Academic Seminar of Indonesian Students Association (PPI)

Universiti Sains Malaysia June 20th 20003

Syamsidik

Singapore Coastal Reclamation: History and

Problems
Syamsidik
Graduate Student at School of Mathematical Sciences
Universiti Sains Malaysia
11800 Penang
Email: syamsidik@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT. Singapore has been undergoing coastal reclamation for four decades. As its population
grows until more than four million, the Singapore government faces problem in providing ample land
for residential, industrial and municipal activities. Some waterfronts and offshore islands in Singapore
have been deformed or enlarged by some coastal reclamation projects. The reclamation has been
particularly devastating. Some problems, namely environmental and territorial problems, have arisen
some concerns from its neighboring countries. Singapore coastal reclamations have degraded some
environmental quality parameters. Severe degradation of the marine environment has resulted, either
by direct destruction of coral reef habitat, or indirect effects of increased suspended sediment
concentration and fish mortality. Recently, the problems appear to be a regional problem since the
projects receive many concerns, especially of environmentalists. Indonesia, which has contributed
landfill material for more than two decades, has to face some environmental problems due to sands
dredging and exporting activity. This paper is written to anchor some internal and external problems
generated by Singapore coastal reclamation.

Reasons
of
Reclamation

Coastal

Singapore is located between

latitudes 1o09 N and 1o29N and longitudes
103o38E and 104o06E. Singapore is a
highly urbanized society and already well
known as a city-state, share its borderline
with Malaysia at its northern part and
Indonesia at its southern part (Figure 1).
This Republic consists of a main
island and over 60 small offshore islands
with fringing and patch reefs. Situated in an
international waterway, Singapore has been
long recognized as one of international trade
hubs.
The British firstly introduced coastal
reclamation in Singapore in 1819 by
reclaiming the swampy part of Singapore
river mouth (Chia et al., 1988). However, a
large-scale of coastal reclamation was
initiated in the mids-1960s. East Coast

Reclamation Scheme, reclaiming 19 ha of

land at 14 km East Coast road, started the
history of intensive efforts to overcome land
shortage. Prior to 1960, Singapore had 581.5
km2
of
its
productive
land
(library.thinkquest.org). A rapid growth of
its commercial activities and its population
force the Singapore government to provide
more lands. This is also to fulfill the
transport needs, the latest of which include
roads, expressway, the Mass Rapid Transit
system (MRT), and the port and airport
facilities.
The reclamation scenario seems
being continuously performed and still
becomes the best solution for this small-butrich republic. Scenario of the latest
Singapore reclamation scheme was expected
to increase land area in Singapore by about
100 km2 by the year 2030. Some projects,
namely Pulau Tekong, Changi and Pulau
Ubin Reclamation, were planned to convey

Academic Seminar of Indonesian Students Association (PPI)

Universiti Sains Malaysia June 20th 20003

this ambition. However, amazingly, the

Singapore government moves beyond the

Syamsidik

last prediction of completion. The Singapore

Ministry of Urban and Redevelopment

Figure 1. Map of Singapore

Authority (URA) has published the latest
reclamation plan on North Eastern Concept
plan, revealing the reclamation on Pulau
Tekong, Changi, and Pulau Ubin to be
completed in ten years, started in 2000
(Figure 2).
Singapore expects to have 760 km2
in 2010, which is about 30% bigger than its
land prior to 1960. Until year 2000, the
coastal reclamations have been carried on
Pulau Jurong, Tuas, Pasir Panjang port,
Pulau Sentosa, Marina Bay, Kranji, Punggol,
Changi and Pulau Tekong. The persistence
of having more land is not only proven by
reclamation but also by removing about 60
shipyards from Singapore waterfront to
some other countries (Kompas, November
29th 2002).
In addition, the coastal reclamation
at Jurong is not only aimed to provide more
land for residential purpose but also to
compete the neigbouring port, Tanjung
Pelepas which is just opposite of the Jurong

Port. Port of Tanjung Pelepas (PTP), which

belongs to Malaysia, are rising as a potential
competitor for Singapore. At this time, PTP
can serve 1.5 million TEUs per year,
compared to Jurong 8 million TEUs per
year. However, PTP has just effectively
started its operation since last year.
Meanwhile Jurong port has been activated
for decades.

