Abstract
The challenge of multiculturalism has been faced by nations throughout history as they navigate their development process. Often, this has resulted in divisions and conflicts that impede progress towards social and economic growth. However, Singapore, a multicultural state in South Asia has defied this assumption and quickly risen to become one of the most developed countries in the world. This article aims to explore the key factors that have contributed to Singaporean success.
A cura di
Sofia Manaresi - Junior Researcher Mondo Internazionale G.E.O. Cultura e Società
Marco Rizzi - Junior Researcher Mondo Internazionale G.E.O. Cultura e Società
Introduction
Singapore is an island nation that has undergone an incredible journey of development from a once underdeveloped state to becoming one of the wealthiest and most influential countries worldwide. This journey has been made possible due to several factors, including including the island's strategic geographical location and the abundant opportunities available to investors and companies to flourish. Singapore’s origins as a commercial port, and its subsequent period of British colonization, have led to its economic boom and emergence as one of the world's most advanced countries. This research will examine the economic and social policies that enabled Singapore's economic growth, such as opening up to foreign markets and investing in critical infrastructure, as well as the role of foreign multinational corporations in Singapore's economy.
Globalization has played a significant role in Singapore's growth, contributing to the formation of its identity given its historical and multilingual origins. This research will analyze how Singapore’s multicultural and diverse population has influenced the construction of its national identity and how this has impacted its economy and global positioning. This study will also examine the role of politics in shaping Singapore's national identity and how it has been influenced by globalization and global economic forces.
In both chapters, the challenges that Singapore has faced and continues to encounter in its development path will be analyzed. Furthermore, future plans and policies adopted by the government to maintain the country’s competitive edge in the global economy will be assessed.
This research will deepen our understanding of how Singapore has become one of the most advanced countries in the world, and how its evolution has been influenced by globalisation, politics, and global economic forces.
Economic development of the island and globalisation
Since its independence, Singapore has emerged as a globally connected, multicultural, and cosmopolitan city-state.The flow of people, ideas, capital, goods, and services has made Singapore a hub of international activity. This would not have been possible without globalisation which has, along the way, aided Singapore in successfully becoming a multicultural society. Globalisation refers to the widening, deepening, and acceleration of global interconnectedness, facilitated by increased international trade, greater and faster mobility of capital, and larger and more far-reaching migration flows. Globalisation has had a great impact on Singapore, both in fostering multiculturalism and in economic development (Baricco A, 2002)
The globalised economy is mainly characterised by two aspects: technological progress and an exponential increase in international trade
The phenomenon of globalisation has allowed some countries, mostly in Asia, including Singapore, to experience significant economic development, closing the gap with the more industrialised countries.
This success is attributed to the opening up of states to a global economy, which takes advantage of trade liberalisation, directs its economy towards exports, and makes abundant labour a competitive factor. This type of economy also leads to the adoption of domestic policies aimed at improving the urban, territorial, political and social fabric, in orderto attract foreign capital (Pannozzo, 2017).
The island-state of Singapore has undergone a remarkable economic transformation over the past few decades, partly due to globalisation and the rise of a more capitalist economy after the Cold War.
Upon gaining independence in 1965, Singapore faced multiple challenges, including social unrest, inadequate infrastructure, low economic growth, low wages and high unemployment. The country's first generation of leaders decided to adopt a pragmatic approach to tackle these difficulties. Lee Kuan Yew, Prime Minister of the Republic of Singapore from 1959 to 1990, made it a priority to focus on theeconomy, creating an efficient and transparent administrative structure taht was capable of implementing policies effectively. The administration thus became an effective policy instrument to achieve his goals.
In contrast to other postcolonial economies, the Singaporean government chose to adopt a free-market oriented economy, which was open but also controlled by the state apparatus. Through the adoption of state- and market-oriented policies, Singaporerapidly transformed intoa first-world nation. Much of the country's development was made possible by the effective implementation of policies that were developed entirely by the government, taking into account Singapore's strengths and weaknesses.
During the period of decline of the planned economies in the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, neo-liberal ideology gained ground as a new economic doctrine based on free market economics and the internationalisation of capital. This view gained wide adoption and became the predominant paradigm for economic management in those countries during the period in question, in parallel with the globalisation process. Many Asian countries that had previously adopted socialist or mixed economic models embraced deregulation, privatisation and integration with the global economy, attracting foreign direct investment in the service sector.
