Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T03:22:29.574Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Social Discipline in Singapore: An Alternative for the Resolution of Social Problems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 April 2011

Stella R. Quah
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This paper aims to discuss the issue of problem-solving at the national level by focusing on the concept of social discipline. The development of a new nation-state, i.e. contemporary Singapore, will provide the empirical basis for the analysis.

The paper is divided into three sections. The first section deals briefly with relevant conceptual approaches to the solution of social problems, and the definition of social discipline. The second section presents an illustration of social discipline in action. The final section attempts a critical assessment of the approach used in Singapore for the solution of social problems.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Southeast Asian Studies , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , September 1983 , pp. 266 - 289
Copyright
Copyright © The National University of Singapore 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

This is the revised version of a paper presented at the Tenth World Congress of Sociology, Mexico City, 16–21 August 1982.

1 Etzioni, A., Social Problems (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1976)Google Scholar.

2 Wiseman, J.P., “Towards a Theory of Policy Intervention in Social Problems”, Social Problems 21, 1 (1979): 4Google Scholar.

3 , Etzioni, Social ProblemsGoogle Scholar.

4 Berger, P.L., Pyramids of Sacrifice: Political Ethics and Social Change (Middlesex, England: Penguin, 1974)Google Scholar.

5 Goulet, D., The Cruel Choice: A New Concept in the Theory of Development (New York: Antheneum, 1978)Google Scholar.

6 , Etzioni, Social Problems, p. 34Google Scholar.

7 Ibid., p. 35.

8 Ibid., pp. 39–43.

9 Ibid., p. 44.

10 See for example , Berger, Pyramids; Goulet, The Cruel Choice; W. McCord, The Springtime of Freedom: The Evolution of Developing Societies (New York: Oxford University Press, 1965)Google Scholar; Linz, J.J. and Stepan, A., The Breakdown of Democratic Regimes (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978); andGoogle ScholarBayley, D.H., Public Liberties in the New States (Chicago: Rand McNally, 1964)Google Scholar.

11 , Etzioni, Social Problems, pp. 95–96Google Scholar.

12 Ibid., p. 137.

13 Ibid., p. 126.

14 Ibid., p. 95.

15 Christenson, R.M. et. al., Ideologies and Modern Politics (London: Dodd, Mead & Co., 1971)Google Scholar.

16 Christenson, et. al., Ideologies, pp. 205–6Google Scholar.

17 , Bayley, Public Liberties, p. 9Google Scholar.

18 Ibid., p. 10.

19 Ibid., p. 137.

20 , Linz and , Stepan, The BreakdownGoogle Scholar.

21 Ibid., p. 10.

22 Moore, B., Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy (Boston: Beacon Press, 1966), pp. 430–32Google Scholar.

23 , McCord, The Springtime, p. 196Google Scholar.

24 lbid., p. 242.

25 , Etzioni, Social Problems, p. 157Google Scholar.

26 , Berger, PyramidsGoogle Scholar.

27 , Goulet, The Cruel ChoiceGoogle Scholar.

28 , Berger, Pyramids, p. 165Google Scholar.

29 Ibid., p. 165.

30 Ibid., pp. 169–70.

31 Ibid., p. 192.

32 Ibid., p. 259.

33 Maslow, A.H., Motivation and Personality, 2nd ed. (New York: Harper and Row, 1970), pp. 35–47Google Scholar.

34 Ibid., pp. 53–54.

35 Ibid., pp. 57–58.

36 Dahl, R.A., Polyarchy. Participation and Opposition (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1971)Google Scholar.

37 , Berger, Pyramids, p. 201Google Scholar.

38 , Goulet, The Cruel ChoiceGoogle Scholar.

39 , Berger, PyramidsGoogle Scholar.

40 , Goulet, The Cruel Choice, p. xviGoogle Scholar.

41 Ibid., p. 256.

42 Ibid., p. 328.

43 The exchange rate as of 1 June 1983 is US$1 =$2.10. It has remained relatively stable during the past three years.

44 Department of Statistics, Yearbook of Statistics Singapore 1980/81 (Singapore: Department of Statistics, 1981)Google Scholar.

45 Ministry of Culture, Singapore 1981 (Singapore: Information Division, Ministry of Culture, 1981), p. 206Google Scholar.

46 Department of Statistics, Yearbook, p. 14Google Scholar.

47 Ibid., p. 15.

48 Ministry of Culture, Singapore 1981, pp. 145–46Google Scholar.

49 Ibid., pp. 172–82.

50 See People's Action Party, People's Action Party 1954–1979. Petir25th Anniversary Issue (Singapore: Central Executive Committee, PAP, 1979), p. 36; andGoogle ScholarMinistry of Culture, Singapore Facts and Pictures 1981 (Singapore: Information Division, Ministry of Culture, 1981), pp. 21, 38Google Scholar.

