many overseas industrial park projects – Suzhou Industrial Park, Tianjin Eco City Business Park (please refer to illustration 3), Qatari FTZ and Logistics Park (Qatar), iCAD (Abu Dhabi, UAE), to name a few, are shiny examples of how other cities are replicating Singapore’s industrial park models.

Q7: So, what holds for the Future of Singapore’s Industrial Landscape?

A: Industrial building designers have probably taken on new forms of industrial clustering/planning during modern times, and this may not necessarily be confined to the traditional spatial concentration of similar industry companies in a particular location.

Similarly, such innovation continues for new industrial estates delving into newly found industries. By gaining insight on the nature of the industry’s value chain and operational standards of companies, industrial infrastructures are shaped to provide the tangible framework – and each company operating in it is then able to generate synergies amongst themselves to form an industrial community with a competitive edge.

Tracing how Singapore’s industrial landscape has evolved over the years, we observe how each decade’s economic and land policy mechanisms function. This, combined with physical planning and urban design initiatives, will in turn influence the focus in planning and design principles of industrial estate typologies. As such, the result of the physical form, as well as the interaction and functioning of Singapore’s industrial estates, has seen a progressive transition from the past till present, with each decade adding on a new dimension to the industrial built environment in Singapore.

Singapore’s industrial landscape development will continue to be driven by land intensification, new technologies and the emergence of new industries. Even farming and food business businesses are going high-rise. Buildings will be designed for ease of maintenance; hence the use of BIM for facility management will gain in popularity. Overall and increasingly, new industrial estates and buildings will and must become more eco-friendly as well as society-friendly. Not only must we not pollute and make the best use of resources, we must cater to an aging population and special-needs groups.

This article is co-created by Surbana Jurong Academy.

Perspectives, developed by SJ Academy, is our platform to explore new ways of tackling some of today’s most complex challenges in the urban and infrastucture sector. We draw on ideas and opinions from our experts across different businesses. Click here to read more about Technology & Innovation, Connectivity & Infrastructure, and Design Leadership.

Twenty years ago, Singapore set out a daring ambition: to build on its position as South East Asia’s premier global trading center and establish itself as a world leading knowledge hub. Throughout this journey, Surbana Jurong’s expertise has helped to guide the project from vision towards reality.

Singapore has always been a nation with ambition. Never more so in the 1990s, a new plan emerged to transform this small island nation from an independent, world leading trading center, into a global, knowledge-based economy.

The ambition required a new type of infrastructure. A purpose-built environment to attract the new breed of fast-growing information and intelligence-based industries and research and development companies – to create a world leading destination to which global talent and entrepreneurs naturally gravitated and turned their visions to reality.

The one-north development zone is the result of this ambition. It builds on the cluster strategy originally proposed in the late 1990’s by the Singapore’s National Science and Technology Board, now renamed A*Star (Agency for Science, Technology and Research). The name one-north itself is intended to reflect the scale of ambition. Originally called simply the Buona Vista Science Park, it was rebranded as one- north to reflect Singapore’s location 1 degree north of the Equator, and designed to avoid the vision of one-north being defined by its locality or the word Science.

It was a collaborative initiative involving various statutory boards and government agencies which formed a steering committee to guide direction and chart the roadmap for implementation. The committee comprised members from the Ministry of National Development (URA, HDB), Ministry of Law (Singapore Land Office), Ministry of Trade and Industry (EDB, JTC Corp) and Ministry of Transport (LTA). JTC Corporation took the leading role of developing and implementing the project.

The mission was clear: To gather and encourage communities of likeminded businesses, focus investment and create technology hubs dedicated to research and development. The master plan was envisioned as a mixed-use development incorporating different Work-Live-Play-Learn elements.

Long term partnership and collaboration
World renowned architect, the late Zaha Hadid, was commissioned in 2001 to produce the master plan and created a framework and concept for the development. However, throughout this 17-year project evolution, Surbana Jurong has been at the heart of work to create the physical manifestation of Hadid’s grand master plan. It was gradually realized through tangible buildings and infrastructure, with every stage reshaping the built environment to meet the needs of the community.

Each project in the development has presented unique challenges. As such the projects clearly highlighted many critical elements of the firm’s philosophy and approach to planning, design and construction.

Community is key. One unique feature for one-north is the requirement for all developers to invest in public artwork worth a minimum of 0.5% the construction cost of the project. The result is an art accessible and culturally rich area to which businesses and the community is drawn, underlining the mixed-use characteristics envisaged by the master plan and the organic growth of one-north.

Throughout this time, the work has evolved to reflect the various phases of developments in the diverse land use clusters and its industrial “epicenters”: from the initial Phase Z.ro start-up catalyst incubators, to the Biopolis biomedical research centers, Fusionopolis info-communications technology, and STT MediaHub and data center.

Vision for the future – Phase Z.ro

Building out this bold masterplan required JTC as the developer and Surbana Jurong its appointed consultant to lead a clear vision to kick start construction of the vast one-north development site. This began with the Phase Z.ro (pronounced Zee-Ro) development which effectively started the project, acting as a catalyst for development and an incubator for start-up technology companies.

This rapidly erected start-up cluster, located adjacent to the Ministry of Education headquarters, was constructed in 2001 from reused shipping containers and originally designed for just three years of temporary use.

The goal was to create a rapid, new and exciting buzz around the site; to draw in technology companies and so promote the one-north sector as next big moment in Singapore’s development. The project comprised 60 steel shipping containers stacked two units high, with common circulation spaces and shared amenities weaved between – designed and delivered at fast-pace to mirror the constantly changing and growing ethos of start-up technology and IT companies.

Tenants were provided with high speed broadband connectivity, shared meeting rooms with teleconferencing facilities, security and maintenance services. The development also doubled as JTC’s on site office as the next phases of one-north were rolled out.

Slightly later than intended, the offices were dismantled in 2008 with the containers and other components recycled for new uses. However, this interim and temporary use of the site had, in effect, set out the vision for the project as the breeding ground for new high tech businesses and talent.

Design with community and collaboration in mind – the Biopolis Cluster

Phase Z.ro reflected the vision for the one-north project – encapsulating the evolving nature of the knowledge industry, where start-up units dream of growing into larger companies, to become tenants of buildings and then eventually to own buildings as their businesses expand. Ideally, this rapid growth process would take place within one-north, with its growth matching the businesses around it.

As an enticing beginning, it set the pace for projects that followed. It also optimized the use of the land while the eventual permanent land parcels and infrastructure within the master plan were concurrently planned and rolled out.

The design of the Biopolis Cluster by Surbana Jurong was the start of this permanent plan; conceived as a biomedical research-and-development hub, and creating a cluster of professionals intended to encourage collaboration between major biotechnology companies and public research institutions.

Seven buildings, ranging from eight to 13 storeys, were completed by 2003 and are interconnected by skybridges and an extensive pedestrian network through its vast landscape and greenery.

The resulting design is a unique biomedical community. Its location adjacent to the Science Parks, the National University of Singapore, the National University Hospital, the Singapore Polytechnic and the Ministry of Education buildings, maximises the capability and resources across various disciplines and encourages greater collaboration.

