CHANGI AIRPORT AS LANDSCAPE FOR

NATION-BUILDING

WOON WEI SENG

A0002916N

Honours thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements

for the degree of Bachelor of Social Sciences (Honours)

DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE

AY 2014/2015
 ABSTRACT

With Changi Airport’s long-running success, construction of upcoming Project

Jewel and Singapore’s upcoming SG50 celebrations in 2015 as backdrop, this thesis

explores Changi as landscape contributing to nation-building. Drawing on a mixed-

methods approach, this thesis unpacks how the state mobilises Changi to symbolise

or develop national identity amongst Singaporeans, through interwoven material,

symbolic and discursive constructions of the nation in the landscape. Subsequently,

this thesis proposes three kinds of reactions from Singaporeans consuming this

landscape: acceptance of the state’s top-down impositions; indifference or resistance

towards these impositions; and bottom-up nation-building developing organically

through personal experiences, that arise in ways unintended or unmanaged by the

state but without necessarily challenging the state’s nation-building intentions. This

thesis studies the landscape’s multiple representations and unravels through

Changi the ‘where’ and ‘how’ of nation-building, arguing for the importance of both

top-down and bottom-up approaches to nation-building and the possibilities for

both the iconic and the mundane in fostering the nation. This thesis also positions

itself to address certain lacunae in the ‘airports’ literature, particularly the tendency

for scholarship to privilege travellers over non-travellers, and to demonstrate how a

highly-mobile, globalised space like the airport can serve nation-building purposes.

Keywords: landscape, nation-building, national identity, mixed-methods, Singapore, Changi

Airport

2
 Table of Contents
ABSTRACT................................................................................................................................ 2
LIST OF TABLES........................................................................................................................ 6

LIST OF PLATES / FIGURES ...................................................................................................... 7

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ......................................................................................................... 9

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS......................................................................................................... 10

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 12

1.1 Point of Departure: Why Study Changi Airport?........................................... 12

1.2 Checking-in: Research Aims.............................................................................. 13

1.3 Thesis Outline ...................................................................................................... 14

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW & CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK ................................... 17

2.1 Preamble: Screening the Literature .................................................................. 17

2.2 Scanning the Airport .......................................................................................... 17

2.3 X-Raying the ‘Nation’ ......................................................................................... 18
2.3.1 Geographies & Landscapes of the ‘Nation’ .................................................... 20
2.3.2 Locating the ‘Nation’ in the Airport .............................................................. 22

2.4 Frisking the Singapore ‘Nation’ & Changi Airport ........................................ 23

2.4.1 Unpacking Singapore‘s Nation-Building ...................................................... 23
2.4.2 Understanding Changi Airport ..................................................................... 25

2.5 Conceptual Framework ...................................................................................... 27

2.6 Conclusion ........................................................................................................... 29

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................. 31

3.1 Preamble: Now Boarding ................................................................................... 31

3.2 Structured Questionnaire ................................................................................... 31

3.3 Semi-Structured Interviews ............................................................................... 33

3.4 Photography as Research Method .................................................................... 37

3.5 Content Analysis, Discourse Analysis & Netnography ................................ 38

3.6 Ethics & Positionality ......................................................................................... 42

3.7 Conclusion ........................................................................................................... 43
CHAPTER 4: PRODUCING THE NATION THROUGH CHANGI AIRPORT ............................. 46

4.1 Preamble: Take-off .............................................................................................. 46

3
 4.1.1 Changi as Top-Down Nation-Building Project ............................................. 46

4.2 Material Construction of the ‘Nation’............................................................... 49

4.2.1 Changi’s Material Spaces ............................................................................... 49
4.2.2 Control Tower as Icon .................................................................................... 54
4.2.3 Banal Nationalism: Travelling Landscape-Objects ........................................ 56