Environmental Concerns
Reclamation is conducted by means
of dredging and dumping material to
reclamation site. These activities are
potential to render hydrodynamic regimes
and to pollute water quality. Dredging is of
source of suspended sediment dispersed in a
water body. The reclamation material,
according London Convention 1970, should
not contain any hazardous chemical
substance. However, suspended sediment,

Academic Seminar of Indonesian Students Association (PPI)

Universiti Sains Malaysia June 20th 20003

by itself, carries some water quality

problems. Suspended sediment is potential

Syamsidik

to deliver a number of Chemical Oxygen

Demand (COD), which is able to press

Figure 2. Concept Plan of North Eastern Island (www.ura.gov.sg)

Dissolved Oxygen (DO) to a severe level of
aquatic life degradation (Jinchi and Jinxiu,
1999). According to Thomann and Mueller
(1987), a moderate concentration DO in water to
persevere aquatic life is about 5 mg/L.
Material of reclamation (landfill) is not
come from Singapore itself. The material is
dredged from Riau islands (Indonesia).
Therefore, dredging is not a major concern for
Singapore government since the dredging sites
are out of its authority. Dumping process and
the morphology deformation are reserved tasks
for Singapore government.
Reclamation projects have covered
some mudflats, particularly on Pulau Tekong
and Jurong Bay. Jurong Reclamation scheme
was carried out to develop the foreshore to
Jurong Industrial Estate, which reclaimed 1,416
Ha including mudflat. Meanwhile, Pulau Tekong
Reclamation is underway to reclaim about 1700
Ha, mostly mudflat.

Technically, the chosen locations are

well justified. However, the mudflat has
important roles in preserving aquatic life,
especially of breeding insects larvae. The
concern is also arisen by the fact that some coral
reefs have been destructed by the reclamation
projects. According to Water Research Institute
(http://business.wri.org), around 60% of total
coral reef area has been lost owing to near shore
reclamation. It is also found that the increasing
of suspended sediment concentrations have
triggered declines in coral cover in almost all
observed sites since 1980. Some experts
estimate that, compared to conditions 50 years
ago, about 70% of coral reef in Singapore are
degraded. The degradations show a progressive
effect, which are mostly caused by coastal
reclamation.
Coastal deformation may seriously
affect the marine environment and lead to
increase water turbidity, sediment deposition,

Academic Seminar of Indonesian Students Association (PPI)

Universiti Sains Malaysia June 20th 20003

and also disturbance to biological organisms. Lu

et al. (2000) has conducted a research on
Punggol coastal reclamation (in Selat Johor
channel). The three-year annual survey has
proven that the reclamation has caused water
turbidity and sedimentation increased. There
was a sharp decrease of macrobenthos number in
the area. The decrement suggests that
reclamation has a damaging effect, which may
lead to the increasing of benthic animal
mortality. The benthic community may recolonize. However, this study, when it was
completed, found that there was no any recolonization of benthic community in the area. A
research conducted by Kenny and Rees (2000)
proves that the re-colonization is fully recovered
after 7 months.
At recent reclamation project on North
Eastern Reclamation scheme, which covers
Pulau Tekong and Changi Bay Reclamation, has
also arisen some complaints including from
Malaysia government. The project is potential to
lowering water quality in the area and placing
navigational way in a susceptible condition. The
current around the area may rise up to 0.78 m/s,
compared to the condition before reclamation,
which is 0.50 m/s.
Suspended Sediment
concentration is potential to increase up to 200
mg/L, which is considered severely polluted
(Syamsidik and Koh, 2003). Regarding Pulau
Tekong reclamation, corroborative evidences are
only found when the projects completed.
However, an Environmental Impacts Assessment
(EIA) is one of secured methods to assess the
potential impacts. Therefore, despite resulted
from a predictive study, the mentioned potential
impacts should be seriously taken into account.
For information, Singapore has accessed
London Convention on dumping material on
1972. The convention mandates to all the
signatory countries to do by all means to prevent
their soil from dumping hazardous or
contaminated material. London Convention is
closely related to Basel Convention on
transboundary movement of hazardous material.
The last convention has just being accessed by
Singapore in 1982.
The most concern thing of the reclamation
is the potential dispersion of the landfill material
in form of suspended sediment in the coastal.
The sediment may put aquatic life in an alerted

Syamsidik

level. Many marine scientists have proved such

anxieties. According to Grigalunas et al. (2001),
the effects triggered by sediment can be found in
three types of fish production effects, namely
short-term effects, long-term effects, and
indirect effects. Short-term effects are found as a
result of mortality to adult finfish, shellfish, and
mollusks. Long-term effects are impacts
showing in mortality of the bigger fish
population including juveniles and young-ofyear. Indirect effects can only be shown in a
lower tropic organism that function as food
resources. These effects, eventually, disturb the
food web in the area. However, off-site food
web losses may occur to the extent that food
resources are lost to consumer species outside
the reclamation area.
The remained question raised after reading
the above passages is about Singapore
government accountability to conserve its
marine life. Many countries, including
Indonesia, put an Environmental Impact
Assessment (EIA) as an obligatory procedure for
any project before its started. Presumably the
project will generate adverse impacts to nature
and human, the EIA is mandated. However,
Singapore practices discretionary EIA rather
than a mandatory one. Singapore has a reason in
doing so. Singapore acknowledges itself as a
country that already well conceived on physical
plans to allow for economic development and
the same time provide for the safeguard of the
environment. Although the reports on the
assessments are not available for public access,
Singapore has completed eights EIA in 1995
(Chia, 1998). The secrecy is not specifically
applied in Singapore. Other countries, such as
Indonesia, also adopt a similar policy. This
makes difficult to convince public whether the
projects are environmentally justified or not.

