Pictures: Singapore & Hong Kong
As early as entering the airport in Singapore (or even in Hong Kong), when coming from Mainland China, one can just sense the increased organization and civility. Let me explain what I mean by this by sharing some of my observations…
When the subway train rolls to a stop and the doors open in Singapore people can actually get off the train. This is a novel concept in China: people in Singapore wait until those getting off have done so, and then they proceed to get on. In China, those getting off feel like fish swimming upstream as they face the onslaught of people clamoring for the–often non-existent–empty seats.
In Singapore, the Chinese (94% of Singaporeans are ethnic Chinese) actually put diapers on their babies. In China, by comparison, the baby’s pants are split along the seam to allow easy access for the child’s wastes to the sidewalk. My friend Aana (a New Zealander who has been in Singapore for 5 years) told me, in Singapore they have to put diapers on the babies. Singapore is famous for being meticulously clean (generally true, except in Little India), while China is notorious for being dirty. Of course, this means you won’t find any spitting in Singapore, nor will you find the bus assistant throwing 2 days worth of trash out the window. (Note, this behavior is not characteristic of every Chinese person–I know plenty who are refined, educated, and sophisticated–but it represents the behavior of the masses.) So why, you might wonder, has Singapore been so successful at curbing the obnoxious habits of Chinese people, yet Mainland China can’t seem to do the same?
There are many reasons:
- Singapore is a much smaller place with far fewer people;
- Until 60 years ago, Singapore was a British colony;
- Singaporeans are better educated and more cosmopolitan than they average Mainlander;
- Laws in Singapore are very strict; and
- Singapore has some of the most effective public service campaigns of any country.
Singapore is well-known for its strict laws and harsh punishments. Tales abound of being lashed for chewing gum and executed for possessing drugs. And these certainly have been effective; however, laws are essentially meaningless if no one knows about them. Therefore, education, along with laws, regulations, and enforcement, are necessary. To educate the public and promote a better society and life for Singaporeans, public service campaigns are a common fact of life in Singapore.
Aana explained to me that each year the Prime Minister selects an issue of social concern that he wants to focus on. For example, I noticed on many of the food stalls, signs that said, ‘you can ask for more vegetables and less oil’ or ‘you can ask for less sugar and less cream.’ And I wondered who was so health-conscious. She explained that this was a previous public service campaign. The current public service campaign is customer service, such as is provided in hotels, restaurants, retail establishments, and hospitals. These public service campaigns are so effective partly due to their multi-faceted approach. The government uses traditional advertising mediums, such as TV, radio, outdoor signage, and presumably newspapers as well. But they also enlist businesses for support and cooperation. In the example of encouraging healthy choices of food, clearly the government exerted influence on the food stalls. For improving customer service, the government had segments as part of the traditional news program demonstrating how to improve employer-employee relations at service establishments. By working directly with businesses to promote the ideals of the public service campaigns, the government not only reaches those specific employees, but also multiplies its impact through the customers those businesses deal with. The influence of the government on Singaporean society is stunning, as is the difference between social norms in Singapore and China.
However, such heavy government influence and such successful public service campaigns come at a price. Aana suggested that the strict government rules and regulations stifle innovation, creativity and entrepreneurship. She also mentioned that freedom of speech is rather limited. Individuals can not own property (land); they can only lease it for a certain number of years. As Westerners, we consider these last 2 issues fundamental human rights: freedom of speech and the right to own property. As you can see there are definitely trade-offs to the Singaporean system. (On the other hand, Singapore is one of the best examples of a peaceful pluralistic, multi-racial, multi-religion society.)
Nonetheless, I believe China could learn from Singapore. China has various approaches to cleaning up its people’s obnoxious behaviors. However, needless to say, these have been less than successful. For example, China requires travel agents to tell their outbound tourists not to spit or litter in foreign countries. But if only 100 to 130million Chinese travel abroad each year, the other 1.2billion will never hear of this concept. As TV is the most popular form of entertainment in China, the government needs to follow Singapore’s example and reach the masses through TV campaigns. TV is further a valuable medium because it doesn’t require literacy nor travel nor individual ownership. And since the government controls all the media (namely TV) anyway, there is no reason why appropriate public service messages couldn’t be shown on television. The government should also influence businesses and public servants to set a good example. For instance, 2 of Shanghai’s taxi companies are government sponsored, so those taxi drivers should be the first to respect pedestrians and stop spitting out the window. A more committed effort on the part of the Chinese government would result in greater success than its current approach.
Though far from perfect itself, there is a lot Singapore could teach China about refinement of peoples and society, and about the effectiveness of education, laws, regulations, enforcement, and public service campaigns.
Popularity: 1% [?]