The Matrix Building and its landscaped plaza form the “epicentre” of the entire Biopolis complex and with its cafes, shops, restaurants, child care centre, fitness club and a specialty bookshop, is designed to encourage community interaction. Six other buildings in the complex – Chromos, Helios, Centros, Genome, Proteos and Nanos –  form an “outer ring” to the epicentre and shared facilities such as the library, laboratories, meeting rooms, and auditoriums, are again, designed to encourage collaboration.

Embracing a commercial approach to the public realm – Biopolis Phases 2 and 3

It was always clear to the team at Surbana Jurong that Biopolis Phase 1, being the first phase development at one-north, would be a critical catalyst for investment in future developments. It would set the design standard for all subsequent developments and so become the main shop window for attracting the all-important future private investment.

This clear understanding of the commercial realities of property development meant that the Biopolis Phases 2 and 3, completed in 2008 and 2011 respectively, saw private sector developers roll in with confidence to support this government initiative.

Phase 2 was developed by Ascendas-Singbridge[1], while Phase 3 was by Crescendas Bionics[2]; both investments were direct testimony to the Biopolis 1 success and the appreciation that high, consistent design standards were key to one-north’s long term commercial attraction.

Technical and architectural excellence – Fusionopolis

The heart of this private sector attraction to one-north has also been a commitment by Surbana Jurong and other development partners to delivering technical and architectural excellence. The world class masterplan has, in reality, been consistently built out with world class infrastructure design and construction.

Fusionopolis Phase 1, completed in 2008, is one such example. The 1.2-hectare development is the first project implemented in one-north’s Central Exchange district and creates a cluster for the Information & Communication Technology (ICT) and Media industry sectors.

Quality is at the heart of the Surbana Jurong design for the project, construction of which kicked off in February 2002.  At its core are two unique composite steel and concrete structure towers – which at 22 and 24 storeys are the clear landmark buildings for the otherwise low rise one-north development – a retail podium, a flexible-seating theatre pod and six basement levels.

The design is for a truly vertical city, featuring a high density and integrated mixed-use layout comprising offices, retail, food and beverage outlets, health club with a roof-top swimming pool, serviced apartments and a digital arts theatre. Direct integration with the one-north MRT station ensures that the building is accessible as a destination in the one-north zone.

A cluster of curved sloping roofs creates a dramatic silhouette in the predominantly mid to low rise suburban landscape to underline the quality of design. Meanwhile, the technically intricate curtain wall façade and distinctive theatre pod – supported by a single “tree column” structure over a geometrically complex skylight – demonstrate the complex delivery – unique, yet simple and exciting.

Sustainable, secure and future proof design – STT Mediahub

Priorities change and emerge on a project such as one-north which spans several decades. As such, to fulfil its role as a broadcast and data center, the STT MediaHub required stringent design specifications to boost resiliency and high security before opening in 2016.

The project was Surbana Jurong’s first foray into such a sensitive project. Services and utilities were designed for redundancies, and emissions from the heavy use of back-up generators had to be mitigated.

While the one-north project to date had promoted openness, integration, pedestrian connectivity and accessibility across its developments, on STT MediaHub the need to meet stringent security provisions were as challenging as they were incongruent with the rest of the scheme.

However, this challenge was mitigated by a unique layered design concept in which secured areas were carefully zoned and protected. The outer layers of the architectural form were thus articulated to meet need for public accessibility and open spaces – with a distinctive façade representing a suit of armour protecting the sensitive technically-charged areas within.

And despite being an energy guzzler, careful design meant the building achieved the BCA’s GreenMark Platinum award for Data Centre category, following extensive design work to develop and implement holistic integrated energy efficient measures and optimize the building’s power utilization efficiency. It is truly a development of the future.

Next steps for one-north and Surbana Jurong

Over the last two decades, the one-north project has enabled Surbana Jurong and its previous business incarnations to showcase unique built environment design talent and problem-solving skills. It has been a rich journey, allowing teams to gain great insights into the needs of life sciences, biomedical research and R&D professionals and then find the most appropriate infrastructure solutions.

We have learnt the value of a focused approach to meet the project requirements. And we have had to understand and design for flexibility and future proofing to meet JTC’s objective of catering to a wide range of tenants and users with specific needs.

It has been important work, helping to create not only a new development zone but also a major step for Singapore as it moves to become a world leading hub for the knowledge industry; ensuring that the projects have the capability to support as wide a range of business operations and so creating a major destination for technology entrepreneurs and scientific research.

The relevance of this is far-reaching, especially in the wake of one-north’s success in the eyes of the world. It is a thriving area, where an established scientific business community and start-ups companies mix effortlessly with universities and government institutions.

Yet the project is far from complete. Our journey continues as the one-north masterplan moves forward to its next investment.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Case Study 1: Biopolis

The design of Biopolis reflects the site’s existing ground contours. While the masterplan dictates its high density, high plot ratio and tight fragmented plots, the buildings are sympathetic to the site in that the existing terrains and trees are retained.

The building configuration and envelopes of Biopolis Phase 1 channel air into the spaces between, thereby generating a natural cooling airflow. Innovative systems such as the District Cooling System were also implemented, removing the need for air-conditioning cooling towers to be built into each building. This reduces the dissipation of heat from individual buildings and to preserve the roofscape.

The fragmented clustering effect also meant that smaller buildings retained distinct identity yet were integrated as a cohesive whole. The outdoor spaces between the buildings provide contrasting open public areas alongside more private and intimate streets and green pockets. As such, its compactness breaks away from the traditional street setbacks and provides shade to public open spaces, encouraging outdoor interaction and so boosting community interaction.

Design ingenuity was critical to fit the research laboratory requirements within the irregular building forms, dictated by the site configuration, while maximizing the building efficiency.

Similarly, designers worked hard to maintain the unique feel to each building while creating an identify of the overall Biomedical complex. A priority was to protect the privacy of each research institute while promoting a vibrant and stimulating hub for sharing of ideas and meeting of minds.

Biopolis also showcases modern technologies and government initiatives such as a Pneumatic Refuse Conveyance System for refuse disposal, a system designed with the community in mind. Energy conscious approaches, such as integrating photovoltaic cells within building façades, an Intelligent Building Automated System to actively reduce energy use.

Case Study 2: Fusionopolis

Conceived as an iconic structure for one-north, the Fusionopolis building possesses a distinctly recognizable and memorable external form. The architectural expression of the structure is achieved through the elegant and efficient use of structural steel in combination with reinforced concrete core walls.

Horizontal mega-trusses cantilever from the central core walls with each truss supporting approximately seven floors above. This also enables the floors to be elevated from the ground, thus affording expansive and structure-free spaces and creating a seamless ground plane between the building and its surroundings.

Sky Bridges strategically connect towers to offer visitors an exhilarating experience, while architectural lighting effects enhance the building at night. The skylight above the concourse draws vision upwards to the underside of the egg-shaped theatre pod and to the two towers rising above.