4.3 Discursive Construction of the ‘Nation’........................................................... 60

4.3.1 Government Speeches & Publications............................................................ 61

4.3.2 The Mass Media ............................................................................................. 63

4.3.3 The Internet & Social Media .......................................................................... 67

4.3.4 National Education: Aviation/Airport Learning Journeys ............................ 69

4.4 Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 72

CHAPTER 5: CONSUMING CHANGI AIRPORT AS NATION-BUILDING LANDSCAPE ......... 74

5.1 Preamble: Touchdown ........................................................................................ 74

5.1.1 General Sentiments of Respondents ............................................................... 74

5.1.2 Netnography of Changi’s Digital Spaces ....................................................... 77
5.2 Acceptance of Top-Down Impositions ............................................................. 79
5.2.1 Ideological Hegemony: Imbibing Government Discourse .............................. 79

5.2.2 Verification through Personal Experience ...................................................... 81

5.3 Alternative Representations: Bottom-Up Nation-Building ........................... 83
5.3.1 The Airport as ‘Home’ .................................................................................... 83

5.3.2 Childhood Shared Memories: Airport as Memoryscape ................................. 85

5.4 Nonchalance & Resistance ................................................................................. 87
5.4.1 Indifference: Airport as Simply Functional ................................................... 88

5.4.2 Voicing Displeasure: The Vocal Minority? .................................................... 89

5.5 Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 93

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION ................................................................................................... 96

6.1 Arrival: Revisiting Thesis Aims & Arguments ............................................... 96

6.2 Thesis Contributions ........................................................................................... 97

6.3 Implications & Future Directions ...................................................................... 98

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 100

APPENDIX A: STRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRE ................................................................... 112

APPENDIX B: STRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES ................................................ 116

4
APPENDIX C: AIDE-MEMOIRE FOR INTERVIEWS & AUTO-PHOTOGRAPHY ..................... 118

APPENDIX D: PARTICIPANT INFORMATION SHEET & CONSENT FORM .......................... 120

5
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1: Profile of Survey Respondents. ........................................................................ 33

Table 3.2: Profile of Interview & Auto-Photography Respondents.............................. 35
Table 3.3: Screenshots of Some Social Media Platforms Managed by Changi Airport
Group. ................................................................................................................................... 41
Table 4.1: Timeline of Changi Airport’s Operators. ....................................................... 47
Table 4.2: Open-Ended Questions on Impressions of Changi Airport. ....................... 50
Table 4.3: Open-Ended Question on People, Places & Things in Changi Airport. .... 51
Table 4.4: Close-Ended Question on Sources of News on Changi Airport. ................ 64
Table 4.5: Close-Ended Question on Types of News Seen on Changi Airport. .......... 65
Table 5.1: Likert-Scale Questions on National Identity.................................................. 75
Table 5.2: Likert-Scale Questions on Ideological Hegemony. ....................................... 80

6
 LIST OF PLATES / FIGURES

Cover: Photograph by Author of Changi Control Tower. ............................................. i

