Page 1 of 15
1
OUR CALLS TO ACTION
Slash Singapore’s
absolute greenhouse gas emissions to
peak by 2020, halve by 2030,
and reach net zero by 2050.
Our three Calls to Action are grounded in the recommendations published by the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in their special report, Global Warming of 1.5 oC in October 2018.1 In
their address to policymakers, the IPCC makes clear that it is necessary to reach and sustain net-zero global
CO2 emissions in order to halt anthropogenic global warming. It also further emphasises that warming must
be kept below 1.5°C to avoid global tipping points that will lead to significant climate risks. The report
explains that in order for the planet to have little or no overshoot of this level, it requires “global net
anthropogenic CO2 emissions to decline by about 45% from 2010 levels by 2030, and to reach net zero
around 2050”.
Singapore is far from meeting the IPCC’s targets.
Although Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has said that climate change is “one of the gravest
challenges facing humankind,” 2 the actions taken by the government to mitigate the crisis are inadequate.
In 2015, Singapore made a commitment to reduce its emissions intensity by 36% from 2005 levels by 2030,
and stabilise emissions with the aim of peaking around 2030.3 This is insufficient when looking at the
emissions reductions called for by the IPCC. Of concern is the Singapore government’s focus on reducing
“emissions intensity” (a metric which refers to how much carbon is emitted per unit of GDP) as opposed to
the reduction of absolute carbon emissions. Even with a reduction in emissions intensity, we will still
continue to see a growth in absolute emissions, with continued contribution to the heating of our planet. As
one of the wealthiest and most developed countries in the world, Singapore can and must do more to affirm
the “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities” principle of the Paris
Agreement.4
SG Climate Rally calls on our government to step up to meet the ambitious targets that are
necessary to ensure a livable world. Singapore is already on track to meet its existing emissions targets
without any further policy changes.5 Such targets are far from ambitious, and Singapore should aim to take
bolder climate action.
1 https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/
2 https://www.pmo.gov.sg/Newsroom/National-Day-Rally-2019
3 https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/ndcstaging/PublishedDocuments/Singapore%20First/Singapore%20INDC
4 https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/english_paris_agreement.pdf
5 https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/singapore/current-policy-projections/
Page 2 of 15
2
The citizens of Singapore feel this urgency. According to the government feedback unit Reach6
,
90% of Singaporeans below the age of 30 feel that the threat of climate change to the country is real, and
that Singapore should invest in mitigation before it is too late. Among those aged between 30 and 54, 80%
felt likewise.
Our government should do more by committing to reduce Singapore’s absolute greenhouse gas
emissions to peak by 2020, halve by 2030 (with respect to the most recently reported 2014 levels of
51MtCO2e 7
), and reach net zero by 2050. Here, we are using greenhouse-gas (GHG) and CO2 emissions
interchangeably, as CO2 accounts for 95% of Singapore’s equivalent emissions.6
To reach this emissions target, we ask that the Singapore government implement the following
processes:
1. Face the Truth
a. Declare a national climate emergency in recognition of the need to bring absolute greenhouse gas
emissions to net zero.
b. Commission and release, by 2020, a comprehensive report that assesses the direct and indirect
impacts posed to Singapore by the climate crisis.
2. Combat the Crisis
a. Craft and make publicly accessible, by 2020, a national climate mitigation master plan to slash
emissions.
b. Decarbonise our economy.
c. Divest fully from polluting industries.
3. Engage the People
a. Educate all Singaporeans on the urgency and severity of the climate crisis.
b. Convene quarterly meetings to consult and update the public on the progress towards achieving the
emissions targets.
6 https://www.straitstimes.com/politics/singaporeans-concern-on-climate-change-shows-they-think-long
-term-dpm-heng
7 https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/SubmissionsStaging/NationalReports/Documents/05961724_Singapore-
BUR3-NC4-1-Singapore%20Fourth%20National%20Communication%20and%20Third%20Biennial
%20Update%20Report.pdf
Page 3 of 15
3
1. FACE THE TRUTH
a. Declare a national climate emergency in recognition of the need to bring absolute
greenhouse gas emissions to net zero.