Shared amenities serve not only the users of the building but also the surrounding community, in particular the podium retail area which creates a buzz of activity. The deliberate interweaving of pedestrian routes through the development, a direct link to the MRT station, and the interconnecting voids and spaces at the podium and via the elevated SkyBridges, add to the connected feeling and so foster collaboration and cross-disciplinary cooperation.

Fusionopolis also boasts 13 public sky gardens, each landscaped with distinctive themes. These high-rise gardens provide visual relief, cooling opportunities and social interaction spaces while contributing to Singapore’s overall urban greening initiatives.

 

[1] Ascendas-Singbridge Group is Asia’s leading sustainable urban and business space solutions provider with Assets under Management exceeding S$20 billion.

[2] Crescendas is a multi-industry group with business interests in properties, hotels, building materials, logistics and distribution services, innovative and technological products, green energy and environmental friendly products.

Perspectives, developed by SJ Academy, is our platform to explore new ways of tackling some of today’s most complex challenges. We draw on ideas and opinions from our staff associates and experts across different businesses. Click here to read more about Technology & Innovation, Infrastructure & Connectivity, and Design Leadership.

As the global population rises and increasingly lives in urban environments and megacities, planners and designers are being challenged to create and maintain a high quality of life for citizens. But liveable, sustainable cities can be a part of the future, if we focus efforts on the fundamental objectives – to create good jobs, quality housing, and an effective transport system.

 

The Rise of Megacities

In 1950, the world had only two megacities.  New York and Tokyo stood alone as cities with more than 10 million inhabitants. Fast forward to 2017, the world now has 37 megacities[1], many of which are found in Asia.

Between 1995 to 2015, the world’s urban population grew at an average rate of 2.16% per year. By 2015, some 4 billion people lived in cities. Yet significantly, the rate of urbanisation in low-income countries, at 3.68%, is much higher than the 0.88%[2] growth seen in high-income countries.

A city with a high quality of living is usually one that is safe, economically vibrant, inclusive and with active participation from its residents. However, this does not come about naturally. With the rapid rate of urbanisation, particularly in low-income countries, what we are more likely to see are cities with slums, high crime rates, and pollution.

While there are many aspects to the concept of liveability in cities, it is useful to go back to basics and examine what are the key criteria of a liveable city.

I believe that there are three fundamental “objectives” that any large city must deliver to ensure a decent quality of life for its inhabitants. These are

• good jobs;
• quality housing; and
• an effective transport system.

This is typically reflected in the land allocated to these “deliverables”. In Singapore’s land use master plan, for example, more than 50% of our land will be set aside for the purposes of industry, commerce, housing, land transport infrastructure, ports and airports by 2030.

Creating Good Jobs

People flock to major cities in search of economic prosperity as the economies of scale and network effects in cities lead to more job opportunities. However, this alone does not guarantee that the jobs are high-paying or meet the aspirations of the residents. Instead, the city must leverage strategic and appropriate economic positioning as an important factor in its economic development – a process often requiring hard-headed analysis of the natural advantages and disadvantages of the city and the global trends at that point in time.

When Singapore became independent in 1965, it had no natural resources. But it had one clear advantage – its strategic location at the centre of major shipping routes. The trend of globalisation, where multi-national corporations were relocating or setting up their trading and manufacturing operations in different parts of the world had already started – albeit still unclear to many casual observers.

Singapore seized its locational advantage and rode the wave of globalisation. Over the last few decades, it has risen from a labour-intensive manufacturing base, and regional port to become the global business hub in Asia with a wide range of sophisticated trading, high-value manufacturing, and professional service activities.

The economic miracle has seen Singapore’s GDP per capita multiply 100-fold from about USD500 in 1965 to more than USD50,000 in 2016, among the highest in the world. Obviously, as a result, many good jobs were created in this period, and income for the average Singaporean improved significantly.

Building world-class infrastructures

Besides a visionary leadership, a strong and united government bureaucracy, and pro-business government policies, the economic miracle was possible because of world-class infrastructure. In particular, to be a global business hub, Singapore needs a world-class airport, an efficient sea port, and well-designed industrial areas. Changi Airport will be opening its Terminal 4 soon and is already planning its massive Terminal 5[3] expansion. Similarly, to remain as the key maritime transhipment hub, Singapore is building a new port in the west. When fully completed, this will double the capacity of the existing port[4] facilities.

A unique infrastructure project in Singapore is the formation of Jurong Island, which is a S$7 billion amalgamation of seven offshore islands into a 3,200-ha world-class petrochemical complex. Today, Jurong Island is home to more than 100 manufacturing companies, employing 30,000 professionals. The project also makes better use of Singapore’s scarce land resources by storing bulk liquid underground in the Jurong Rock Caverns[5].

Public Housing

As people migrate to cities, meeting the demand for housing can quickly start to be a challenge. If not resolved, the price of decent accommodation reaches unaffordable levels, increasing the prospect of slums becoming a common sight.

While private housing should be part of the solution to housing demand, there is almost always a need for some public housing. As the name suggests, public housing cannot be left entirely to market forces. The government has to be involved heavily to make public housing work.

Singapore has a highly successful public housing programme with more than 80% of the population living in quality accommodation that is often the envy of other countries. In addition, public housing has become an appreciating asset for most Singaporeans.

The key success factors of our public housing programme are:

1. Adequate allocation of land for public housing;
2. Varied designs to cater to different affordability at different times;
3. The use of a mandatory savings scheme to finance public housing;
4. Regular maintenance and upgrading of public housing; and
5. Thoughtful social policies to achieve greater social integration.

Firstly, land must be allocated for public housing early in the city’s development. The Singapore Land Use Concept Plans take a long term 50-year view that integrates various needs for the country. This is supplemented by the 10-year Master Plans which translate the concept into strategies. The Land Acquisition Act has been instrumental in this. From the outset, it has been a deliberate and carefully guarded objective by the government to retain land in Singapore for public housing. This includes land in the central area as well as land further away. Cities which do not adopt such an approach will quickly find that they run out of land for public housing.

Secondly, designs for public housing apartments should be varied enough to cater to different segments of the population. Unlike many cities, where public housing is meant for the poor, Singapore has taken the approach that public housing should be designed for all.

Hence, there are small units for the low-income groups as well as large units that suit the needs of the upper and middle-income groups. And government subsidies differ accordingly. These designs have also evolved over time so that even the smaller units for the low-income groups see improvements over the years, creating a sense of inclusiveness and progress for all.

Thirdly, public housing needs to be financed. To this end, a strong economy and a balanced government budget are vital. In addition, Singapore has put in place a mandatory savings scheme called the Central Provident Fund which channels parts of the individual’s income into purposes such as housing, healthcare, and retirement. This fund works hand-in-glove with the public housing programme to allow the government to finance the development of public housing and for the residents to own them.

Lastly, public housing must be maintained, serviced, and upgraded regularly to prevent it from degenerating into slums. Government policies must be put in place so that there is co-sharing of such costs by the residents. Today in Singapore, much of this work is done by the Town Councils, which have started to apply smart technologies into monitoring various assets such as lifts in public housing[6]. Finally; public housing can be an effective vehicle to achieve greater social integration among different socio-economic and racial groups. Singapore has been very deliberate in its township planning, mixing smaller units with bigger public housing units, effectively encouraging groups with higher income residents to live next to groups with lower income.