The Singaporean government reacted to the new economic challenges by further diversifying its strategy and improving its industrial process. In particular, it focused on capital- and technology-intensive industrial production and high value-added services, which strengthened the role of the service sectorwhile maintaining the importance of manufacturing.
To ensure competitiveness and support economic development, the Singapore government has invested heavily in research and development, particularly in industrial research. In addition, itadopted multilateral and bilateral agreements to integrate itself into the international trading system.
During the 2000s, Singapore embarked on a transition to a knowledge-based economy, investing significantly in research and development, as well as in the technology-innovation sector. The government promoted local high-tech companies and established the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) to protect intellectual property and patent legislation. In addition, the Ministerial Committee on Research and Development (MCRD) was established in 2004 to promote autonomous and independent research and development, while the National Research Foundation (NRF) was established in 2006.
Singapore's economy is active, competitive and innovative. The government, which provides much of the infrastructure, exercises strict control over the pace and direction of development, which is a considerable effort in a highly global economy. In general, Singapore can be considered a technocracy, where policy-making is in the hands of highly skilled individuals.
Despite some reforms in the economic sector, the role of government still remains important, with a highly skilled and dedicated administration playing a dominant role. However, the government has allowed local and foreign private companies to compete in sectors traditionally reserved for state monopolies. Currently, the role of the public sector is to support the private sector by creating a business-friendly atmosphere in terms of lower tax rates for companies, efficient infrastructure, business regulations and permits.
Despite the attempt to open up to more competition, political and administrative innovation in Singapore has been gradual and limited compared to the more substantial changes in other countries. The political sector remained unchanged in terms of the greater involvement of opposition parties and civil society groups in policy decisions.
In general, Singapore has achieved a balance between autonomy, creativity, and an effective, interventionist government composed of a highly qualified and dedicated administration. Despite some leadership changes as a result of globalisation, Singapore's dominant role remains largely intact, especially after successfully weathering the recent Asian financial and economic crisis (Macchiati, Alimenti 2014/2015).
Multiculturalism, multilingualism, and national identity of Singapore
Singapore's cultural and ethnic diversity is undoubtedly one of the city-state's most attractive features. The diversity of people, as well as ethnicities, religions, and languages, allows for plurality within the state itself. However, it is interesting to investigate how the different populations evolve and cohabit together, combining various religions, languages, and customs. Singapore was once a territory associated with Malaysia under British colonial rule. Many ethnicities and cultures lived side by side, including Malays, Chinese, Indians, and Eurasians. Indigenous people and many immigrants were also part of the multicultural landscape of the region (Velayutham, 2017). The British colonial power wanted to form a common Malay identity to promote inter-ethnic equality, avoid ethno-cultural tensions, and build a nation (Reddy et al., 2020). Each ethnic group found a way to assert its identity, traditions, and way of life in the region, forming a kind of cultural pluralism (Velayutham, 2017).