51 Ministry of Culture, Singapore Facts, p. 37Google Scholar.

52 “Jeyaretnam takes Anson”, The Sunday Times (Singapore) 1 11. 1981, p. 1Google Scholar.

53 Muthukrishnan, G.S., “Focus on Singapore: Dilemma of the PAP”, Pacific Community 2,1(1970): 202Google Scholar

54 Quah, J.S.T., “Administrative Reform and Development Administration in Singapore: A Comparative Study of the Singapore Improvement Trust and the Housing and Development Board” (Ph.D. diss., Florida State University, Tallahassee, 1975), pp. 64–66Google Scholar.

55 Ibid., pp. 165, 169.

56 Ibid., p. 71.

57 Housing and Development Board, Houses for the People. 50,000 Up (Singapore: HDB, 1965), p. 30Google Scholar.

58 , Quah, “Administrative Reform”, pp. 71–72Google Scholar.

59 Republic of Singapore, Housing and Development Act. Chapter 271 (Singapore: Government Printer, 1959)Google Scholar.

60 Teh, C. W., “Public Housing in Singapore: An Overview”, in Public Housing in Singapore, ed. Yeh, S.H.K. (Singapore: Singapore University Press, 1975), p. 15Google Scholar.

61 Ibid., p. 15.

62 Housing and Development Board, Annual Report 1964 (Singapore: HDB, 1965), p. 10Google Scholar.

63 Republic of Singapore, Parliamentary Reports (Singapore: Republic of Singapore, 1978), Vol. 37, Part I, p. 897Google Scholar.

64 Housing and Development Board, Conditions of Sale of Housing and Development Board Flats, Application to Purchase a Flat Form (Singapore: HDB, 1982)Google Scholar.

65 Ministry of Culture, Singapore 81, p. 80Google Scholar.

66 The CPF is a scheme of compulsory savings for the workers, which is “available to them when they retire or become totally incapacitated for work”. Under the CPF, both employer and employee are required to pay monthly contributions at a rate proportional to the wages earned by the employee. These rates were in 1980 as follows: for the private sector, the employee's rate ofcontribution is “18 per cent subject to a maximum of S$540” and the employer's contribution is “20.5 per cent subject to a maximum of S$615”. For the government sector, the employee's rate of contribution is the same as that in the private sector, but the employer's contribution is “10.5 percent without a maximum limit”. Economically, then, the population in the low- and middle-income groups can own their homes without major strain in their budgets and at a price two or three times lower than the private market. See Ministry of Culture, Singapore 81, pp. 58–59, for more detailsGoogle Scholar.

67 , Teh, “Public Housing”, pp. 19–20Google Scholar.

68 Ministry of Culture, “Singapore Facts”, p. 134Google Scholar.

69 Housing and Development Board, Annual Board 1980 (Singapore: HDB, 1981)Google Scholar.

70 lbid., pp. 46–48.

71 See Robert, C.I., “The Social and Economic Implications of Relocation on Squatter Settlements: A Case Study of Kebun Bugis” (Academic Exercise, Department of Sociology, University of Singapore, 1972); andGoogle ScholarTan, R.L.L., “The Impact of Relocation on HDB Tenants — A Case Study”(M.Soc.Sc. thesis, Department of Sociology, University of Singapore, 1974)Google Scholar.

72 Department of Statistics, Yearbook, p. 18Google Scholar.

73 Housing and Development Board, Homes, pp. 28–29Google Scholar.

74 See Quah, S.R., Socioeconomic Variations in the Perception of Side-Effects of Contraceptives Singapore: An Exploratory Analysis (Singapore: SEAPRAP, 1979), pp. 10–11; andGoogle ScholarDepartment of Statistics, Yearbook, p. 14Google Scholar.

75 Srikantan, K.S., The Family Planning Program in the Socioeconomic Context (New York: The Population Council, 1977), p. 6Google Scholar.