As a multi-racial society, Singapore has also been careful to put in place policies to ensure that different races live together in the same area so as to promote better understanding and create greater racial harmony.

Land Transport

An affordable, sustainable and convenient land transport system is key to creating a liveable city. As a city grows, traffic congestion and pollution become more likely. A liveable city, therefore needs to ensure that the transport system is not only affordable, comprehensive and uncongested, but also well-connected to other nearby cities.

In Singapore, given the limitation of our size, we are steering our population to use more land-efficient modes of transport. As such, the Singapore public transport system is centred on the Mass Rapid Transit system, which transports 2 million passengers daily through 142 stations, with plans to increase the total distance from about 200km today to 360 km by 2030. This is supplemented by the bus network, which is also continually being enhanced.

Singapore takes a hard-nosed approach to addressing the negative impacts of car ownership. Through a combination of excise taxes on cars and fuel, electronic road pricing and a quota system which controls the number of new vehicles that are registered, Singapore has managed to keep its private car population under control. At the same time, through better designs that make it convenient for cyclists and users of other personal mobility devices, Singapore has tried to encourage a higher usage of these sustainable modes of transport. Singapore is also taking an open-minded approach towards new business models such as Uber and Grab, which may also help reduce the private vehicle population over time.

As an island, Singapore is linked by a causeway to Malaysia, and the road connection has been the key mode of transport between the two locations. There are now plans to enhance this by building the Kuala Lumpur-Singapore High-Speed Rail, and the Johor Bahru-Singapore Rapid Transit System Link. This will help connect Singapore to the nearest city to our north and allow Singaporeans to enjoy the benefits of agglomeration of cities.

The Future City

The fundamental requirements of a city or mega city will not change. However, technology will significantly alter how these can be delivered in the future. The types of jobs will change as more industries are disrupted by new technologies and new business models.

Infrastructure such as public housing and transport system can be designed, built, and maintained more efficiently as we make better use of Building Information Management systems, Virtual and Augmented Reality, data analytics, drones, autonomous vehicles and other new technologies.

It is clear that the future city will look very different from what we see today. Yet I am hopeful that if we employ the ideas discussed here, it can be a much more liveable city.

[1] Source: Demographia World Urban Areas 2017 survey.

[2] Source: UN World Cities Report.

[3] Surbana Jurong is the engineering consultant for the major tunnels at Changi Airport Terminal 5, which will include facilities such as people mover system, baggage handling system and common services. Surbana Jurong is also involved in the soil improvement work for the third runway.

[4] As the engineering consultant, Surbana Jurong is responsible for designing and supervising the construction of the 222 caissons, each of which is the size of an apartment block. This will create a 8.6km long wharf structure to cater to the largest container ships.

[5] Surbana Jurong has been involved in Jurong Island in various roles as master planner, technical consultant, project manager and as the Jurong Rock Cavern operator.

[6] Surbana Jurong has been providing such smart city services to all the Town Councils in Singapore.

Perspectives, developed by SJ Academy, is our platform to explore new ways of tackling some of today’s most complex challenges. We draw on ideas and opinions from our staff associates and experts across different businesses. Click here to read more about Technology & Innovation, Infrastructure & Connectivity, and Design Leadership.

The motor car has transformed lives around the globe by providing affordable and rapid personal transport to the masses. But its success has come at a cost in terms of congestion, pollution and impact on the planet. City planners must now focus their efforts on more sustainable transport solutions to create environmentally-friendly, liveable, and attractive places for our growing and increasingly urbanised populations to live and work in.

 

Our love affair with the motor car began more than a century ago with its invention in the late 19^th Century. With continuous technological advances, there has been a global revolution in personal mobility, allowing for door-to-door trips to be made with increasing speed, reliability, comfort, and safety.

Fast forward to the 21^st Century, with rising global population that is becoming more affluent and urbanised, the aspiration of car and motorcycle ownership is now within reach of the masses.  It is increasingly clear that such ownership, with its sophistication, convenience and practicality has become a victim of its own success with congestions, delays and pollution in most cities.

City planners and engineers have wrestled with the problem over the decades to meet the insatiable demands for personal motorised transport.

But, overwhelmed by the sheer volume of vehicular traffic, we now realise that the once life-transforming motor car is simply no longer a sustainable solution for the world’s cities.  As renowned urban designer Lewis Mumford once put it: “Cities are built for the care and culture of men, not for the constant passage of motor vehicles.”

So what went wrong?

First, it was the belief that we could always build our way out of congestion with massive road projects.  We now understand that this is not the case. No city has ever succeeded in doing so and there is a wealth of research that demonstrates how road construction and improvement actually generates more traffic that further adds to congestion.

Second, it was the laissez-faire attitude of allowing market forces and public preference dictate our design and policy decisions. Instead of pushing for investment in mass transport as the preferred mode of transport, the private car has been allowed to dominate public infrastructure investment decisions, leaving public transport playing second fiddle in most cities.

A consequence of this road dominant investment strategy has been the significant impact on the economy of congested cities. Road congestion costs time, thus reducing productivity. As well as affecting private vehicles and buses, it also impacts freight vehicles (which account for some 20% to 30% of traffic on the roads) thereby increasing costs and reducing efficiency.

Furthermore, the uncontrolled use of fossil-fuelled private vehicles producing about 20% of the greenhouse gases contributes to global warming. Road accident fatalities account for about 1.2 million in the world. The cost of congestion arising from unchecked growth in car population in terms of lost man-hours, accidents and pollution amount to a staggering figure.

Is there a way out of this predicament?

There are a number of possible solutions to the road problems plaguing cities around the world – many of which Singapore had adopted over the past four decades.

At the heart of these solutions is a realisation that the urban traveller is really only interested in three things:

• to travel safely;
• in the shortest travel time and;
• at the lowest travel cost.

Although each on its own is a very simple concept, yet as we have found in Singapore, they are not easily achieved without appropriate investment in planning, design and operations.

That means embracing the urban mobility challenge as a fundamental part of the holistic town planning process. It means understanding and accepting that every decision on the land use made by a town planner has an impact on the city’s transport system – an impact that must be addressed to enable people to move from one place to another to carry on their activities in safety, in time and at an affordable cost.

Public transport to maximise the efficiency of space

Clearly investment in better, modern public transport is the obvious place to start when it comes to tackling a city’s congestion problem and maximising the use of precious surface space. While a car with four passengers is an efficient vehicle, in most cities the average car carries only around 1.5 people, resulting in a wasteful use of the road space.

Compare this to a bus, which carries typically between 60 and 120 passengers. It clearly makes sense from a road space perspective to prioritise and invest in providing buses on the road network.

The next logical step obviously is to invest in urban rail systems. With each train cabin capable of carrying around 250 passengers, there are huge gains on offer from the perspective of maximising the efficiency of the available road space.

Encouraging personal transport

However, there are cheaper alternatives when it comes to maximising the use of road space such as walking and cycling, both of which can easily be overlooked when it comes to planning urban mobility strategies.