The issue of cultural and ethnic diversity has been discussed at length within the city-state. Historically, inclusion has been a key policy of Singaporean governments. In 1965, Singapore became independent from Malaysia and British colonial rule. However, this process of territorial separation caused instability at the political, social, and ethnic levels within the city-state. Indeed, most of the Singaporean population were immigrants or descendants of immigrants (Clammer, 2019). The population was separated into small communities sharing the same race, language, culture, and religion, with little interaction between them except for trade and economic exchanges (Ibid.). In the 1960s, race revolts erupted and changed the socio-political landscape of the region. The government had to find a solution to the ethno-cultural problems in order to build an economically strong nation and forge a sense of unity within the state and the people. (Gomez, 2010). The People's Action Party (PAP), which has been in power since Singapore's independence, implemented a multi-racialism policy by incorporating a "racial grid" previously developed by the British colonial power. Such policy is supposed to structure and consolidate the population to avoid the emergence of conflict (Clammer, 2019; Kuehne, 2015; Gomez, 2010). The large-scale immigration was the result of this initiative. Very quickly, the desire to create a panel of communities became part of the political and social mores of the city-state. This policy categorized the different races present in the territory in order to recognise them more formally as Chinese, Malay, Indian and others (Rocha, 2011). The state's ethnic categorization was aimed at consolidating a 'very diverse population' and served to build the structures of the nation (Yeoh et al. 2019; Kuehne, 2015). However, this policy did not take into account the varieties and specificities of each ethnic group or culture, including different languages, religions and identities. For example, the Chinese were the largest group in Singapore (75% of the population), but they could use different dialects, languages or religions. (Yeoh et al. 2019). The PAP also sought to constantly transform the city-state's urban and industrial landscapes in order to promote increasing economic development, but also to blur the local landmarks of Singapore's citizens. In doing so, the government prevented citizens from becoming attached to more local areas that reminded them of their own ethnic or cultural identity (Gomez, 2010). Citizens were then pushed to identify with the Republic of Singapore itself, not just with their distinct cultural or ethnic markers. The Singaporean state thus began to subtly forge a sense of national unity and avoid creating ethnocultural divisions in the country (Rocha, 2011). Therefore, geographically speaking, these ethnic groups lived separately and traded almost exclusively among themselves.
The issue of cultural and ethnic diversity has been extensively debated within the city-state of Singapore. Throughout history, inclusion has been a fundamental policy of Singaporean governments. In 1965, Singapore achieved independence from Malaysia and British colonial rule. However, this process of territorial separation caused instability at the political, social, and ethnic levels within the city-state. In fact, most of the Singaporean population comprised of immigrants or their descendants (Clammer, 2019). The population was divided into small communities that shared the same race, language, culture, and religion, with little interaction between them except for trade and economic exchanges (Ibid.). Race riots erupted in the 1960s, altering the socio-political landscape of the region. The government had to find a solution to the ethno-cultural problems in order to build a robust economy and foster a sense of unity within the state and its people (Gomez, 2010). The People's Action Party (PAP), which has governed Singapore since its independence, introduced a policy of multi-racialism, incorporating a "racial grid" that was previously developed by the British colonial power. This policy was designed to structure and consolidate the population and prevent conflicts from emerging (Clammer, 2019; Kuehne, 2015; Gomez, 2010). Large-scale immigration was the result of this initiative. Soon, the desire to create a panel of communities became part of the city-state's political and social norms. This policy categorized the different races present in the territory, formally recognizing them as Chinese, Malay, Indian and others (Rocha, 2011). The state's ethnic categorization aimed to consolidate a 'very diverse population' and served to build the structures of the nation (Yeoh et al. 2019; Kuehne, 2015). However, this policy did not take into account the nuances and specificities of each ethnic group or culture, including different languages, religions, and identities. For instance, the Chinese constituted the largest group in Singapore (75% of the population), but they spoke different dialects, languages, and adhered to diverse religions (Yeoh et al. 2019). The PAP also sought to constantly transform Singapore's urban and industrial landscapes to promote economic development and blur the local landmarks that reminded citizens of their ethnic or cultural identity (Gomez, 2010). Citizens were then encouraged to identify with the Republic of Singapore itself, rather than solely with their cultural or ethnic background. The Singaporean state thus subtly fostered a sense of national unity and avoided creating ethnocultural divisions in the country (Rocha, 2011). Geographically, these ethnic groups lived separately and traded almost exclusively among themselves.
Nevertheless, the Singaporean government's policy on cultural and ethnic diversity underwent a significant shift in 1989 with the introduction of the "ethnic quota" program (Sin, 2002; Mutalib, 2011). This initiative aimed to encourage different ethnic groups to live together and reap social benefits. One of its measures involved regulating the number of families of different ethnic backgrounds that could reside in a building, thereby preventing the concentration of specific ethnic groups in certain residential areas. Landlords were required to meet ethnic quotas in deciding who could move into their homes, creating an environment that promoted community activities between diverse cultures and fostered social harmony among communities (Sin, 2002; Sin, 2003). In the 1990s, Singapore's emerging middle class advocated for the liberalisation of the multiracialism policy, urging the state to "allow greater diversity and choice in cultural identities and lifestyles" (Rahim, 2010). To achieve this, the state prioritised building a sense of community among the population and promoting diversity rather than racial separation. This approach allowed individuals to express their multiple and unique identities, irrespective of their socio-cultural, historical, or ethnic background. Values such as social harmony and civic discipline were emphasised to redefine the concept of Singaporean citizenship, although individual rights remained restricted by the state (Sin, 2002).
