https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/18/10427

Nature-based solutions (NbS) are increasingly recognized as viable tools for sustainable urban water management. This article explores the implementation of NbS in two distinct cities, Singapore and Lisbon, to demonstrate that NbS can work in very different contexts and spark new thoughts on the urban–nature relationship and to identify commonalities that drive and enable the implementation of NbS in different context. Literature review-based research was conducted to examine the types of NbS implemented, the common drivers, the governance model, and the plural functionalities of the solutions. The research shows that, despite the differences, the two cities shared common drivers (including water supply, flood control, and resident demand for green space) and goals, such as improving water quality and overall quality of life, through the deployment of NbS. With rapid urban expansion, water use increase, and the impacts of climate change, NbS can be effective tools to deliver integrated benefits and improve the liveability of cities.

The notion of a recalcitrant "police subculture" is pervasive in the literature on policing, often invoked to explain many of the ills linked to police misconduct and corruption. This article argues that the failure of reform efforts is the result of interventionist strategies which had sought to change police subculture "head-on" without a corresponding change in the structural conditions in which the policing role is so located, and that these efforts, theoretically, have been informed by a conceptualisation of police subculture as homogenous, monolithic, and static. Using the Bourdieuian concepts of the "habitus" and "field", the view of a "recalcitrant" subculture will be challenged in this article. Using the Singaporean experience as a case in point, it will be shown how changes in the field of policing can bring about changes, intended or otherwise, in the occupational habitus of the police: refashioning the informal repository of knowledge guiding police work.

The following sections are included: Introduction; Perennial Issues Confronting the PAP; What Were the Key Issues in the 2020 GE?; General Strategies and Approaches; Campaign Strategies; Conclusion

The Electoral Boundaries Review Committee (EBRC) Report was released on 13 March 2020, instigating much speculation about the calling of the GE. The committee’s formation was announced the 4 September 2019, and it made several recommendations that were accepted by the government. These include not having six-member Group Representation Constituencies (GRCs) and having more Single Member Constituencies (SMCs). Unsurprisingly, the report was viewed with suspicion by some within the opposition circles. Allegations of gerrymandering were put forth, with claims that the new boundaries would give the PAP an even bigger advantage in the upcoming GE. The Committee denied such accusations, maintaining that it “does not examine the results of past elections”, and instead, was only concerned with “population shifts and new housing developments”.1The report was released right in the middle of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis, and as the government was stepping up measures against public gatherings and encouraging social distancing. Naturally, the release of the report amid the pandemic elicited mixed reactions from both the opposition parties and members of the public, which will be discussed later.

Purpose: The aim of this study is to trace the factors that have contributed to the adoption and institutionalization of foresight practices within the Singapore Public Service, Government of Singapore. Design/methodology/approach: This study discusses the history of the adoption and institutionalization of foresight practices in the Singapore Government; this study has carried out content analysis of secondary literature and conducted 11 in-depth semi-structured interviews with elite informants. Findings: This study finds that the adoption and institutionalization of foresight practices in the Singapore Government was brought about by a combination of five factors. The most foundational factor in our model is the role of institutional entrepreneurs, who drew upon the symbolic representation of Singapore’s vulnerability to legitimize the use of foresight, thus resonating well with local technocratic groups to maintain steady economic progress. This study further argues that the underdevelopment of foresight in the local private and academic domains can be at least in part explained by the historical connotations of foresight that were uncovered. Research limitations/implications: As the findings are fruit of the authors’ interpretation of the secondary literature/interview data, they require further triangulation by future research. Originality/value: This study presents the interpretation of elite informants’ accounts and historical documents to explain one of the most exemplar yet classified case studies of governmental foresight globally. © 2021, Emerald Publishing Limited.

http://libproxy1.nus.edu.sg/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2016.1201134