The bicycle is a popular, healthy and non-polluting mode of transport that is now making a comeback as a reliable and cheap means to navigate the city, having been eclipsed by motorised vehicles for decades.

Addressing safety concerns of cyclists having to mingle with larger motor vehicles is the critical factor, and has prompted city authorities around the world to invest in segregated infrastructure for cyclists, and so encourage their greater usage.

The idea of establishing a network of well signposted, safe, and prioritised routes for cyclists can also be applied to encourage more pedestrians in cities. Making people feel safe and comfortable to walk short journeys rather than use taxis or buses, it reduces congestion and frees capacity on the public transport system.

Demand management

Another part of the road congestion reduction equation is to manage demand for travel by rationing or prioritising road space during the rush hour.

For example, allowing only high occupancy vehicles, such as cars and buses to use the city roads during the rush hour has demonstrated that behaviour can be changed, with people incentivised to either form car pools or take the bus to work.

Other ideas to regulate flow include permits that allow only specific vehicles – perhaps chosen by vehicle registration number – to use the city roads on any day or the use of bans on freight deliveries outside certain hours.

More controversial is the use of congestion charges or high car city centre parking charges. Both have been very effective in terms of regulating car use and also in generating revenue to plough back into the public transport systems. However, there are clear political risks from imposing such unpopular policies and this has prevented many local authorities from embracing the idea.

Finally, given that the majority of road traffic congestion in cities is seen during the daily tidal flow to work in the mornings and home again in the evenings, many city authorities are now encouraging the staggering of work hours and the use of flexi-time working. And of course, with the advent of technology in our daily lives, telecommuting could ultimately reduce all need for travel to work.

Technology to transform door-to-door transport

The private hire market has been transformed by online services such as Uber and Grab which have entered the market to complement the existing public transport services and provide convenient on-demand transport.

The use of apps to enable simple, cost effective booking and use of private hire vehicles have transformed the customer experience of the taxi and private hire cars. The logical next step in this service is the introduction of autonomous driverless vehicles capable of safely and efficiently transporting passengers from door-to-door on demand.

Conclusion

The answer to the urban mobility challenge lies in first understanding the needs of the transport user. Only then can we provide efficient service options that provide realistic, convenient, and affordable alternatives to the private car.

It is clear that no single solution holds the key to the congestion problems faced by cities. Instead, we must tackle the issues on multiple fronts, ensuring that the differing needs of travellers are addressed so as to create a genuinely sustainable transport future for modern cities.

Ultimately, by investing in public transport and non-motorised transport, and demand management measures to control the inefficient and widespread use of the private vehicle, cities will be able to reduce congestion, boost productivity and free the space currently devoted to road transport. As a result, we will be able to focus our urban design efforts away from the demands of the motor car, and towards the needs of people to create an environmentally friendly, liveable, and attractive place for everyone to live and work.

Perspectives, developed by SJ Academy, is our platform to explore new ways of tackling some of today’s most complex challenges. We draw on ideas and opinions from our staff associates and experts across different businesses. Click here to read more about Technology & Innovation, Infrastructure & Connectivity, and Design Leadership.

In my presentation today, I will give a geo-economic perspective of a global initiative that is closely associated with our infrastructure business community. Proposed by China in 2013, “One Belt One Road” and now renamed the “Belt and Road Initiative” (BRI) is a global economic plan to create regional connectivity through infrastructure development and promote world trade and economic growth. It plans to connect 65 countries across Asia, Middle East to Europe by land along the historic Silk route and another maritime route, down the Pacific and Indian Ocean and up the Mediterranean Sea. It is arguably the most ambitious economic project in the 21st Century in terms of physical and economic scale and geographic spread.

The 65 countries make up 65% of the world population, one third of the world’s GDP, 40% of the global trade and one quarter of all goods and services the world moves.

In September last year, I mentioned at a conference that, amidst the then-pessimistic world’s economy, there were only two possible major stimuli or drivers that could reignite global growth, namely the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the One Belt One Road (OBOR) programme. The TPP is now as good as dead, although there have been recent attempts to revive it. The world is now left with BRI as the only potential global collaborative vision that can be the engine of the world’s economic growth. This BRI programme is sometimes likened to the US’s Marshall Plan, except that the current proposed BRI is 12 times larger.

I attended the “Belt & Road Forum for International Cooperation” held in Beijing two weekends ago. I wanted to personally assess the vibe and spirit at the Forum and to listen to what participating countries had to say on the BRI.  More than 1500 guests from 130 countries attended the forum. This included 29 state and government leaders, as well as the heads of major World organisations like the UN Secretary General, MD of the World Bank and IMF, VP of the European Commission, as well as the Heads of the WTO, ICAO and IMO. Initially Western media reported that the US, Japan and Australia would not be attending the Forum. But they were all there and mostly represented by senior representatives.

In his opening speech, China’s President Xi spoke robustly in assurance of investment in infrastructure to open-up trade, promote economic growth through globalisation, connectivity with other countries, win-win projects, inclusive development, and peaceful economic collaboration. Other world leaders advocated peace and prosperity, bonding and friendship, good governance, sustainability, quality infrastructures, transparency of procurement processes, social and environment impacts and standardisation of cross border development. The mood was supportive and encouraging but there was still a palpable reservation over whether China would lead and deliver this global economic initiative fairly and with transparency.

So what is the economic scale of BRI? Asia Pacific will need to spend US$26 trillion from now to 2030 on infrastructure, and Asia alone will need up to US$1.7 trillion in infrastructure investment annually over the next ten years to maintain growth. One estimate of the BRI’s cumulative investment over the long-term is between US$4 – US$8 trillion. BRI countries therefore gladly welcome and support BRI to accelerate their infrastructure driven economic growth. Since 2013, China has poured in US$60 billion in B&R countries. She has announced recently that total outbound investment will reach US$120 billion to US$130 billion a year over the next five years giving it a total of US$600 billion.

So where will the funding be coming from? China in a show of leadership for BRI has initiated financial institutions like the US$100 billion AIIB, US$40 billion New Silk Road Infrastructure Fund and another US$100 billion New Development Bank to support these infrastructure projects. At the BRI Forum President Xi pledged US$124 billion to finance BRI projects, of which US$9 billion will go to assist BRI developing countries. China as the promoter of BRI wants to make it happen.

There have been doubts expressed, particularly in Western media, on China’s ability to orchestrate this ambitious undertaking successfully. In my view, whether it is China, US, Japan or any other world economic power, a global initiative of this scale will undoubtedly face implementation challenges and obstacles. Funding is the first hurdle, because infrastructure projects will always face issues over their bankability. In addition, where infrastructure projects involve foreign investment, there will be issues such as the host country’s political stability, local vested interests and possible resistance, as well as project management and execution risks. And finally, there would still be risks on the completed infrastructures’ performance outcomes.

So does China have the capability to deliver this grand plan? Over the past few decades, China has convincingly demonstrated her capability to deliver large scale projects successfully. I first visited China in 1982. China was then in abject poverty. At US$200 GDP per capita, it was the largest but one of the poorest countries in the world. Within 35 years its GDP per capita gained 40 times to over US$8,000 per capita. In 1981, 88% of Chinese and 96% of rural Chinese lived below the poverty line. By 2010, less than 10% were that poor. Now ranked as the world’s second-largest economy it has miraculously built up, at one time, more than US$4 trillion in reserves. No one could have forecast China’s dramatic transformation.