The government must declare a climate emergency to demonstrate the urgent and existential threat
that climate change poses on our nation. Only by declaring an emergency will the requisite attention in all
spheres of governance begin to be sufficiently focused on tackling climate change.
Climate emergencies have already been declared by many governments around the world. As of
September 2019, 987 jurisdictions in 18 countries have done so. This covers a population of about 212
million citizens. 8 This includes:
● The governments of Wales and Scotland being the first on 28-29 April 2019, followed by a national
declaration in the UK House of Commons on 1 May 2019.
● Governments in Portugal, Canada, France, and Argentina from June to July of 2019.
● 45 jurisdictions in Australia and 33 cities and towns in the US (including New York City and Los
Angeles).9
We call on the members of parliament in the Singapore government to likewise pass a motion
declaring a climate emergency. This motion should include the following aspects -
That the Singapore Government:
● Acknowledges the need to reduce greenhouse gases in line with the figures put forth by the IPCC,
and pledges to halve Singapore’s emissions by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050.
● Will take the lead in spreading awareness of climate change to the population, including in our
education system, in the press, and in public speeches.
● Will centre the climate crisis as an issue that all spheres of governance will direct its attention and
efforts to.
● Acknowledges that only radical transformation will be sufficient to respond to the threat of the
climate crisis.
● Will use its legal powers and planning machinery for the just restructuring of the economy, laws,
and government in line with the climate emergency.
● Will be a proactive member of the international community in working towards a global agreement
to reduce emissions in line with the IPCC targets.
8 https://climateemergencydeclaration.org/climate-emergency-declarations-cover-15-million-citizens/
9 https://www.cedamia.org/global/
Page 4 of 15
4
b. Commission and release, by 2020, a comprehensive report that assesses the direct and
indirect impacts posed to Singapore by the climate crisis.
Climate change is an urgent and existential risk to Singapore. However, its effects are not always
obvious to citizens. To remedy this, the government should publish the best available data on the impact of
climate change to Singapore. A comprehensive assessment on the dangers posed by climate change will
demonstrate to all Singaporeans the seriousness of the issue, and help to generate mass-based political
support for this climate emergency.
The government has already committed large amounts of resources into investigating the impact of
climate change through the Centre for Climate Change Research, and the findings from this should be
collated into a comprehensive report. We call for the publication of this report by the end of 2020.
At the National Day Rally 2019, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong addressed the impact of rising
sea levels, and announced that the government is willing to spend $100 billion in the next 100 years to deal
with this specific threat.10 Other threats posed by climate change, while mentioned, were not discussed with
rigour. They include:
● New diseases and more frequent pandemics
● Food shortages
● Forced migration of displaced populations
● Economic depression
● Wars
These are all threats which pose grave dangers to Singapore’s well-being as a nation, and it is
crucial that the extent and implication of both direct and indirect impacts of the climate crisis are fully
fleshed out and communicated to the Singaporean public. These threats will place significant pressures on
Singapore’s existing policy measures. For example:
● In healthcare, the government has been focusing most of its recent efforts on issues such as diabetes,
and the expected burgeoning of healthcare costs with a rapidly ageing population.11 The
proliferation and worsening of diseases induced by climate change, such as dengue and heat
injuries, will lead to even further pressures on the healthcare system.
● Singapore’s government has recently reinforced that Singapore is not in a position to accept any
persons seeking political asylum or refugee status due to land constraints.12 Climate-induced
migration is likely to place further pressure on Singapore’s stance on this.13
10 https://www.pmo.gov.sg/Newsroom/National-Day-Rally-2019
11 https://lkyspp.nus.edu.sg/gia/article/rapid-ageing-exerts-pressure-on-singapore-s-pension-system
12 https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/singapore-cant-accept-refugees-mha
13 https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2018/03/19/climate-change-could-force-over-140-
million-to-migrate-within-countries-by-2050-world-bank-report
Page 5 of 15
5
● Singapore imports approximately 90% of its food. Shortages in the food supply will become
increasingly common with climate change, and will drastically destabilise Singapore’s food
security.14
The report should also outline how different groups and demographics will be differentially
impacted by these threats. This is because decisions on adaptation will always depend on trade-offs being
made between different interests. Outlining how these impacts will affect various communities disparately
will ensure that the government is transparent and just in implementing protection measures. As Dr.