Figure 1.0: Photograph by Author of Entrance to Terminal 2 Departure Hall. ......... 11
Figure 2.0: Photograph by Pearl of Security Checkpoint in Terminal 1. ..................... 16
Figure 2.1: Conceptual Framework. ................................................................................. 28
Figure 3.0: Photograph by Author of Singapore Airlines Plane in Changi Airport. . 30
Figure 4.0: Photograph by Author of Plane Taking-Off from Changi Airport. ......... 45
Figure 4.1: Photograph by Author of National Day Decoration next to Hari Raya
Puasa (Ketupat) Decoration in Terminal 3. ..................................................................... 51
Figure 4.2: Photograph of Singapore Girl in Terminal 3. .............................................. 52
Figure 4.3: Photograph by Author of Kopitiam Bowl (Printed with ‘True Singapore
Taste’) in Terminal 3. .......................................................................................................... 52
Figure 4.4: Photograph by Author of Departure Hall (With Map of Singapore on
Right) in Terminal 3. ........................................................................................................... 53
Figure 4.5: Photograph by Ella of Greenery in Terminal 2 Transit Area. ................... 53
Figure 4.6: Photograph by Sue of Orchids in Terminal 1 Baggage Collection Area. . 53
Figure 4.7: Photograph of Changi Control Tower. ......................................................... 55
Figure 4.8: Advertisement in The Straits Times on National Day featuring Changi
Control Tower (Bottom-Left) Alongside Other Singapore Icons. ................................ 55
Figure 4.9: Photograph of Postcard of Changi Control Tower. .................................... 56
Figure 4.10: Postage Stamp of Changi Control Tower to Commemorate Changi
Airport’s Opening. .............................................................................................................. 57
Figure 4.11: Photograph by Author of ‘Inquring into Our World’ Social Studies
Textbook showcasing Changi Control Tower................................................................. 57
Figure 4.12: Photograph by Author of New 20-Cent Coin Embossed with Changi
Control Tower. .................................................................................................................... 58
Figure 4.13: Screenshot of Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) Website
Showing Old S$100 Banknote with Changi Airport Image. ......................................... 58
Figure 4.14: Photograph by Author of Chinese Medicinal Product Sold at Watsons in
Terminal 1. ........................................................................................................................... 59
Figure 4.15: Aviation-Related Article in The Straits Times by Karamjit Kaur,
Aviation Correspondent. ................................................................................................... 66
Figure 4.16: Photograph of Dark Clouds Looming over Changi Control Tower. ..... 66
Figure 4.17: Screenshot of Changi Airport’s Facebook Page on 8 November 2014. .. 68
Figure 4.18: Screenshot of Changi Airport’s Instagram Profile on 24 August 2014. . 68
Figure 4.19: Screenshot of Changi Airport’s Facebook Page on 9 August 2014. ........ 69
Figure 4.20: Photograph by Author of Changi Aviation Gallery’s Introduction. ...... 71
Figure 4.21: Photograph by Author of a Changi Aviation Gallery Exhibit. ............... 71
Figure 5.0: Photograph of Singapore Airlines Plane Approaching Changi................ 73

7
Figure 5.1: Article in The Straits Times on Changi Control Tower Voted as Top
Buildings ‘Sacred’ to Singaporeans................................................................................... 76
Figure 5.2: Photograph by Wayne of Changi Control Tower. ...................................... 76
Figure 5.3: Screenshot of Changi Airport’s Facebook Page on 16 July 2014. .............. 78
Figure 5.4: Screenshot of Changi Airport’s Instagram Profile on 17 November 2014.
................................................................................................................................................ 78
Figure 5.5: Photograph by Nathan of Atrium between Terminal 2 & MRT Station. . 82
Figure 5.6: Photograph by Sunny of ‘Flipboard’ in Terminal 2. ................................... 86
Figure 5.7: Screenshot of Post on SG Heart Map’s Website on 27 November 2014. .. 87
Figure 5.8: Screenshot of The Straits Times’ Facebook Page on 16 November 2014. . 91
Figure 5.9: Screenshot of The Straits Times’ Facebook Page on 19 December 2014. .. 92
Figure 6.0: Photograph by Author of Immigration at Arrival in Terminal 2. ............. 95

8
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AOHD: Archives and Oral History Department

CAAS: Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore

CAG: Changi Airport Group

DCA: Department of Civil Aviation

DG: Director-General (of CAAS)

LJ: Learning Journeys

MOE: Ministry of Education

NDR: National Day Rally

NE: National Education

NLB: National Library Board

PAP: People’s Action Party

PM: Prime Minister

SG50: Singapore’s 50th anniversary of independence

SIA: Singapore Airlines

ST: The Straits Times

9
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This was the first and last section that I wrote, to make sure I remember to thank
everyone who made this thesis possible. This yearlong journey (or flight) of research,
discovery, joy and anguish would not have been possible without the following:

My supervisor Dr Harvey Neo: my deepest gratitude for your helpful and prompt
guidance and encouragement. It has been great pleasure working with you. Hope to
have future opportunities to work with you!

My previous supervisor Dr Zhang JJ: thank you for starting me off on the thesis
journey, and all the best to you in University of Hong Kong.