China isn’t bestowed with oil or other rich natural resources, yet she managed to lift more than 700 million people out of poverty and grew her urbanised population from 16% to 55.5%. It is the most successful story of migration in mankind’s history. I have been travelling to China very regularly over the past 20 years dealing with real estate business in various cities – and I am still at it. Initially I was less than sanguine about the mammoth projects China chose to embark on. In the last 30 years, China has succeeded in delivering several gigantic transformational infrastructure projects. This includes Shanghai’s Pudong district, which was then ridden with paddy fields, but which has since become one of the world’s most vibrant financial centres; the Three Gorges Dam; more than 20,000 km of railway including the Qinghai-Tibet high altitude railway, the Beijing-Shanghai high speed railway which is the world’s longest high-speed line ever constructed in a single phase, the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge, as well as the Beijing Capital Airport, just to name a few.

I have seen too many of China’s ambitious dreams at work and how they have all become reality in an incredibly short time. I have therefore learnt not to underestimate China and to not doubt their proclaimed ambitious plans.

Of course, these were largely domestic projects and I am mindful that cross border undertakings, such as the BRI, will pose dramatically different challenges. Such a massive undertaking will certainly face a myriad of uncertainties surrounding the plan caused by political, financial, technical, environmental and social, and / or other collaboration issues. These are a “given” in global infrastructure businesses, whether it is promoted by China or by any other economic powerhouses. Having said that, I believe China will need to move this initiative in partnership and collaboration with other countries, as well as commercial and multi-lateral development organizations to ensure its ultimate success.

So how do I view BRI and the perceived growing influence of China in the world?

With rising protectionist sentiments in the US and EU, world growth and global trade is crucial to help prevent it from escalating. Jobs are a key political problem in all these countries, especially in the EU and among the lower middle class in the US. The implementation of the BRI itself has the potential to create growth, demand and jobs, and can therefore help to dampen protectionist sentiment globally.

For developing countries, growth is even more critical. Most developing countries like countries in ASEAN, Central Asia and South Asia are facing what demographers call the “youth demographic bulge”, caused by a rising number of young people. Joblessness will be highly destabilizing for these countries. Any global impetus and initiative to foster economic growth and create jobs in these regions can only be a positive.

There have been some initial questions raised on the mutuality of benefits between China and the host countries. It has been claimed that trains that travelled to China fully loaded returned empty, suggesting an imbalance in the trade equation. In an apparent attempt to address such concerns, the Chinese ambassador to UK, Liu Xiaoming wrote in FT last week that in the first quarter this year China customs cleared 62 trains, 2850 containers and 35,027 tons of cargo carrying industrial products and only 11.4% returned empty. Containers almost doubled and empty containers halved. Since 2011 China trains made 3000 trips to Europe linking 27 Chinese cities in 21 provinces to 28 cities in 11 European countries. China is expected to make 5000 such trips every year by 2020. From 2014 to 2016 total trade between China and the BRI countries exceeded $3 trillion. Trade in services is also rising in proportion.

Chinese investment in BRI countries now amounts to US$60 billion with another US$14.5 billion signed during the BRI Forum. In the next five years, Chinese outbound investment is forecast to reach a total of US$600 billion to US$800 billion and it will largely go to BRI countries.

From an economic standpoint, many companies from developed countries such as US, EU and Japan can also benefit from BRI. China and the host countries will certainly need to tap into global industries and service providers from the developed countries in the whole value added chain, ranging from master planning, design, architectural services, consulting, project management, legal and financial services etc. Big players in the construction industry and machine and equipment suppliers such GE, Siemens, Caterpillar, Rolls Royce, Airbus, Bouygues, EDF will have huge potential roles in BRI projects. Financial firms like Goldman Sachs, UBS, JP Morgan can also be involved in infrastructural financing. For developed countries where their own countries’ infrastructural developments have reached a more mature stage, such industry players will welcome the potential of such big jobs outside their own countries. The knock-on effects of the implementation of BRI and the potential benefits to industry players from developed countries cannot be denied.

With BRI and increasing growth and development, today’s developing countries like ASEAN, Central Asia and central Europe can develop and industrialise and urbanize. As the income in these regions increase and the middle class expands, they can also become future markets for developed countries.

It may be true that the BRI will increase China’s dominance and influence. Any country which invests and / or trades heavily with another country is bound to have some degree of political and even subconscious cultural impact on the host country. To me, that is inevitable. Whether that is positive or negative is subjective, and obviously, different countries will have different geo-political considerations. China’s dominance and influence in world trade is already being felt worldwide, with or without BRI.

China realises that the BRI must be open and inclusive to succeed. They should also surely be aware that such a plan cannot succeed without the cooperation of the host countries and the support of other developed countries.

For the host countries, the potential direct and indirect benefits of the BRI will likely outweigh any concerns of China’s global dominance, political or otherwise. I foresee that pragmatism will prevail and they will embrace the BRI for its economic benefits. For other countries who are not directly involved, they can still benefit by participating in the implementation process and partake in the growth opportunities. Non-participation and non-engagement, in my view, is not an option!

In conclusion, I would like to say that the world now lacks a key growth engine. I see the BRI as the main locomotive for the global economy over the next decade. This is a plan designed for global infrastructure development to improve connection between Asia and Europe. Having a plan or vision is better than having no plan or vision. Trying to make it work is better than speculating over why it will not work. Emerging countries, with their limited resources, may not have the means to grope around to seek their own vision for global expansion. China, with all its capabilities and experience, cannot fully deliver the plan in its entirety without the participation and collaboration of all the host countries. She will also need support in services and expertise from other developed countries.  If all parties concerned do go on board and work with China in this plan, the implementation of BRI will likely transform the world economic landscape for the better. It will result in a “win-win-win” situation for China, developing as well as developed countries. Whilst economic growth and wealth creation by themselves cannot solve all the geopolitical problems that currently plague this world, it can certainly help to eliminate poverty and improve the quality of the lives of the mass population, reduce the problems of unemployment and indirectly, encourage political stability, particularly in vulnerable and less developed regions.

Perspectives, developed by SJ Academy, is our platform to explore new ways of tackling some of today’s most complex challenges. We draw on ideas and opinions from our staff associates and experts across different businesses. Click here to read more about Technology & Innovation, Infrastructure & Connectivity, and Design Leadership.

The stellar success of Singapore’s Jurong Island Chemical Hub can be attributed to clever land utilisation, adaptability to volatile markets and adequate attention to safety and security

Singapore has no oil or gas resources and limited land space. But against all odds, it has achieved tremendous success in the petrochemical industry. Today, Singapore is the third-largest oil refining centre in the world, the largest bunkering port and, one of the top 3 oil trading hubs in the world and the price discovery centre of Asia’s oil trading industry.