Indonesia:
Contributor

Problem

Indonesia has been contributing a lot to

Singapore coastal reclamation since 1970s.
However, the contributions put Indonesia in a
conflicting situation. Concerns come from
Indonesia
are
territory
problem
and
environmental problem. These have been

Academic Seminar of Indonesian Students Association (PPI)

Universiti Sains Malaysia June 20th 20003

become issues in Indonesia. Some Indonesian

politicians said that the reclamation can move
Singapore border farther from its existing off
shore parts, which means that Indonesia will
lose some hundreds kilometer square of its water
territory.
Pulau Nipah is the closest island to
Singapore, which could be another SipadanLigitan to Indonesia if the matter is not
meticulously investigated. However, Indonesia
Ministry of Foreign Affair has denied such
anxious in March 2003. The Ministry said that
Singapore and Indonesia are bound with
bilateral agreement on their border territory. The
agreement is accredited by United Nations and
cannot be changed by any convention without an
agreement from the two parties.
Singapore has imported sands/landfill
from Indonesian waters since 24 years ago,
particularly from Riau waters. Singapore still
needs 167 million meter cubic of sands for the
next 10 years to complete its goal. The imported
reclamation material has made Indonesia has to
bear with Sin$3.09 billion of loss because of the
difference price between the price at dredging
sites (Indonesia) and reclamation sites
(Singapore). Sand exports in the next 10 years
will costs Sin$13,68 billion. According to Ir.
Afni, a house representative member from
Reformation Faction (Fraksi Reformasi), the
price is equal to selling all StateOwned
Companies (BUMN) for 12 years (Kompas,
May 16th 2002). The sand exporting activity has
been practiced since 1979 and has contributed
500 million meter cubic sands from Riau.
The exacerbated condition was started
when autonomy policy applied in 1999.
According to the policy, every district has a right
to do by all means to increase its income. To do
so, Riau government gave licenses to some
companies to export sands to Singapore.
Compared to the condition in 1980 when there
were only three companies that dredged the
sands in Riau waters, there were 18 companies
in 1998, and 71 in 2002 (Sinaga and Suprato,
2001).
The dredging activities have caused four
islands in Kecamatan Karimun (A county in
Riau Province-Indonesia) disappear. The
dredging also destroyed some mangrove forests.
Furthermore, suspended sediment concentrations

Syamsidik

were dramatically increased and later damaged

aquatic life (fish and corral reef). The unaware
environmentally
habits
of
Indonesian
government are notoriously apprehended.
Therefore, the adverse impacts generated by the
sand dredging activities are not fully
investigated.
Some NonGovernmental Organizations
(NGOs) have initiated to raise this problem to
the public. Two NGOs bring the matter to
International Court Justice (ICJ), namely Center
for Indonesia Forest Studies (LPHI) and
Laksana Samudera. The two accuse that the
Singapore government intentionally ignores the
adverse impacts and keeps on importing the
material regardless of the impacts. The remained
confusing problem on this legal action is why
these two NGOs do not bring Indonesia
accountability, simultaneously with Singapore.
Ideally, Indonesia should take responsibility on
the matter at the same weight.
Indonesia government policy on Sands
export shows inconsistency. In February 2002,
the government halted the activities for
temporary in response to many complaints from
environmentalists. In May 2002, then, Indonesia
has revoked an earlier regulation through a
Presidential decree. Under Presidential Decree
No. 33/2002, sea sand mining was to be
controlled and supervised by central government
through a special team lead by the Ministry of
Trade and Industry. The decree stated that all
sand exports require a permit from the central
government. This was the time when sand
dredging company number increased up to 70
companies.
Later, On February 28th, 2003, Ministry
of Trade and Industry issued a decree to, once
again, ban sand dredging and exports for
temporary. The decree was taken base upon two
considerations. Firstly, the government needs to
reformulate a proper procedure of the sand
dredging and exporting so that the activity will
also conserve natural resources, especially
marine resources. Secondly, the decision was
taken to provide an ample time for Indonesia
and Singapore to re-look to their borderline.
However, as stated earlier, Ministry of
Foreign Affair has denied the second
consideration. Therefore, the remained problem
is natural conservation.