Today, the Singaporean government remains steadfastly committed to a fairly rigorous multicultural policy aimed at promoting pluralism, integration, and tolerance within society. In the post-colonial era, multiracialism has necessitated the state's redevelopment of urban spaces and the country's school system to promote equitable economic development between groups and prevent racial tensions. The authorities take a strict stance against racial intolerance and mete out punishments for actions and gestures that discriminate against different ethnicities or cultures (Lian, 2016; Singh, 2016). However, with the influx of thousands of migrants each year to support the country's economic development and meet the needs of a rapidly changing labor market, the multi-racialism policies that categorize the population may become less applicable in the context of migration that challenges Singapore's previously established ethnic categories (Ortiga, 2015; Gomes, 2015). The state may be compelled to re-examine and perhaps relax its vision of multiculturalism to include the realities of migrants, which could potentially challenge the multi-ethnic and multicultural order that has been in place for years.
The construction of a national identity in a multilingual context in Singapore
Once a British trading post, Singapore has emerged as one of the world's most prosperous nations. This modern city-state located in the heart of the Malay world has demonstrated its economic strength, and its next challenge is defining its identity. Cosmopolitan Singapore comprises mainly of migrants, and is the most densely populated country in Southeast Asia and the second most densely populated globally, only surpassed by Monaco (Tan et al., 2013). The city-state's population of 5.7 million is remarkable not only for its density, but also for its ethnic, linguistic, and cultural diversity. Singapore is home to four primary ethnic groups: Chinese (74.3%), Malay (13.3%), Tamil (9.1%), and "others," which include Westerners (Australians, British, etc.) as well as Asians (Thais, Filipinos, Indonesians, etc.). These ethnic communities arrived at various points in the city-state's history. Furthermore, there is significant linguistic heterogeneity in the country. Given this diversity, is it reasonable to speak of a Singaporean identity?
Since gaining independence, Singapore's language policy has been based on multilingualism. Addressing language was one of the government's first actions, and it chose four official languages: Malay, Mandarin, and Tamil, reflecting the three main ethnic groups in the country, and English, the language of colonial heritage. The Singaporean government has always prioritized multilingualism, and policies must respect language diversity, which is enshrined in the constitution (Bolton et al., 2014). Singapore's linguistic variety, therefore, is one of its defining characteristics. The government has thus found it advantageous to preserve this diversity, as it contributes to Singapore's identity as a nation. Through the education system, the government has mandated learning a second language, ensuring that all students study in their mother tongue and learn a second language from among the country's official languages starting from primary school. Each language serves as a vehicle for the corresponding ethnic group.Of the four official languages, Malay is the only one with a special status: indeed, it is both an official and a national language. The government gave it this special status because of the influence of Singapore's neighboring state, Malaysia, and the role it played in the post-colonial era. The fact that the Malay language has a special status in Singapore demonstrates that the government is making efforts to include the Malays within the nation. However, the recognition of the special status of the Malay language is not the only government policy that has been put in place to include the Malays. The Malays have been granted indigenous status and also certain privileges to improve their economic conditions. Through these initiatives, the Singaporean government is setting an example for the Malaysian government that it is possible to build a nation on the acceptance of differences (Vaish, 2017; Cavallaro et al. 2010).
Mandarin was chosen as an official language in Singapore due to the fact that the Chinese community constitutes the majority of the population. However, not all members of this community speak the same language or dialect. To promote communication and unify the community, the Singaporean government established Mandarin as the representative language of the Chinese Singaporeans. The 'Speak Mandarin' campaign was also created to encourage the use of Mandarin among the Chinese Singaporeans (Chin et al., 2021; Bokhorst-Heng, 1999; Newman, 1988).