Winston Chow of Singapore Management University (SMU) points out:
“What’s needed is an assessment of the costs accrued when installing and maintaining coastal
protection, and the potential loss of natural ecosystems during its construction. These costs must
then be balanced against the benefits of protecting critical infrastructure and property of financial
and historical value.
This evaluation requires an in-depth socio-economic assessment of current and future land use, as
well as the value judgments of existing natural capital or its ecosystem services provided. The net
cost-benefits are needed prior to deciding on the coastal adaptation option.”15
14 https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/big-read-far-peoples-minds-food-security-looming-issue
15 https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/commentary/singapore-climate-change-effective-polders-
pumps-s-100-billion-11833080
Page 6 of 15
6
2. COMBAT THE CRISIS
a. Craft and make publicly accessible, by 2020, a national climate mitigation master plan
to slash emissions.
Past national master plans concerning the environment have failed to take the necessary bold
climate action to prevent 1.5°C of warming. In the past few years, through the Ministry of Environment
and Water Resources (MEWR), its statutory board the National Environment Agency (NEA), and the
Ministry of National Development (MND) and its statutory board, the Urban Redevelopment Authority
(URA), the government has published the Sustainable Singapore Blueprint (2015), Climate Action Plan
(2016), the Biennial Update Report (2018) and most recently, the Draft Master Plan (2019). Each of these
plans presents its own specific limitations that have been outlined below:
● MEWR and MND’s Sustainable Singapore Blueprint (2015) (SSB) 16
○ The SSB falls short of providing a comprehensive blueprint for climate action as it focuses
on individual action within the living environment, addressing issues limited to short term
livability like air quality and littering instead of greenhouse gas emissions. The focus on
individual action to drive climate action is misleading because it fails to hold our industries
accountable, when they account for 60% of Singapore’s overall GHG emissions (as of
2014)17. This is in stark contrast to the 6% of GHG emissions that households account for.
○ This interpretation is congruent with public opinion. In a series of Public Action events,
LepakInSG collected public feedback on the SSB18, and the common consensus surfaced
was that the SSB had a “very human-centered perspective and does not consider
environmental issues adequately.”
○ Additionally, each of the pillars listed in the blueprint, whether be it “Eco Smart” Towns,
“Car-Lite” Singapore, or a Zero Waste nation, are not adequately mapped to a tangible
reduction in GHG emissions.
● MEWR and MND’s Climate Action Plan (2016) 19
○ The Plan outlines four strategies for climate mitigation: improving energy efficiency,
reducing carbon emissions from power generation, developing cutting-edge low-carbon
technologies, and responding as one nation. It should be noted that the policies to improve
energy efficiency are indeed effective and innovative. However, the emissions reductions
in this sector are limited as energy efficiency improvements constitute a marginal rather
than transformative change.
○ When discussing Singapore’s generation of electricity, the proposed solutions are to
increase the carbon efficiency as well as raise the share of solar to 5% by 2020. However,
16 https://www.mewr.gov.sg/docs/default-source/module/ssb-publications/41f1d882-73f6-4a4a-964b-
6c67091a0fe2.pdf
17 https://www.nccs.gov.sg/docs/default-source/default-document-library/2050-public-consultation-
document-(nccs)_30-sep70796bfcd0a943f698e366ac86066508.pdf
18 https://lepakinsg.files.wordpress.com/2019/05/publicaction-on-the-sustainable-singapore-blueprint.pdf
19 https://www.mnd.gov.sg/docs/default-source/mnd-documents/publications-documents/climate-action
-plan---for-a-sustainable-future.pdf
Page 7 of 15
7
this would mean that fossil fuels would still contribute more than 90% of our electricity
generation mix.
● NEA’s Third Biennial Update Report (2018) 20
○ The mitigation strategies presented draw on information in the Climate Action Plan, but
with the addition of a Carbon Tax of S$5 per tCO2e of GHG emissions in the first instance
with intention to increase it to S$10-15/tCO2e by 2030. However, this is far below the
levels argued for by the IPCC (upwards of S$185) and the World Bank’s High Level
Commission on Carbon Pricing (S$75-135).