And Jurong Island Chemical Hub, the pillar of Singapore’s petrochemicals industry, is an embodiment of Singapore’s success. The island is an amalgamation of seven small islands in the western part of Singapore, formed through land reclamation. The process started in 1983 through the combined effort of various government agencies in Singapore, in particular the Economic Development Board and JTC Corporation.

Despite having no feedstock advantage or a substantial domestic market to support the petrochemical production, Jurong Island has persevered through stiff competition and maintained its position as one of the top global petrochemical hubs. Today, Jurong Island Chemical Hub is home to almost 90 international petroleum and chemical companies, and has contributed to investments of over S$47 billion. The Hub manufactures refined & chemical products from integrated petrochemical complexes of oil majors Exxon Mobil and Shell, intermediate products from chemical producers such as Sumitomo & BASF, to automotive chemicals and agro-chemicals, from firms such as Evonik and Solvay.

We look at some of the critical reasons for this success.

1. Effective utilisation of land space

The effective utilisation of land has allowed all these facilities to be built within a relatively small area. There is a large focus on infrastructural support such as common pipeline corridors to make plant-to-plant transfers easier and more cost efficient. The close proximity of the plants allow one company’s output to be used as feedstock for another, thereby reducing logistics costs. Additionally, the presence of third-party providers that handle non-manufacturing services helps reduce costs. The network also offers companies alternative options for product storage, freeing up space to carry out more processing.

The Jurong Rock Caverns (JRC) are also an important breakthrough in the provision of infrastructure for the Jurong Island Chemical Hub. When the idea was first conceptualised in the early 2000s, storing oil underground was unheard of in Singapore and in many parts of the world. The JRC is constructed at about 130m below the sea and is designed for flexible operations that can link to various customers on the island. Surbana Jurong, together with Geostock, embarked on the basic engineering design and construction management, including commissioning, of the JRC in 2006. The Jurong Rock Caverns Phase 1 officially opened in 2014. With 1.47 million cubic metres of storage space underground, it freed up about 60 hectares of surface land. Now that this previously unthinkable idea has become a reality, further underground expansion is being considered.

2. Adaptability and flexibility

Singapore has been able to adapt to market volatility, allowing the industry to flourish. With the Jurong Island Version 2.0 Initiative announced, the focus expanded from investment attraction to enhancing competitiveness and sustainability through creating robustness, optimization and optionality. Instead of building more refineries, Jurong Island will transform itself to focus on specialty chemicals, which are generally used in the textile, automotive and agriculture sectors. They are higher up the value chain as they serve more unique functions, and in 2015 it was reported that one-third of more than S$6 billion in fixed asset investments over recent years came from specialty chemicals alone.

Some countries have seen some difficulty in attracting specialty chemical investments due to lax intellectual property laws. Singapore has managed to gain investor confidence in this sector due to its intellectual property protection laws, access to skilled labour and research and development capabilities.

Flexibility is important in finding solutions to challenges. Take for example the ongoing development of the Pengerang Integrated Petroleum Complex, a petrochemicals hub in Johor, Malaysia. Although at first glance it might seem to pose a threat, there is also potential for both Singapore and Malaysia to collaborate and mutually benefit, given that land is limited in Singapore.

3. Safety and security

Safety is arguably the most important factor in ensuring Jurong Island operates smoothly. A key lesson is that in the implementation of a project, from the initial planning and design stages to construction and operation of facilities, meticulous supervision is required and must be enforced.

Additionally, in-depth knowledge of the industry is essential, as facilities see thousands of chemicals and products that possess unique properties. Knowledge of and experience with handling these products are paramount in ensuring safe, synergistic clustering.

Singapore has extremely high standards and rigorous guidelines on individual plant safety – vital for plants so close to one another. Should an unfortunate accident occur, Singapore has shown it can respond efficiently, like it did during the 2016 Jurong Aromatics fire.

Started in a condensate storage tank within the plant, the fire was isolated and put out by the Company Emergency Response Team (CERT) and the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) in a 5 hour operation. The neighbouring companies were evacuated immediately despite there being no immediate threat, and companies with connecting pipelines to the affected plant executed mitigation measures to isolate any potential escalation of the fire to their own facilities. All stakeholders were in constant communication while they monitored the situation, and the SCDF also updated the fire situation through Facebook. Such a transparent and proven effective response system is necessary to maintain the confidence and trust of both investors and the public.

What is in store for the future of Singapore’s petrochemicals industry?

A foreseeable challenge to the industry is the world’s move towards protectionism. This means that Asian refiners, especially those in Singapore, need to constantly innovate to stay competitive.

Moving ahead, some things that could be considered for the future of Jurong Island are the development of sustainable feedstock and technologies, moving towards lower carbon emissions and improving overall energy efficiency. Additionally, floating platforms could be considered to increase space, or perhaps even Hyperloop technology, such as that proposed in Dubai, to increase product transport efficiency.

A comprehensive development plan is merely the first step in achieving success. Singapore has the added advantage of a whole-of-government ecosystem, whereby various government agencies form a cohesive committee to support the development plan. The collective experience of the team that implements the plan and a focus on prudence and adaptability to global economic and oil cycles are vital to turn the dream into reality. Jurong Island already stands as testimony to this.

Perspectives, developed by SJ Academy, is our platform to explore new ways of tackling some of today’s most complex challenges. We draw on ideas and opinions from our staff associates and experts across different businesses. Click here to read more about Technology & Innovation, Infrastructure & Connectivity, and Design Leadership.

过去的亚洲， 未来的亚洲， 人多的亚洲

盘古开天至工业大革命， 亚洲一直是经济与科技的中心点。单单是宋代的中国就占了世界的生产总值的80%。

然而18世纪工业大革命之后，西方国家通过科技创新， 在经济和生活素质上迅速地超越了亚洲。

二战后， 亚洲国家的经济与科技摆脱了封建的包袱，先后改革。现在也有望回复昔日的领先地位。根据亚洲发展银行 的估计， 在2050年，亚洲其中有30亿人口可享有西欧目前的生活水平； 亚洲的生产总值也能达到全球的50%。

工业4.0

低劳资成本当然也是这几十年来亚洲复兴的推动力。可是科技创新更是亚洲在工业4.0大趋势里的主要成功因素。亚洲在工业物联网的投资与发展是这趋势的最好验证。市场调擦名家，Frost & Sullivan 估计亚太的工业物联网的市场会在五年内猛增5倍（至150亿美元。）

云端技术让我们以前所未有的规模、速度和深度搜集、储存和 分析数据，因而能够发现之前无法察觉的微弱关联性，并且找 出原本复杂到无法理解的系统内部运作情况。在云端运算和高 级分析能力的支持下，人工智能、机器人、基因技术、材料科 学、3D打印等领域的发展可谓一日千里。

云端技术与行动装置的结合，使我们可以在任何时间，从任何 地点取得信息，并与他人联系，这意味着我们将有无限的空 间，可以重新想象经营企业、联系客户、管理人力、购买货物 与组织供应链的方式。
 