English is considered as the language that has propelled Singapore's economic growth. It is the language of business, commerce, and administration. Without English, Singapore would not have become the economic powerhouse that it is today. Additionally, as a foreign language, English acts as a neutral language that unifies the different ethnicities and languages spoken in Singapore, thus promoting social cohesion. Hence, the Singaporean government encourages young people to learn English as a second language in school for economic and social reasons (Neumann, 2016). Mastery of the English language is also essential for finding work in Singapore. English is widely used in academia, administration, and is the intra-ethnic lingua franca (Mee, 2002). Since 2010, immigrants (especially for work) are required to pass a test to prove their proficiency in English to obtain a work permit or visa. The Singaporean government places great importance on the mastery of the English language as they believe it is vital for the country's economy (Tan, 2014). Singlish is a Singaporean patois that has emerged as a derivative of the English language. It includes a mix of Malay, Mandarin, and Tamil and is used as a unifying language among the different communities in Singapore. However, Singlish is not used in official communications, and the government is against its use. The 'Speak Good English Movement' was launched in 2000 to promote the use of proper English in Singapore (Rubdy, 2001). Nevertheless, many Singaporeans consider Singlish to be a crucial part of their culture and identity. As a dialect and unifying language, Singlish plays a significant role in creating nationalism (Harada, 2009; Vaish, 2007).
The Singaporean education system is the product of a commitment to pluralism. The preservation of diversity, which is a fundamental principle of the nation, is achieved through education, which is primarily provided in schools. The government recognizes the importance of promoting diversity and emphasizes the selection of elements from both the national and ethnic cultures to uphold this commitment (Karuppiah et al., 2011; Ritu et al., 2015). However, the implementation of this approach poses many challenges. Nonetheless, the success of this commitment is crucial to the engagement and prosperity of the nation, as these two elements are interlinked within Singaporean government policy (Ritu et al., 2015).
The Singaporean government's commitment to pluralism raises several questions. First, since the Chinese community represents the majority, why has the government established a multi-ethnic system? Moreover, some limitations of this system have been identified, particularly with regards to the "Co-Ethnic Residential Concentration Act", which imposes a quota on where people can live, and is subject to criticism for its fairness to all inhabitants (Bhatti et al., 2016; Yeoh et al., 2022). Communalism, which is viewed positively and as necessary for the prosperity and peace of the nation, is an institution in Singapore and stands in contrast to Western mores (Bell, 1997).
The Singaporean government's dedication to embracing diversity is evident through its policies and practices, even with numerous waves of migration, the country has been able to maintain a delicate balance. The Singaporean system sets itself apart from Western systems in many ways, and its distinctiveness has gained the nation unprecedented recognition on the global stage. Singapore's well-protected diversity shines through as the foundation of the nation's reputation and allows for the development of innovative systems and hopeful prospects within the international community (Lian, 2016). While inequalities between different communities may arise, the absence of major conflicts is a result of the state's commitment to upholding respect for traditions, religions, and even languages since its independence (Ortiga, 2015). This is achieved through the important cooperation between the authorities and the populations, as well as among the diverse communities themselves (Velayutham, 2017). Despite the existence of certain limitations, it seems that this mode of operation enables Singapore to achieve its primary objectives.
In essence, the Singaporean government implements policies that generally align with multiculturalism by aiming to unite society while preserving the diversity of each community. Singapore's strength lies in its multiculturalism, and this very characteristic holds the potential to define the nation. However, the term 'nation' refers to a group of people who share the same language, culture, history, and ethnic background (Smith, 1992). At present, Singapore can only rely on its history and, if Singlish is included, language, to qualify as a nation. Nevertheless, an increasing number of young Singaporeans regard themselves as Singaporean first, then defining themselves based on their ethnicity. Thus, despite the country's youth, a sense of belonging to Singapore and identifying oneself as a Singaporean is triumphing over ethnic divisions.
Conclusions
In conclusion, it can be affirmed that Singapore is an example of a State that has achieved its success by prioritizing diversity and economic growth. Over the past few decades, Singapore has integrated itself into a multicultural and globalized world.
In other contexts, diversity in a multicultural society can be a point of weakness, but in Singapore, it represents the key to its success because different cultures bring with them different interests and ways of thinking, living and existing; and it is not always possible to mediate these conditions positively and efficiently.