Academic Seminar of Indonesian Students Association (PPI)

Universiti Sains Malaysia June 20th 20003

Confusingly, Head of Energy and

Mining Office in Riau said that Riau would
export its sands to Malaysia since there is no
restriction to export the sands to the country. He
said the restriction was made by Indonesia
government due to the border problem with
Singapore (Republika, June 4th 2003). This
clearly impresses that the last Ministry decree on
banning sand export is not well socialized. In the
decree, the banning is imposed not only on
exporting sands to Singapore but also to all sand
dredging/exporting activities, regardless the
exported country targets.

A Preferable Solution
Based on some reports, banning sands
exports is more favorable one than others. Some
sands dredging companies said that Singapore is
more benefited than Indonesia. When there were
70 dredging companies, Singapore was
reluctantly bought the sands at the price more
than Sin$1.0/m3. Singapore controlled the sand
prices and sometimes the Singaporean
Contractors played one dredging company to
another. In this situation, the dredging
companies were forced into a war-price
condition. Kabupaten Karimun, where the most
dredging activities were conducted, has just
received Rp27 billion in 2000 even though the
dredging has been practiced in its waters for
decades.
Flawed law enforcement has reflected a
mismanagement of marine resources in
Indonesia. Until year 2000, Indonesian Navy has
caught up to 13 illegal dredging ships, which
some of them were Korean-owned ships. In
addition, according to Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO), Indonesia is being robbed 1
million ton of fish every year. This proves that
Indonesia has not fully guarded it waters
territory from many illegal activities.
Exporting sands involves some official
procedures. The procedures, ideally, should
control
the
environmental
impacts
simultaneously. However, the impacts are not
fully investigated and controlled by Indonesian
Authority. Therefore, a further sands dredging
will not ensure the natural conservation.

Syamsidik

From economical and environmental

point of view, banning sands dredging and
exporting is more favorable one for Indonesia, at
least for 10 years from now. This is to ensure a
proper environmental preservation being
conducted and all marine sources in Indonesian
waters are protected. It is possible that this
preference will generate problems to Singapore.
However, that should not be Indonesias
problem. Since, the Singapore has long practiced
the policy.

References
Chia LS, 1998. Coastal Management in Singapore:
institutional arrangements and implementation.
Ocean and Coastal Management 38(1998): 111118.
Chia LS, Habibullah K, Chou LM, 1988. The Coastal
Environment Profile of Singapore. International
Center for Living Resources and Management
(ICLARM), Manila.
Grigalunas T, Opaluch JJ, Luo M, 2000. The
economic costs to fishery marine sediment
disposal: case study of Providence, RI, USA.
Ecological Economics 38(2001) 47-58.
Jinchi, H., and Jinxiu, L., 1999. Impact of sediment
movement on the water quality of Three Gorge
reservoir. Environmental Hydraulics, Lee,
Jayawardena and Wang (eds), Balkena,
Rotterdam.
Kenny, A.J., and Rees, H.L., 1994. The effects of
marine gravel extraction on macrobenthos. Early
post-dredging recolonization. Marine Pollution
Bulletin. 28 (1994): 442-447.
Kompas, May 16th 2002. Reklamasi Singapura
Aneksasi Wilayah RI. Daily Newspaper. JakartaIndonesia.
Kompas, November 29th 2002. Tanah Air Indonesia
Pindah ke Singapura. Daily Newspaper. JakartaIndonesia.
Lu L, Goh BPL, Chou LM, 2002. Effects of coastal
reclamation on riverine macrobenthic infauna
(Sungai Punggol) in Singapore. Journal of
Aquatic Ecosystem Stress and Recovery
9(2002): 127-135.
Republika, June 4th 2003. Pasir Laut Riau Diekspor
ke Malaysia. Daily Newspaper. JakartaIndonesia.

Academic Seminar of Indonesian Students Association (PPI)

Universiti Sains Malaysia June 20th 20003

Sinaga, M., and Suprapto, E., 2001. Tumbal Riau

demi Singapura. Kontan Magazine 30/V, Jakarta.
Syamsidik and Koh, H.L., 2003. Impact assessment
modeling on coastal reclamation at Pulau
Tekong. Proceeding Integrating Technology in
Mathematical Sciences. Universiti Sains
Malaysia-Penang. In Press.
Thomann, R.V., and Mueller, J.A. 1987. Principles of
Surface Water Quality Modeling and Control,
HarperCollins Publishers Inc., New York-USA.

Syamsidik