Professors I have consulted during the idea conceptualisation phase in GE3240: A/P
Chang TC, Dr Jamie Gillen, A/P Elaine Ho, A/P Pow CP, Prof Jonathan Rigg, Prof
James Sidaway & Dr Woon Chih-Yuan. Not forgetting Prof K Raguraman from
Massachusetts Maritime Academy, and especially newly-minted Dr Lin Weiqiang:
thank you for advice and chit-chat on aviation (and aeromobilities)-related matters.

My secondary school Geography teacher Miss Esther Cheong: thank you for
longstanding support and encouragement; your guidance since Secondary 1 and
especially your mentorship for 3 years of Humanities Research Papers have been
immensely helpful. I won’t be where I am today without your guidance. Thank you
also for feedback on my draft!

My CAAS and CAG friends and colleagues, especially during my internship, for
support, background information & great times: Evelyn, Tuang Hin, Charmaine,
Yeu Shinq, Chao Han, Farah, Waner, Michelle, Werner, Wei Jim, Meaveen, Guan
Han, Christina, Shimin, Edmund, Zhao Dong & Yiran.

My survey, interview & auto-photography respondents (who must remain

anonymous): your contributions are deeply appreciated. Without your opinions, I
would not be able to write this thesis. Thank you also to those who helped with
snowballing/referring research participants.

My friends for encouragement and support (whether emotional, proofreading,

sharing or snowballing): Aisha, Aloysius, Andre, Andy, Brendan, Cheryl, Fang Yu,
Muhammad, Wei Xin, Wen Bin, William, Yang Yang, Yu Lin and many more,
including seniors Rachel, Rebecca & John. Not forgetting NUS SAVE members &
the Superputtie Gang!

My close & extended family: thank you for understanding and supporting me
through this challenging time.

I apologise if I inadvertently left anyone out. Thank you to everyone who played a
part in one way or another!

10
Figure 1.0: Photograph by Author of Entrance to Terminal 2 Departure Hall.

11
 CHAPTER 1:

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Point of Departure: Why Study Changi Airport?

To travel, send-off or pick-up people. To eat, shop or relax. To study, or

plane-spot. To work. Many Singaporeans visit Changi Airport for these myriad

reasons, singing its praises in the process (CAG, 2013a; Kishnani, 2002). Besides

being ‘world’s most awarded airport’ (CAG, 2014b), an achievement worthy of

pride, Changi was mooted as ‘sacred’ place important and ‘dear’ to Singaporeans

and their history (Ang, 2014; Zaccheus, 2014). Such suggestions are timely to

examine in light of Singapore’s 50th anniversary of independence 1 (SG50). How did

Changi become perceived or represented in this manner in the national imaginary?

Pride in Changi’s success story, inflected through one’s Singaporean identity,

becomes associated with Singapore’s success story, and the government’s role in

this success. Indeed, the government takes pride in Changi’s achievements, while

reminding Singaporeans to strive for continued success, for Changi’s and

Singapore’s future (Lee H. L., 2013). Project Jewel’s recent ground-breaking (Kaur,

2014b) bears testament to this commitment to extend Changi’s and Singapore’s

success, a reflection of Changi’s contribution to the nation’s economy.

1 https://www.singapore50.sg/.

12
 With Changi’s long-running success, Project Jewel and SG50 as backdrop,

this thesis examines the nexus between Changi and Singapore as a nation: how

Changi serves as landscape for nation-building, symbolising and developing

national identity, from the state’s and people’s perspectives.

To relate Changi to the idea of ‘nation’ may not come naturally to some.

While Changi is the national airport 2, the first thought associated with Changi is

probably ‘international’ or ‘global’. Yet as hinted earlier, the histories and futures of

Changi and Singapore as a nation are deeply intertwined. I argue that Changi is a

‘means of putting Singapore onto the global map… while still acting as a tool of

nation-building’ (Muzaini, 2013:39). Such an assertion will throw up more questions:

Can a putative ‘non-place’ (Augé, 1995) like the airport engender strong

identification and feelings? How can a contemporary site of globalisation par

excellence also promote national identity? Is it even still relevant to talk about

national identity in today’s globalised world (cf. Penrose, 2009)? Journeying through

this thesis will offer some answers to these questions.