However, the main challenges that Singapore faces in the near future could concern maintaining its unique character in an ever-changing world. In fact, the South Asian region is currently experiencing a growing predominance of autocratic states which could potentially change the reality in Singapore by exerting geopolitical pressures.
Sources
Information Content | ||
1 | Confirmed | Confirmed by other independent sources; logical in itself; coherent with other information on the topic |
2 | Presumably true | Not confirmed; logical in itself; coherent with other information on the topic |
3 | Maybe true | Not confirmed; reasonably logical in itself; coherent with some other information on the topic |
4 | Uncertain | Not confirmed; possible but not logical in itself; no other information on the topic |
5 | Improbable | Not confirmed; not logical in itself; contradicts with other information on the topic |
6 | Not able to be evaluated | No basis to evaluate the validity of the information |
Trustworthiness of the source | ||
A | Trustworthy | No doubt about authenticity, reliability or competence; has a history of total trustworthiness |
B | Normally trustworthy | Small doubts about authenticity, reliability or competence, nevertheless has a history of valid information in a majority of cases |
C | Sufficiently trustworthy | Doubts about authenticity, reliability or competence; however, has supplied valid information in the past |
D | Normally not trustworthy | Significant doubt about authenticity, reliability or competence, however has supplied valid information in the past |
E | Not trustworthy | Lack of authenticity, reliability or competence; history of invalid information |
F | Not able to be evaluated | No basis to evaluate the validity of the information |
Baricco A., Next. Piccolo libro sulla globalizzazione e sul mondo che verrà, Feltrinelli, 2002 (2-A)
Bell, Daniel A. "A communitarian critique of authoritarianism: the case of Singapore." Political Theory 25.1 (1997): 6-32. (1-A)
Bhatti, Yosef, and Kasper M. Hansen. "The effect of residential concentration on voter turnout among ethnic minorities." International Migration Review 50.4 (2016): 977-1004. (1-B)
Bokhorst-Heng, Wendy. "Singapore’s Speak Mandarin Campaign: Language ideological debates in the imagining of the nation." Language ideological debates 2 (1999): 235-265. (1-B)
Bolton, Kingsley, and Bee Chin Ng. "The dynamics of multilingualism in contemporary Singapore." World Englishes 33.3 (2014): 307-318. (1-A)
Cavallaro, Francesco, and Bee Chin Ng. "Language in Singapore: From multilingualism to English plus." Challenging the monolingual mindset 156.33 (2014): 9781783092529-005. (1-A)
Cavallaro, Francesco, and Stefan Karl Serwe. "Language use and language shift among the Malays in Singapore." Applied Linguistics Review 1.1 (2010): 129-170. (1-A)
Chin, Ng Bee, and Francesco Cavallaro. "The curious case of Mandarin Chinese in Singapore." Multilingual Singapore. Routledge, 2021. 159-178. (1-A)
Clammer, John. Race and state in independent Singapore 1965–1990: The cultural politics of pluralism in a multiethnic society. Routledge, 2019. (1-A)
Costa Antonio, Nascita e ascesa della Città-Stato di Singapore: una lezione dall’Oriente [tesi di laurea]. Roma: Università Luiss, 2020/2021. (2-B)
F.Adamo, “Sviluppo e sottosviluppo nell’era del globalismo” (Development and Underdevelopment in the Globalism Age), in D. Lombardi (Ed.) , Percorsi di geografia sociale, Bologna, Patron, 2006, pp. 165-192 (2-A)
Foffani Alberto, L’Asia orientale tra regionalismo e globalizzazione: Analisi della traiettoria dell'integrazione regionale asiatica dopo la Crisi Finanziaria Asiatica [tesi di laurea]. Venezia: Università Ca’Foscari, 2020/2021. (2-B)
Francesca Pannozzo, Dal Terzo al Primo mondo: Singapore: un esperimento di successo [tesi di laurea]. Firenze: Firenze University Press, 2018. (Premio Cesare Alfieri Cum Laude; 5) (2-B)
