"More than the freedom to chew, Singaporeans need the freedom to choose. Until they get it, Singapore will remain clean, green -- and boring."
This is a comment made by a blogger about the ban of chewing gums in Singapore. It is undeniable that Singaporeans live in a clean environment, but arguments against the ban include Singaporeans lacking creativity, ingenuity and entrepreneurial drive -- qualities that are vital for the country's survival in the modern world economy.
The Ministry of National Development has taken authority over this issue. In January 1992, Goh Chok Tong imposed the ban. After the ban was announced, the import of chewing gum was immediately halted. However, a reasonable transition period was given to allow shops to clear their existing stocks. After that, the sale of chewing gum was completely terminated but there are singaporeans who try to "smuggle" gum from neighbouring countries. Despite that, no black market for chewing gum in Singapore ever emerged.
On the other hand, there were supporters of the ban. Another blogger writes:
"If Singapore didn’t ban chewing gum, the seat at the cinemas, buttons in the lifts and etc will fill with dry up chewing gum..."
Some people stuck it under restaurant tables; others dropped it on the sidewalk, gumming up the streets. Chewing gum was even blamed for delays on the mass rapid-transit system when gummy doors got stuck and held up the trains.
Councils in foreign countries have long complained about the problem and in particular the cost of cleaning up the remains of chewing gum. This is an example of a social cost, a negative externality. Westminster Council point out that the cost of cleaning up chewing gum costs them in excess of £100,000 a year.
In Singapore’s context, the ban had these externalities greatly reduced and more benefits were yielded.
Credits: Chanel Lam, Ethel Soh, Jeanette Yuen and Ryan Chia
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
Although the government has been banning such goods for years, it has actually allowed certain types of chewing gums to be sold in stores like Guardian nowadays. Will any consequence arise due to the sale of such good?
although banning chewing gum was one way of getting rid of dried gum stuck everywhere, was there no other possible avenues such as fines? if the banning of gums is permitted/justified what about cigarettes? they bring about even more negative impacts but.. it is still sold. just at a higher price.
zoe
they did not illustrate how the negative externality of cleaning up gum will lead to inefficiencies in resource allocation.
the third party in this case could be tourists. tourists help to boost the tourism industry and they might not want to visit Singapore again because chewed gum that is not properly disposed of, is unsightly and affects the cleanliness of a place.
-aretha
banning chewing gum is indeed an effective, however, isn't it possible to solve the problem through other ways like educating people or raising the price or chewing gum, or taxing chewing gum? Also, what about the recent issue about allowing chewing gum as a form of medication to help those smokers who want to cut down on their addiction to smoking. Is that not considered positive externality then?
[quote]In Singapore’s context, the ban had these externalities greatly reduced and more benefits were yielded.[/quote]
I don't think the externality of the extra cost of cleaning chewing gum would outweigh the "benefit" derived of some shopowners making less money.
after reading this article, i am thinking of the benefits that chewing gum would bring to singapore and the people that import the chewing gums. also, there was a mention of a lack of black market. im wondering if the reason is because demand for chewing gums are not high?
i think we cannot just ban something just because we think that it dirties our environment. it just wont help because it is the people's mentality that is making the difference. dont tell me people dont eat chewing gum in sg even though it is banned?
japan is a good example. the citizens really know how to protect their environment and surroundings. they bother to stop and differentiate their rubbish accordingly(plastic,paper,galss etc) for recycling purposes.
what we really need to do is instill the "go green" attitude in the citizens. so even if govt allows gum, we wont be able to find it being stuck everywhere. but they will actaully bother to dispose it appropriately.
carine
yoz..hmm your bit kind of vague? Reduced externalities and increased benefits? There still exist the presence of legally sold chewing gum? wun this be "stuck under your tables and cinemas too?" People still "smuggle" gum from overseas? The banning of gum supposedly reduces externalities but at the expense of the particular industry. I feel that the gum ban is not clerly substantiated in this write up..
I'm sure the problem faced by Singapore while chewing gum was legalised is not only faced by Singapore right ? How then are other countries dealing with this situation ? Why can't Singapore apply these measures rather than imposing a complete ban of chewing gums ?
Instead of imposing a ban , we could make use of the positive externalities that C. gum could bring about in terms of either health or increased revenue yet and the same time try and minimize the negative externalities that is brought about through cleaning campaigns and maybe fines. If the benefits which are derived from the sales are higher than the disadvantages , then why not aye?
Adarsh.
Hmmm interesting description of effects of chewing gum..."gumming up the streets", "gummy doors".Anyway, i think this ban is totally ineffective and not well enforced. Although chewing gum is "banned", you still find it practically everywhere you go. In fact, there has been no reports of people getting caught for smuggling large quantities of gum into s'pore.Perhaps, the immigration officers should start doing so...
Aloysius
write up is a bit vague. but yea why couldnt the government just have allowed gum to be sold here and then impose stricter laws n fines?
I think the government banned chewing gum instead of posing taxations or fines cos if they did so, Singaporeans would still abuse this half-chance; so problems of gum stuck in all places would still surface.
Moreover, chewing gum, unlike other goods say cigarettes, don't generate as much revenue for the govt. as others do. ( 1 pack of cigarettes which cost $10 results in the govt making easily ~$7 in revenue.)
Ying
I never thought that chewing gum brought so much troubles to infrastructure as the other class has mentioned. I think if chewing gum can actually cause the MRT to stuck, it is no longer a minor problem, but part of a safety measures to ban it! I believe fines will not change the conditons so much since the will to destroy public goods came from people's mindset. Why don't government try to teach Singaporeans some appreciation to their own country? It may help in other aspects if they appreicate Singapore.
Post a Comment