1.2 Checking-in: Research Aims

This thesis aims to:

1. Investigate how the state has materially and discursively produced Changi

Airport as landscape for nation-building.

2 Only airport offering scheduled flights.

13
2. Explore how Changi Airport is perceived and used by Singaporeans, to

evaluate its consumption as landscape for nation-building.

1.3 Thesis Outline

In the spirit of the airport, this thesis’ flight-path shall mirror a passenger’s

journey from departure and check-in (this chapter), to security screening (Chapter 2),

boarding (Chapter 3), take-off (Chapter 4), landing (Chapter 5), and finally arrival

(Conclusion).

This chapter has outlined the motivations and context underpinning this

thesis, and stated the research aims. Chapter 2 examines existing research in

relevant fields, situating the thesis within this literature and identifying the research

gaps plugged. The conceptual framework, based on producing and consuming

Changi as nation-building landscape, is elucidated here. Chapter 3 elaborates on the

research methodology, based on mixed-methods research, and reflects on its

attendant issues and ethics and positionality.

Chapter 4, the first empirical chapter, unpacks the top-down nature of the

production of the nation-building landscape of Changi, analysing how the state

materially and discursively produces it. Subsequently Chapter 5 studies how this

nation-building landscape is perceived by Singaporeans, through assessing

receptivity to top-down approaches, proposing alternative bottom-up approaches to

nation-building, and flagging potential dissonances amongst some Singaporeans.

14
Chapter 6 summarises the thesis arguments and contributions while highlighting

implications and prospective directions.

15
Figure 2.0: Photograph by Pearl of Security Checkpoint in Terminal 1.

16
 CHAPTER 2:

LITERATURE REVIEW & CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

2.1 Preamble: Screening the Literature

Like the airport’s security screening, this chapter inspects key literature on

‘airport’ and ‘nation’, subsequently with reference to Singapore, to situate this thesis

in the literature and address identified research gaps. Given the vast literature, this

review is necessarily partial. Drawing upon various works, a conceptual framework

based on landscape studies is then proffered to structure this thesis.

2.2 Scanning the Airport

Traditionally, the literature on aviation and airports focused on economics,

management, planning and design, a focus that retains popularity today (e.g.

Graham, 2014; Hakfoort et al., 2001; O’Connor, 1995; Zukowsky, 1996). Concern

with airports’ sociocultural dimensions emerged in the 1990s, beginning with its

characterisations as ‘non-place’ (Augé, 1995) and ‘space of flows’ (Castells, 1996) in

the modern, mobile era of globalisation predominated by transient interactions

devoid of social relations. Since then, much research, especially post-9/11, arose to

debunk such conceptions.

17
 The airport’s social, cultural and political geographies (cf. Adey et al., 2007)

have been studied through different lenses like security (Adey, 2004; Salter, 2008),

technology (Dodge & Kitchin, 2004), architecture and design (Adey, 2007; Nikolaeva,

2012), and retail and consumption (Adey, 2010; Lloyd, 2003). These are sometimes

situated within the aeromobilities literature concerned with ‘how airspaces, from

the air to their related spatialities on the ground, are moved through’ and its effects

(cf. Adey, 2008:1319; Cwerner et al., 2009; Lin, 2013).

Taking up Adey et al.’s (2007:774) call to study the ‘social dimension of air

travel’, this thesis refutes Auge’s (1995) ‘non-place’ thesis and examines the

sociocultural ‘production and consumption of air[port] space’ by studying its

sociality and spatiality, particular the airport’s influence on national identities.

While literature relating aviation to identity and belonging exists (cf. Adey, 2006;

Fritzsche, 1992; Raguraman, 1997), I argue that opportunities remain to investigate

its intersections (Section 2.3.2).

