THE Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) has plans to dam Sungei Khatib Bongsu to form a reservoir. Khatib Bongsu, in the northern part of Singapore, is a tract of natural area still unknown to most people, except nature lovers.

The URA's move has incited reactions from environmentalists who remember that the affected area was considered one of the 'important nature areas' in the 1993 Singapore Green Plan.

A snap poll conducted by The Straits Times indicated that more than 96 per cent of the respondents were in favour of planners finding a way of meeting 'housing and other needs without tearing up remaining green sites'.

It would not be too far wrong to suggest the issue of balancing between environmental considerations and economic progress and development, will assume greater prominence in public fora in the years ahead.

According to the official magazine of the Nature Society of Singapore, Nature Watch, in 2000, Singapore has only around 4 per cent of mangrove areas left in its 647 sq km of land.

RISK OF EXTINCTION

OTHER conservation-related facts: more than 39 per cent of Singapore's 251 coastal plants are extinct; 26 per cent of all seed plants are already extinct and around 60 per cent are threatened; 25 per cent of mammal species are extinct, and 58 per cent of the remnant 53 species are at risk; 34 per cent of bird species are extinct, and 38 per cent of the extant residents are at risk.

That the URA has put forward the argument that Sungei Khatib Bongsu has to be dammed to meet Singapore's longer term water needs would certainly mean a partial or complete destruction of the mangrove swamps in this biologically diverse nature area. This could have been the catalyst for the reactions from environmentalists here.

As Singapore society becomes even more affluent, knowledgeable and progressive in the coming years, this greater sense of environmental consciousness among segments of its population will not only place greater demands on policy-makers to further incorporate conservation considerations into their policy-making decisions, but also bring to the forefront the importance of protecting what is left of our natural heritage.

It is this section of society that will serve as an even stronger critique of existing environmental management policies and will place greater pressures on the Government to enhance and better what has already been commendably set in place by it.

This positive correlation between increasing affluence and an increasing realisation that the environmental resources have become more valuable, is not something novel. Such a phenomenon was discussed by economists in the 1990s, and subsequently christened the 'Environmental Kuznets Curve'.

Singapore already has a good track record in managing its natural resources and nature areas, given its scarce land resources. Witness the formulation of the Singapore Green Plan in 1993, and the recent, more ambitious follow-up strategy for Singapore's next lap of development, the Singapore Green Plan 2012.

ECONOMIC TOOLS

ALL in all, the issue of balancing conservation and development would be less of a dilemma if tools from economics of the environment could be given an even firmer footing in decision-making.

Although Singapore has excellent laws related to the protection of our atmosphere, land, water and nature areas, even more can be undertaken to enhance the institutional framework, by using environmental economics to assist policy-makers.

What is to be institutionalised into the system should not only be the implementation of compulsory environmental impact assessments (EIAs) on all environmental projects affecting our natural heritage, but also moves to make such reports accessible to the public and nature lovers.

This would not only serve to allay fears that our environmental heritage has been destroyed unnecessarily, but also indicate to the public the positive measures that the authorities will be taking to minimise the extent of environmental degradation when a decision has been passed to implement a project.

In this realm, cost-benefit analysis will also gain greater prominence in the community, as such an analysis has to be undertaken together with an EIA to assist in decision-making. Admittedly, it is generally unwise to monetise environmental resources, especially when such values can sometimes be misrepresented as hard and fast figures. However, some approximation is better than nothing.

Monetary approximation at least serves to provide a rudimentary tool for policy-makers and the public to roughly weigh the pros and cons of implementing a project, with the application of an EIA's findings to subsequently minimise the said environmental impacts.

The challenges ahead are not insurmountable. However, the need to devise and choose the appropriate tools and measures in order to preserve what is left of the cultural heritage remaining in Singapore is important and necessary, given the growing environmental consciousness of segments of the Singapore population.