76 More specifically: (1) the first policy refers to accouchment or delivery fees in government hospitals. These fees increase with each additional child and the type of ward used. For the first child in the most economic ward, i.e., Class C, the delivery fee is S$60. This fee increases to SS1OO for Class B2, SS120 for Class B1, and SS300 for Class A, the most expensive ward class. In Class C the delivery fee for the second, third, fourth and subsequent children are, respectively, SS10O, SS200, S$300, and SS400. In Class A the delivery fees for the same birth order children are S$360, SS460, SS560, and S$600 respectively. (2) The second policy regulates paid maternity leave. This policy stipulates that if a working woman has already two or more living children and is expecting the third or subsequent child, she is not entitled to paid maternity leave. (3) The third policy regulates that parents with more than three children will receive income tax relief for the first three children only but not for the fourth and subsequent children. The fourth and fifth policies are directly related to the housing policy. (4) No priority is given to large families in the allocation of subsidized housing; and (5) eligibility to sublet rooms from their own HDB apartments is given only to families with no more than three children. The other policies are, briefly, (6) higher priority in the choice of primary school to children one of whose parents has undergone sterilization after one or two children or before the age of 40; (7) fees for antenatal care at Maternal and Child Health Clinics are raised to S$10 per visit if the pregnant woman has already two or more living children; (8) if sterilization is carried out after delivery, the delivery fees for B and C class patients is waived; (9) if sterilization is undergone after delivery, women government servants with two or more living children are eligible for paid medical leave; (10) finally, if sterilization is carried out after delivery, female government servants will have their seven-day medical leave as unrecorded full-pay leave. For more details see Wan, F.K. and Loh, M., “Fertility Policies and the National Family Planning and Programme”, in Public Policy and Population Change in Singapore, ed. Chen, P.S.J. and Fawcett, J.T. (New York: The Population Council, 1979), pp. 97–108; andGoogle ScholarSingapore Family Planning and Population Board, Fifteen Annual Report 1980 (Singapore: SFPPB, 1981)Google Scholar.

77 Quah, S.R., “Preventive Health Behaviour in Singapore” (Ph.D. diss., University of Singapore, 1980), p. 48Google Scholar.

78 , Wan and , Loh, “Fertility Policies”, p. 97Google Scholar.

79 Ibid., p. 103.

80 , Etzioni, Social Problems, p. 126Google Scholar.

81 Loh, M., “The Singapore National Family Planning and Population Programme 1966–1977” (Singapore: SFPPB, 1978), p. 14Google Scholar.

82 See Singapore Family Planning and Population Board, Twelfth Annual Report 1977 (Singapore: SFPPB, 1978), p. 43; andGoogle ScholarSingapore Family Planning and Population Board, Fifteenth, p. 26Google Scholar.

83 Quah, S.R., “Impact of Policy on the Family: Can the Family be Strengthened by Legislation?” Southeast Asean Journal of Social Science 9 (1981): 33–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

84 See Ministry of Health, Population and Trends (Singapore: Ministry of Health, 1977), p. 11; andGoogle ScholarDepartment of Statistics, Yearbook, p. 14Google Scholar.

85 Singapore Family and Population Board, Eleventh Annual Report 1976 (Singapore: SFPPB, 1977), p. 6Google Scholar.

86 See Chan, T.C., “The Changing Socio-Demographic Profile”, in Singapore: Society in Transition, ed. Hassan, R. (Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press, 1976), p. 272; andGoogle ScholarPang, S.L. and Chen, A.J., “Factors Influencing the Crude Birth Rates in Singapore, 1966-1975” (Singapore: SFPPB, 1976)Google Scholar.

87 See Singapore Family Planning and Population Board, Tenth Annual Report 1975 (Singapore, SFPPB, 1976), p. 1; andGoogle ScholarSingapore Family Planning and Population Board, Fifteenth Annual Report, p. 2Google Scholar.

88 Hassan, R., “Report on Attitudinal and Behavioural Responses to the Population Policies of Singapore” (Singapore: UNFPA Law and Population Project Report No. 2, 1977)Google Scholar.

89 Ibid., pp. 37–38.

90 Ibid., p. 38.

91 Ibid., p. 39.

92 Ibid., pp. 41–42.

93 Ibid., p. 50.

94 , Etzioni, Social Problems, p. 96Google Scholar.

95 Ibid., p. 104.

96 World Bank, Relieving Traffic Congestion: The Singapore Area License Scheme (Washington: World Bank Staff Working Paper No. 281, 1978)Google Scholar.

97 See Graziano, L., “The Historic Compromise and Consociational Democracy: Toward a ‘New Democracy’?” International Political Science Review 1, 3 (1980): 349CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

98 Bryce, J., Modern Democracies (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1921), p. 22, as quoted byGoogle ScholarSchulz, E.B., Democracy (New York: Barron's Educational series, 1966), p. 3Google Scholar.

99 Seah, CM., “Singapore in 1980: Institutionalizing System Maintenance”, Asian Survey 21, 2 (1981): 253CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

100 , Maslow, Motivation, pp. 35–58, 63Google Scholar.

101 Department of Statistics, Yearbook, p. 15Google Scholar.

102 , Linz and , Stepan, The Breakdown, p. 5Google Scholar.

103 , McCord, The Springtime, p. 264Google Scholar.

104 , Seah, “Singapore in 1980”Google Scholar.

105 Goh, K.S., The Practice of Economic Growth (Singapore: Federal Publications, 1977), p. ixGoogle Scholar.

106 Dahl, R.A. and Tufte, E.R., Size and Democracy (Stanford: 0Stanford University Press, 1973)Google Scholar

107 , Dahl and , Tufte, Size, p. 137Google Scholar.

108 Goh, , The Practice, p. 9.Google Scholar