● URA’s Draft Master Plan (2019) (DMP19) 21
Only one of the five themes—A Sustainable and Resilient City of the Future—in the DMP19
mentions the significant risk that climate change poses to Singapore. Even then, the plan refers explicitly
to adaptation as the main mechanism for response. Adaptation is futile without a complementary mitigation
plan. Without a comprehensive plan to reduce our GHG emissions, there will be a limit to how much we
can geoengineer our way out of the impending risks. At the same time, we are abdicating our moral
obligations to the global community.
○ Plans to improve alternative modes of transport to driving as well as plans to increase
greenery in communities are essential climate mitigation, but not on the scale required for
the crisis we are facing. Should all these proposed modes of GHG reduction be
implemented, we will still not meet the IPCC targets.
Given the limitations of these master plans, and the fact that they are written in silos from one
another and national discussions pertaining to development (such as the annual budget), we are asking our
government to craft and make publicly accessible, by 2020, a national master plan to slash emissions. This
plan should:
● Align national targets to the IPCC Report by which Singapore should slash absolute greenhouse
gas emissions to peak by 2020, halve by 2030, and reach net zero by 2050.
● Focus on system-level actions with an immediate decarbonisation plan.
● Make use of our international clout through our financial institutions, and divest fully from
polluting industries.
20 https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/SubmissionsStaging/NationalReports/Documents/05961724_Singapore-
BUR3-NC4-1-Singapore%20Fourth%20National%20Communication%20and%20Third%20Biennial
%20Update%20Report.pdf
21 https://www.ura.gov.sg/Corporate/Planning/Draft-Master-Plan-19
Page 8 of 15
8
b. Decarbonise our economy
Singapore needs to accelerate efforts to decarbonise in terms of reducing energy demand, shifting
to clean energy, electrification of the transportation, building, and industry sectors, and recognising the role
of nature as an important carbon sink. Some of recommended approaches to decarbonisation include:
● Ensure that consumers and businesses factor in the future cost of carbon emissions by levying a
carbon tax. There should be a clear roadmap to a price of SGD185/tCO2e by 2030, the level argued
for by the IPCC to remain below 1.5oC. The carbon tax should then rise to SGD340/tCO2e by 2050.
● Reduce emissions from power generation by expanding our solar and battery storage capacities and
importing renewable energy (like that being planned for in the Asian Renewable Energy Hub).
Power generation accounts for roughly 40% of our carbon emissions. The government can aid such
a transition through subsidies, low interest loans, or purchase agreements. (3)
● Implement significant subsidies for, and investment in, electrification of the transport and industrial
sector. Invest in research and development occurring in the universities and companies, and support
test bedding. The Transport sector accounts for 14% of our emissions respectively, while Industrial
Combustion Processes accounts for 40% of our emissions.
● Develop a roadmap to eliminate our reliance on the fossil fuel industry. If necessary, make use of
Carbon Capture and Sequestration in the interim to reduce emissions from those industrial
emissions. 42% of our emissions comes from industrial combustion processes, a majority of which
supports the refining and petrochemical industry.22 However, the transition away from the fossil
fuel industry must be just, and ensure that workers are equipped with the relevant skills to be re- employed in the green economy.
○ The oil and gas industry in Singapore is facing a downturn and has been for the past half a
decade. Since oil prices collapsed from a peak of US$112 per barrel in 2014 to below
US$30 in early 2016, the marine and offshore engineering industry has struggled to recover
from the slump. Prices have risen somewhat, but oil companies remain cautious in their
outlook and development.23
○ This was not only a blow for the economy, but also resulted in a massive restructuring and
downsizing of the oil and gas-related workforce. In 2008, the marine and offshore industry
employed almost 70,000 workers24; in 2016, only 23,00025. Its percentage of Singapore’s
GDP has also shrunk from 5% in 2008, to 1% in 201624.
