PUBLIC HOUSING IN HONG KONG AND SINGAPORE

Abstract

The city-states of Hong Kong and Singapore are often regarded as outstanding examples where public housing have been adopted, implemented and provided successfully. While Hong Kong and Singapore have achieved equal international distinction for their extensive public housing developments, their planning philosophies and approaches are sufficiently distinct to make a comparative study instructive. The objective of this study is to evaluate the massive public housing programmes in Hong Kong and Singapore, in order to assess the real extent of their success in meeting the needs of their respective population. Firstly, the study examines the housing problem from a historical perspective in order to understand why each country has undertaken the task of providing public housing for its people and why different approaches have been undertaken. Secondly, the performances of the public housing programmes are measured by their own standards, and thirdly, the criteria of equity, choice and participation are used in a comparative evaluation of the two countries' public housing programmes. The findings show that Hong Kong, plagued by the severe problem of immigrants, had a tougher task in achieving its objective of providing housing for all. Singapore, however, having enforced stricter immigration controls had an easier task in providing housing for its people. The study also reveals that the factor such as firm government commitment, efficient, centralised and co-ordinated administration, adequate finance and less stringent eligibility criteria must be present in any public housing programme for it to be successful. Also the criteria of equity, choice and participation are important in any public housing programme. In their own right, the policies and plans adopted for public housing in both Hong Kong and Singapore have been successful. Today, more than 46% of the population in Hong Kong and 80% of the population in Singapore are living in public housing.