2.3 X-Raying the ‘Nation’

The ‘nation’ is an important part of human life: while one hardly grapples

with it daily, it is nevertheless difficult to imagine contemporary life without

identifying with particular nations, in a world divided into national spaces. Broadly

defined, nations are communities sharing ‘certain cultural attributes and a particular

territory’ (Jones et al., 2004:83). Various theories explaining nationalism have been

proposed, with Anderson’s (2006) conceptualisation of nations as ‘imagined

18
communities’ and Billig’s (1995) ‘banal nationalism’ popular amongst geographers,

rooted in understandings of nations as socially constructed (cf. Edensor, 2002; Kong

& Yeoh, 2003). Importantly, ‘the space of the nation is… both “imagined” and

“lived”’ (Kong & Yeoh, 2003:9), while the nation and individual national identities

are always in the process of becoming, requiring reminders and reinforcements

(Billig, 1995; Edensor, 2009).

The related concept of ‘nation-building’ is understood as ‘development of all

aspects of political, social and economic systems of a society’, through developing

the state’s political institutions and socially constructing denizens’ national identity

to foster ‘loyalty to a communal identity’ (Barr, 2012:84; Penrose & Mole, 2008).

Penrose and Mole (2008) outline the processes of nation-building, which link the

state and its people through the nation. Successful nation-building amalgamates

two elements of ‘national identity’ (ibid.): creating cultural symbols identifying with

a nation, and internalising these symbols into the individual psyche, with a strong

national identity indicated by shared views and experiences of the nation. As

‘individuals perform the nation’, it is ‘reified’ (Penrose, 2009:227).

Talentino (2004:558) mentions nation-building’s shifting definition from ‘its

traditional meaning of creating nationhood… toward the concept of post-conflict

state construction’ 3. The former definition applies for Singapore, as a young nation-

state (Mutalib, 2010). She makes particular reference to top-down (state-led) vis-à-

vis bottom-up (community-led) approaches to nation-building. This reference to

3This change follows nation-building’s importance in reconstructing American-invaded

Afghanistan and Iraq post-9/11.

19
bottom-up approaches, I propose, cautions us against privileging top-down over

bottom-up approaches, as witnessed in some writings (cf. Barr, 2012; Gillen, 2014;

Mutalib, 2010), but to consider equal emphasis of both. Inattention to examining

bottom-up approaches or resistance indicates a neglect of how the nation-building

landscape is consumed (Winchester et al., 2003:33). Some studies do consider how

nation-building can be imagined bottom-up but perceive it as less powerful (e.g.

subtle resistance towards National Day Parades (NDP) in Kong & Yeoh, 1997).

2.3.1 Geographies & Landscapes of the ‘Nation’

Geographers’ interest in the ‘nation’ bloomed following Williams and

Smith’s (1983) seminal paper linking key geographical concepts like scale and

boundary to the ‘nation’ (cf. Jones & Fowler, 2007). Since then, geographers have

done much work to examine the ‘where’ of the ‘nation’, from grand landscapes to

everyday spaces (Edensor, 2002; 2009; Jones, 2008).

Kong and Yeoh (2003) argue for landscape’s critical role in constructing the

‘nation’ and national identity. The ‘new cultural geography’ approach of reading

landscape as text (Duncan, 1990), beginning from Cosgrove and Daniels (1988),

examined symbolic national landscapes (e.g. Lowenthal, 1991): how landscapes

‘picture the nation’ (Daniels, 1993:5), and how its attendant representations,

meanings and values can be ‘read in multiple ways’ (Bunnell, 2013:280). ‘The

landscape is differentially perceived and drawn upon by the state… and other social

groups with their own versions’ of the nation (Kong & Yeoh, 2003:15). Unequal

20
power relations are witnessed in and negotiated through multiple contested

representations of the national landscape: state-imposed ideals dominate and

become naturalised as ‘truths’ (ideological hegemony), vis-à-vis ordinary citizens’

reinterpretations and resistance in daily life (ibid.).

Today, studies of national landscapes proliferate in multiple sites from

national parks (Jazeel, 2005) and religious monuments (Sidorov, 2000) to routine

spaces like public housing (Kong & Yeoh, 2003). While non-representational theory

criticises textual and iconographic approaches to landscapes for overemphasising

representation, Bunnell (2013:281, emphasis original) reminds us that such

approaches ‘have long considered the effects as well as the meanings of landscapes’,

in this case appreciating how landscape representations produce national subjects.