○ This is not a problem specific to Singapore’s economy – globally, the oil and gas industry
has been facing a five-year downturn that only continues to worsen, a culmination of the
2014 oil price crash, mounting geopolitical tensions, and concerns of a global economic
22 https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/SubmissionsStaging/NationalReports/Documents/05961724_Singapore-
BUR3-NC4-1-Singapore%20Fourth%20National%20Communication%20and%20Third%20Biennial
%20Update%20Report.pdf
23 https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/marine-and-offshore-engineering-sector-diversify-growth-go-
Digital-add-new-jobs-2025
24 https://web.archive.org/web/20120418084237/http://www.edb.gov.sg/edb/sg/en_uk/index/industry_
sectors/marine___offshore/facts_and_figures.html
25 https://www.enterprisesg.gov.sg/industries/type/marine-and-offshore-engineering/industry-profile
Page 9 of 15
9
slowdown. The industry remains volatile, and its market capitalization has also fallen from
10% to 6% worldwide between 2013 and 2018.26
26 https://www2.deloitte.com/insights/us/en/industry/oil-and-gas/decoding-oil-gas-downturn
/introduction.html
Page 10 of 15
10
c. Divest fully from polluting industries.
The government and all government-affiliated bodies (such as GIC Private Limited and Temasek
Holdings) should divest fully from the most carbon-intensive industries such as fossil fuels, animal
agriculture and deforestation.
The impact of fossil fuel companies in creating the climate crisis is undeniable:
● GHG emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels have been the main contributor to the rise in
atmospheric CO2 concentration levels. This is acknowledged by the IPCC,27 as well as internal
research by Exxon.28
● Fossil fuel companies have actively cultivated climate denial by funding think-tanks, lobby groups
and news organisations to sow doubt about the validity of climate science.29 The legacy of this is
seen clearly in the current American presidency, and its decision to withdraw from the Paris
Agreement.30
● Fossil fuel companies fully expect to burn through their entire fossil fuel reserves, which will lead
to emissions about 5 times that of the carbon budget to keep to a 1.5 degree target.31
● An estimation of the existing fossil fuel infrastructure in the world already suggests that a large
amount of emissions are already locked in to bring us past 1.5 degrees of warming, which suggests
firstly, that fossil fuel-based infrastructure must be phased out, and secondly, that new fossil fuel- based infrastructure cannot be built.32
In this vein, the investment by Singaporean entities in fossil fuel-based assets holds undeniable
complicity in the climate crisis and severe ramifications for the environment:
● In Singapore, the major banks are active project finance investors in Southeast Asia, the only region
in the world where the share of coal in the energy mix is rising.33 This includes six deals in Indonesia
worth US$874 million, two deals in Vietnam worth $187 million and single deals in Malaysia and
the Philippines worth $176 million and $44 million respectively.34
● Singapore is a major financial hub in the region, and the financial decisions made in Singapore has
a wide impact for neighbouring countries. Singapore should wield its financial might to drive a
green transition in the region by funding and investing in green infrastructure, and divesting from
fossil fuel-based infrastructure.
The case against oil and gas is clear not just from an environmental standpoint but also from an
economic one. Many of the investments held by government-affiliated bodies are meant to generate returns
27 https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ipcc_wg3_ar5_chapter5.pdf
28 https://insideclimatenews.org/news/01122015/documents-exxons-early-co2-position-senior-executives-
engage-and-warming-forecast
29 https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa815f ;
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/shell-grappled-with-climate-change-20-years-ago-
documents-show/
30 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674927817301028
31 https://www.marketforces.org.au/info/key-issues/unburnablecarbon/
32 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1364-3
33 https://www.eco-business.com/news/how-to-rethink-southeast-asias-energy-systems-to-meet-climate-
goals/
34 https://www.marketforces.org.au/research/singapore-banks/
Page 11 of 15
11
in the long term. However, as foreign governments and businesses begin to recognize and mobilize against
the threat of climate change, the risk of stranded assets amongst oil and gas companies increases. In the
US, coal power plants are beginning to shut down as renewable energy becomes more economically
viable35, and this trend is likely to continue elsewhere around the globe. Divestment from fossil fuel
companies must be undertaken to reduce the risk of exposure to dying non-performing stranded assets.