崭新的繁荣， 崭新的挑战，整体地处理

繁华盛世也存有些隐忧。 潘祖健之前在 文章“智慧城的四骑士”里提到治安会是亚洲未来数十年里最大的挑战之一。治安能分两大类-》 实体安全与知讯安全。 可是在物联网与互联网时代， 两类治安之间的楚河汉界也模糊了。如果要有效地应对治安上的挑战， 亚洲社会就得同时间地面对它们。我们得积极地设计出整体性的安全战略与解决方案。

齐家治国平天下– 整体性的安全概念

让我们用实际例子来了解这整体性的安全概念。 我们先以人数为出发点-》在2017年，中国国家发展和改革委员会此前预测，2017年春运整体客流量将达到29.78亿人次 ； 在2050年- 亚洲的人口总数可达50亿。 在 “人潮汹涌“的冲击下， 保持治安是各国，各层政府的一大挑战。 这挑战不止限于因犯罪案件与人口直线比率，而随着人口增长那么简单。 在未来亚洲的大城市， 市民回来至不同的族群。 我们能从历史上体会到当不同文化， 宗教与经济背景的族群在同一个有限的空间互动时， 很容易发生误解，摩擦与争议。

这显然不是一个单以增加保安团队人数可以解决的问题。科技是解决人口所带来的安全挑战的之中主要关节。 面部识别， 大数字分析 与 运算- 安全科技日新月异， 让治安团体能突破人力所带来的局限， 大幅度地提高治安效率。 在繁荣与多人口的未来， 安全科技是一个亚洲不可缺的架构。

要成功地执行整体性的安全概念， 亚洲各国也需同时关心建筑，城市规划与治安的关系。 好的城市规划得融入实体安全与知讯安全的考虑。这包括实体安全 （如公共设施是否有足够的灯光， 公安组织地点分配等等）， 还有知讯安全对网络的架构方面的需求。ICT 规划 也应该是城市顶层规划的重要环节。

道高一尺魔高一丈

另一方面，物联网与互联网科技也能沦为不法之徒的武器。  根据致同国际会计师事务所（Grant Thornton）的一项调查显示, 在2015年，在亚太地区发生的网络攻击造成的商业损失高于813亿美元。 这数字超过了北美和欧盟 （北美和欧盟个别的损失估计只有200亿美元。）

随着物联网与SCADA系统的互动， SCADA系统也成为网络攻击的一大目标。 趋势科技报告（2016 Global Roundup Report）亚太计算机病毒事件比其它地区严重。 当中Mirai botnet也侵入10万台物联网仪器 （IoT devices）。

微软云惠天下

在这物联网与互联网科技日新月异的时代， 亚洲不能重复历史的错误， 再次自我封闭。 要达到云惠天下的佳境， 微软提出了三个概念： 可信云， 负责云， 与包容云。

可信云

随着数字化的程度日益提高，我们所产生、收集的个人资料， 已经达到史无前例的规模。这些数据可以用于提高云端服务的 效能，用来制造更好的产品，也可以帮助各国政府、企业和研 究者更加了解人类的行为模式。
有了这些数据，透过云端彼此链接的的日常用品可以产生互 动，并做出可以改善生活质量，提升企业经营效率以及推动新 型公共服务的事情。
云端运算所支撑的数据分析、机器学习和人工智能，在帮助制 造业、教育、医疗以及其他诸多领域的机构了解复杂的系统， 提高效率，降低成本，解决难题，及开发出全新的能力。
随着更多的物联网装置链接到云端，微软更加专注在云端的安全性。

当人们日常生活中使用行动装置、智能型手机和其他设备产生 的数据掌握在企业和政府手中时，理所当然，我们会担忧个人 隐私被侵犯，害怕无法掌控基于算法做出的决定，同时，基 于数据分析做出的观察和预测对个人经济产生负面效应的风险 也会增加。人们如果无法确信数据的隐私性和安全性，对于使 用云端服务就必定会心存疑虑。

政府可以制定适用范围广泛、有约束力的法律规范，为人们提供 法律保障，让他们确信个人资料储存在云端里安全无虞，也相信企业和政府有责任必须正当地使用高级分析和算法决策。
隐私保护架构不应过于严格，以致阻碍 政府、企业和其他组织机构以合乎道德的方式透过数据分析获 得洞见。有一种方式可以两全其美，使隐私保护架构既可达成 这一目标，又可降低侵犯隐私权的风险，那就是鼓励实施数 据集的去识别化，使得研究者无法将个人资料连结到特定的个 人。涉及敏感资料和高级分析时，隐私保护架构应赋予企业和 政府足够的弹性，对数据搜集的目的和数据分析技术的内部工 作机制进行说明，以确保企业和政府能够获得更广泛的洞见， 提升给消费者带来的利益。
负责云

在增强人类能力和推动社会进步方面，人工智能（AI）几 乎前景无限。随着无人驾驶汽车、可以预测我们需求的个 人数字助理以及计算机化健康诊断的兴起，人工智能正在让 人们的生活变得更加美好。人工智能取得的最新进展包括 机器学习、推理和感知领域，而所有这些都是由云端运算 所推动。

透过快速、大规模地对数据进行分析，并将个人装置与整个数 据中心的运算资源相连接，云端运算已经成为提供人工智能服 务的主要平台。云端服务还可以确保所有人都能享受人工智能 服务，虽然它们通常需要庞大的计算机密集型基础设施。
为促进人工智能领域的创新以及人工智能的应用，各国政府应 制定法律和政策架构，提供数据获取权限，鼓励对人工智能技 术的投资，并确保人工智能技术值得信赖。人工智能的出现会 带来新的议题和质疑。为支持人工智能的创新、保护普世价值 观（如尊重个人自治和隐私），必须仔细考虑并审慎因应这些 新的议题和质疑。

落实法律和做法的现代化，为人工智能的应用提供环境。人工 智能需要取得数据；机器必须取得大数据集，对其中的模式进 行识别，否则就无法「学习」。各国政府应仔细评估是否需要 修订与取得数据相关的现行法律，以利用人工智能带来的利 益。举例来说，在充分保护作品的表达性价值的同时，版权法 不应对从作品中提取数据进行原创性分析的行为加以限制，这 种行为在为人们提供与人工智能有关的有用见解的同时，不会 与版权所有者形成竞争关系。涉及个人信息时，各国政府应当 在隐私权益和人工智能取得数据所带来的益处之间谨慎权衡。 在提高云端运算的变革性影响力方面，各国政府也可以发挥重 要作用，例如政府可以鼓励公司为共有资源库提供数据，将之 用于数据分析，并在不公开商业秘密或专有信息的前提下共享 分析结果。此外，各国政府应在保护隐私权和国家安全的前提 下，确保公众有权对政府收集的所有数据进行分析。

 

包容云

在2050年， 地球6成的人口将会居于亚洲。 我们得在整体性的安全架构下积极地把科技融入我们的日常生活里。 同时我们的确保科技所带来的繁荣与进步也给亚洲各社群受益。 这可就是包容云的理想。

Perspectives, developed by SJ Academy, is our platform to explore new ways of tackling some of today’s most complex challenges. We draw on ideas and opinions from our staff associates and experts across different businesses. Click here to read more about Technology & Innovation, Infrastructure & Connectivity, and Design Leadership.