Big houses on a small island: legislating Singapore’s ‘good class’ bungalows
International Journal of Housing Policy, ISSN: 1949-1255, Vol: 23, Issue: 3, Page: 612-628
2023
- 4Citations
- 63Usage
- 4Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations4
- Citation Indexes4
- Usage63
- Abstract Views63
- Captures4
- Readers4
Article Description
Land reform in post-independent Singapore was led by compulsory purchase predominantly in the 1960s–70s and resulted in numerous kampungs or villages being demolished. With efficient assembly of land, high-rise public flats were built to accommodate the country’s burgeoning population. Today, 95 per cent of residents reside in high-rise dwellings and Singapore is the 3rd most densely populated country globally. Remarkably, planning regulations protect a housing typology known as ‘good class bungalows’ (GCBs). Though housing less than 0.2 per cent of Singapore households, GCBs collectively take up 7 per cent of the available land for housing. Numbering less than three thousand, GCBs have statutorily required large minimum lot sizes and are situated in Singapore’s choiciest residential enclaves. Development of GCB land to more intensive use is strictly prohibited. In this article, I examine the legal policies and socioeconomic rationale for maintaining this uniquely Singaporean institution, concluding that there are indeed cogent justifications for its existence.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85137663172&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19491247.2022.2105193; https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19491247.2022.2105193; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/4186; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6144&context=sol_research; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/4554; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6512&context=sol_research; https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19491247.2022.2105193
Informa UK Limited
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know