● Financial markets currently do not adequately factor in long-term risk assessments, and thus does
not account for the climate risks that come with fossil fuel assets. Because of this, many fossil fuel
assets are currently overvalued, and risk becoming stranded once financial markets properly
account for their climate costs. This means that there is currently a “carbon bubble” amounting to
approximately US$1-4 trillion. Economists at the Bank of England suggest that this could
potentially lead to massive shocks to the financial system, and even a collapse of the financial
system.36
● Investment in animal agriculture and deforestation also fuels climate change. The clearing of the
Amazon (for example, through burning37) is closely tied to the demand for beef - 80% of Amazon
forests cleared since 2014 are now occupied by cattle38. Furthermore, the haze experienced by
Singapore is a direct result of companies and farmers clearing forests to grow palm oil.39 Investment
in these industries thus provides the financial support necessary to perpetuate these damaging
environmental practices.
Several of the world’s largest institutions have recently divested from fossil fuels:
● BNP Paribas dumped approximately US$1 billion worth of stocks relating to thermal coal because
it was detrimental to meeting the goals of the Paris Agreement.40
● London-based investor LGIM shed $300 million of shares in ExxonMobil.41
● Norway’s sovereign wealth fund announced in 2017 that it would divest from firms that make more
than 30% of their turnover from coal.42 In 2019 it announced that it would divest from firms that
explore for oil and gas to reduce their exposure to oil shocks.43
● Swiss Re has stopped insuring businesses with high exposure to thermal coal.44
35 https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/and-now-the-really-big-coal-plants-begin-to-close/
36 https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/07/20/why-central-banks-need-to-step-up-on-global-warming/
37 https://qz.com/1692804/fires-in-the-amazon-rainforests-were-likely-intentional/
38 https://amazonwatch.org/assets/files/2019-complicity-in-destruction-2.pdf
39 https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/stop-deforestation/clearing-air-palm-oil-peat-destruction-and-
air-pollution
40 https://www.ft.com/content/57d71893-5ae6-3a14-80ae-b82fdfbd1729
41 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-07/big-money-starts-to-dump-stocks-that-pose-
climate-risks?fbclid=IwAR1B11ZyA7IiXKTmrMr_8T0KgeVUnnO-rCDroE9Fr8Zj86rKj6lLfSdPS9w
42 https://www.straitstimes.com/business/companies-markets/sovereign-wealth-funds-scaling-down-
exposure-to-fossil-fuels
43 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/08/norways-1tn-wealth-fund-to-divest-from-oil-and-gas-
exploration
44 https://www.kwhanalytics.com/blog-archive/swiss-re-stops-insuring-businesses-with-high-exposure-to-
thermal-coal
Page 12 of 15
12
It is crucial that divestment starts from institutional investors such as sovereign wealth funds. How
do we get there? An article by Robinson and Fabian in the Straits Times 45 makes the following suggestions:
● Institutional investors can become world leaders in financing low-carbon infrastructure, capturing
the incentives that governments are directing towards a green economy.
● Institutional investors should factor long-term climate risk assessments into investment decisions,
shielding themselves from potential losses in carbon-intensive assets.
● Institutional investors ought to use their institutional might to lobby the boards of companies to
identify, report and manage the transition to a low-carbon economy.
● Government-linked funds can collaborate closely with policymakers to factor in the real costs of
carbon-intensive assets, and drive the change locally and regionally towards low-carbon
infrastructure.
● The Monetary Association of Singapore should reform its regulatory framework to encourage
better management of climate risks and encourage the flow of capital into green investments
domestically and abroad.
45 https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/singapore-can-take-lead-as-low-carbon-investor
Page 13 of 15
13
3. ENGAGE THE PEOPLE
a. Educate all Singaporeans on the urgency and severity of the climate crisis.
Make the study of climate and environmental sciences a compulsory and integrated part of all
academic subjects offered at MOE schools.
Singapore has taken steps to introduce environmental education into different academic subjects,
and at various levels.46 However, as the climate crisis will significantly alter the lives of current and future
generations, we must do more to equip Singaporeans with the relevant knowledge and skills for combatting
the crisis. There is also a need to emphasise the severe and manifold repercussions of the climate crisis we
are experiencing. Hence, we must ensure that all students not only have a deep understanding of scientific
concepts such as Tipping Points, but also an appreciation for the various socio-political issues borne out of
the climate crisis, such as climate refugees, inequity and land rights. Our calls to action are:
● Integrate the study of climate change into all academic subjects offered at school, so that content
about the existential threat of climate change receives sustained, comprehensive, and coherent
focus in the educational experience.