Gomes, Catherine. Multiculturalism through the lens: A guide to ethnic and migrant anxieties in Singapore. Ethos Books, 2015. (1-B)
Gomez, James. "Politics and ethnicity: framing racial discrimination in Singapore." The Copenhagen Journal of Asian Studies 28.2 (2010): 103-117. (1-A)
Harada, Shinichi. "The roles of singapore standard english and singlish." Information Research 40 (2009): 70-82. (2-B)
Jain, Ritu, and Lionel Wee. "Multilingual education in Singapore: Beyond language communities." Multilingualism and language in education: Sociolinguistic and pedagogical perspectives from commonwealth countries (2015): 67-85. (1-A)
Karuppiah, Nirmala, and Donna Berthelsen. "Multicultural education: The understandings of preschool teachers in Singapore." Australasian Journal of Early Childhood 36.4 (2011): 38-42. (1-A)
Kuehne, Kurt W. "Race and Multiculturalism in Malaysia and Singapore." (2015): 241-244. (2-B)
Lian, Kwen Fee. "Multiculturalism in Singapore: Concept and practice." Multiculturalism, migration, and the politics of identity in Singapore (2016): 11-29. (2-A)
Mee, Cheah Yin. "English language teaching in Singapore." Asia Pacific Journal of Education 22.2 (2002): 65-80. (1-A)
Mutalib, Hussin. "The Singapore minority dilemma." Asian Survey 51.6 (2011): 1156-1171. (1-A)
Neumann, Stella, and Jennifer Fest. "Cohesive devices across registers and varieties: The role of medium in English." Variational text linguistics: Revisiting register in English (2016): 195-220. (2-B)
Newman, John. "Singapore's speak Mandarin campaign." Journal of Multilingual & Multicultural Development 9.5 (1988): 437-448. (1-A)
Ortiga, Yasmin Y. "Multiculturalism on its head: Unexpected boundaries and new migration in Singapore." Journal of International Migration and Integration 16 (2015): 947-963. (1-A)
Rahim, Samsudin A., and Latiffah Pawanteh. "The local content industry and cultural identity in Malaysia." Journal of Media and Communication Studies 2.10 (2010): 215. (1-A)
Reddy, Geetha, and Rob M. van Dam. "Food, culture, and identity in multicultural societies: Insights from Singapore." Appetite 149 (2020): 104633. (2-B)
Rocha, Zarine L. "Multiplicity within singularity: racial categorization and recognizing “mixed race” in Singapore." Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs 30.3 (2011): 95-131. (1-A)
Rubdy, Rani. "Creative destruction: Singapore’s speak good English movement." World Englishes 20.3 (2001): 341-355. (1-A)
Sin, Chih Hoong. "The politics of ethnic integration in Singapore: Malay ‘regrouping’as an ideological construct." International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 27.3 (2003): 527-544. (1-A)
Sin, Chih Hoong. "The quest for a balanced ethnic mix: Singapore's ethnic quota policy examined." Urban Studies 39.8 (2002): 1347-1374. (1-A)
Singh, Bilveer. "Religion, multiculturalism and managing diversity in Singapore." Sofjan (Ed.), Religion, Public Policy and Social Transformation in Southeast Asia 1 (2016): 27-42. (1-A)
Smith, Anthony D. "National identity and the idea of European unity." International affairs 68.1 (1992): 55-76. (1-A)
Tan, Puay Yok, James Wang, and Angelia Sia. "Perspectives on five decades of the urban greening of Singapore." Cities 32 (2013): 24-32. (2-A)
Tan, Ying‐Ying. "English as a ‘mother tongue’in Singapore." World Englishes 33.3 (2014): 319-339. (2-B)
Vaish, Viniti. "Globalisation of language and culture in Singapore." International Journal of Multilingualism 4.3 (2007): 217-233. (2-A)
Velayutham, Selvaraj. "Races without racism?: Everyday race relations in Singapore." Identities 24.4 (2017): 455-473. (2-B)
Yeoh, Brenda SA, and Theodora Lam. "Managing the non-integration of transient migrant workers: Urban strategies of enclavisation and enclosure in Singapore." Urban Studies 59.16 (2022): 3292-3311. (2-A)
Yeoh, Brenda SA, Kristel Acedera, and Esther Rootham. "Negotiating postcolonial Eurasian identities and national belonging in global-city Singapore." Social Identities 25.3 (2019): 294-309. (1-A)