What kind of segregation and racial policies cities can and should have?

The classification of the human race has been and can be based on culture, religion, ethnicity and race. Although classification is completely unnecessary, sometimes and in fact, often some of these classifying parameters do go hand in hand or at least, have a positive correlation, and also social and societal implementations. These divisions are often reflected in urban structure and ethnicity can be used for motivating division of labor and land use rights.

Perhaps the most studied and most drastic example of using ethnicity as a basis for social inclusion and exclusion is to be found in South Africa of the Apartheid era. Earlier a Dutch colony, it was taken over by the Brits after the Boer war between 1899 and 1902.

The Apartheid system only started in 1948, dividing the citizens into whites, colored and black population. The dissolving of the Apartheid since the early 1990s meant that the blacks were now granted full citizenship rights, this making them allowed to move freely inside the state without having to carry passports. As the cities offered most working and studying opportunities, it is also natural that the South African cities have faced a marked growth in the post-Apartheid era, this also leading to acceleration of urban poverty.

However, as the Boraine et al. article shows, the reality is a far cry from the official policy statements heralding the multiculturality and -raciality. In fact, the difference between living conditions between racial groups have grown and the ethnic segregation in the South African cities has not certainly dissolved. According to Boraine, the new pressing urban issues of sustainability and globality have put the ongoing problems of structural racism, inequality and fragmentation aside.

Where the ethnic segregation, combined with multi-dimensional social inequality, in South Africa the multiculturality or multiethnicity is a constant source of various problems. In Singapore, the situation is markedly different. While in South Africa the urban space is certainly divided according to the racial groups but fragmented, in Singapore the multi-ethnicity is tackled with deliberate policies to promote equality or, to be more accurate, to promote the pan-Singaporean identity of multiculturality. In Singapore, the ethnic separation of urban space is tackled with strong regulation; as an example, the apartments can only be sold to the representatives of the same ethnic group: to the Chinese, Malay, Indian or the “others”.

According to Chih Hoong Sin, in Singapore the so called pragmatism has become a substitute for ideology, this ideology being to promote entrepreneurship and to make Singapore a competitive environment for businesses. While in Singapore the urban regrouping is deliberately produced and quite a recent phenomenon, only occurring since the late 1980s, in South Africa, the official dissolving of the Apartheid policy is still in strong contrast with the rather mosaically segregated urbanities. While in Singapore there has been a strong economical growth, the rich resources in South Africa have only helped the previously privileged groups.