● Solidify students’ understanding of the drivers of climate change and its effects on our society.47
● Deepen students’ understanding of climate change as not only an environmental issue, but also a
social, cultural and political one48 that is closely connected to many other societal issues such as
socioeconomic inequality and public health.
Conduct large-scale awareness and action-oriented programmes.
As climate change will affect every person in Singapore, every Singaporean should know what is
at stake and what is being done about it. Only with this knowledge can people effectively take part in
supporting various climate mitigation solutions. This will also mean that people will become more
responsive to policies, supporting only the ones that best preserve a safe and stable climate. Our calls to
action:
● Run large-scale awareness campaigns to inform the public about the content of Singapore’s climate
change impact report and national master plan to slash emissions.
● Carry out large-scale, action-oriented campaigns encouraging people to focus on slashing
institutional greenhouse gas emissions.49 Messaging should move away from solely individual
lifestyle choices, toward actions that yield far greater emissions reductions.50 For example, as laid
out in the following document: https://tinyurl.com/IndivClimateAction
● When it comes to the reduction of personal contribution, the high consumption lifestyle of frequent
flyers and beef / lamb heavy diets should be targeted first.
46 https://www.moe.gov.sg/news/parliamentary-replies/environmental-education
47 Representative 2018-2019 online survey found existing confusion on the causes and impacts of
Climate Change
48 Example analysis of culture’s relationship with climate change
49 Inspiration from other action-oriented campaigns with wide reach, including the Do the Mozzie Wipeout
campaign and the MRT Thoughtful Bunch visuals.
50 Examples of individual lifestyle choice-focused messaging includes: Link 1, Link 2, Link3
Page 14 of 15
14
● Appeal to people’s intrinsic motivations to help the environment or their community, rather than
orienting campaigns around the personal gains associated with environmental action.51
51 Aforementioned survey found that people’s motivation largely stems from a concern for others and
other intrinsic factors instead of for instrumental personal benefit. This suggests, for example, that
NEA’s current campaigns asking people to “Save energy, save the environment, and save money too!”
may be counterproductive.
Page 15 of 15
15
b. Convene quarterly meetings to consult and update the public on the progress towards
achieving the emissions targets.
Public involvement increases the legitimacy of decisions while promoting an informed and engaged
citizenry. It allows citizens to participate in meaningful, civic action. Additionally, these meetings have the
potential to bring people together, sending greater Singapore the message that citizens do indeed care about
climate change, and can effectively embark on collective action.52 These meetings should have the
following characteristics:
● Publicise information about these meetings well in advance (at least a month in advance) and in the
same manner as the public campaigns mentioned in Section 3a.
● Ensure transparency in the conduct of these meetings - minutes should be made available for those
who were unable to make it, as well as to maintain transparency with the larger Singaporean public.
● There should be some form of feedback-influenced outcomes. There should be a response to each
distinct recommendation made, similar to the process with the citizens’ jury for the war on
diabetes53. Policy working groups should then be set up to implement these recommendations as
well as carry out further research or cost-benefit analysis where necessary.
● These meetings should be run by trained facilitators (this is in reference to policymakers expressing
difficulty at playing the role of facilitators in the Citizen’s Jury on Diabetes54). However, key
government officials should still be present to listen and discuss necessary points with participants.
● Messaging from the Government also has to move beyond individual action -based solutions to
systemic, institutional change. Many have expressed concern at the disjunct between the severity
of the climate crisis and the National Climate Change Secretariat’s focus on recycling.55
52 Aforementioned survey found most Singaporeans are skeptical of how much others care about climate change.
62% felt that less than half of Singaporeans care about climate change, even though the same survey found 58% feel
a moral duty to do something about climate change.
53 https://www.moh.gov.sg/wodcj
54 https://www.psd.gov.sg/challenge/ideas/deep-dive/the-citizens-jury-a-different-way-to-engage-citizens
55 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nifxhxLxCAySm2aq5bSH2n16HmwFBNOk/view