More recently, Billig (1995) is referenced by geographers to examine ‘banal’

elements of nationalism or the ‘nation’ as lived experience, like banknotes (Penrose,

2011). Geographers have also adopted poststructuralist perspectives to examine the

nation’s discursive strategies (e.g. Bunnell, 2002), the performative ‘doing’ of

national identity (e.g. Wood, 2012) and how the ‘nation’ can be understood

relationally as constituted by places, people and things (Jones & Merriman, 2012).

Thus far, the literature only occasionally features or engages with airports as

spaces of national identity or nation-building. Such research is explored next.

21
2.3.2 Locating the ‘Nation’ in the Airport

In an era of globalisation, as nations become less insular and people

increasingly mobile, forging identities that connect people to place has
become more challenging than before.

(Muzaini, 2013:25)

In highly global, mobile spaces like airports (Fuller & Harley, 2010), it seems

counterintuitive to think about the ‘nation’, not to mention fostering nation-building

and national identity within such spaces. Historical investigations by Fritzsche (1992)

and Adey (2006; 2010) based on air-mindedness 4 show how national identity can be

fostered through the airport, despite it being a harbinger of mobility. In Nazi

Germany, airports like Berlin Tempelhof staged nationalistic air displays by the

Luftwaffe and rousing nationalistic speeches, symbolising the nation’s progress and

building the nation through nurturing pride and loyalty (Fritzsche, 1992; Pascoe,

2001). For Liverpool Speke airport, Adey (2006:347) describes ‘initial impetus for

British airport development [growing] from a context of nationalism and imperial

rivalry’, sparked by competition with Nazi Germany. Speeches by Liverpool’s

Mayor exalted involvement in the airport’s construction as displays of good

citizenship. While history is important to a nation, and such cases show the airport’s

importance to nation-building, does this dwelling on the past mean the airport

today cannot engender national identity?

More contemporarily, Lisle (2003:12) and Vainikka (2005) exemplify the

‘national and cultural symbols’ inhering within airports today (often for visitors’

4 Defined by Adey (2006:346) as ‘belief in [airplanes’] potential to better human life’.

22
consumption), like Singapore Airlines (SIA) stewardesses’ sarong kebaya uniform,

airports named after national heroes like Paris’ Charles de Gaulle, and nationalistic

trinkets sold in souvenirs shops like flag-emblazed T-shirts. Similarly Ferguson

(2014) explores sculptures in Bangkok Suvarnabhumi airport showcasing national

(Thai) historic epics based on Hindu mythology. Weiss (2010) scrutinises the ‘Seven

Species Garden’ in Israel’s Ben Gurion airport as landscape for symbolic expressions

of Zionist national identity that concurrently conceals the Arab minority’s presence.

Nevertheless, such present-day engagements in the literature remain few

and far between, with limited full-length investigation into the construction and

symbolisation of the ‘nation’ within airports. This thesis examines the present

context without forgetting the past, to investigate how a global airport like Changi

can symbolise and anchor national identity.

2.4 Frisking the Singapore ‘Nation’ & Changi Airport

2.4.1 Unpacking Singapore‘s Nation-Building

[Singapore’s] demographic diversity and recent statehood make it even

more challenging to forge a common sense of values, aspirations and
unity… This is why [Singapore] is a "state" but not yet a "nation" [with] a
strong and abiding sense of bonding and esprit de corps amongst the
people and loyalty to the country.

(Mutalib, 2010:61)

23
 Economic survival, for the PAP 5 government, is the basic premise for
everything, without which there would be no need to discuss national
identity.

(Chong, 2010:505)

The above quotes summarise how the government and perhaps many

Singaporeans view Singapore as a nation. The obsession with nation-building stems

from underlying insecurity over Singapore’s survival due to its youth and

heterogeneous population, with new threats arising from increasing migration

accompanying globalisation (Mutalib, 2010). With nation-building purposefully

directed at ensuring survival, the government became ‘the author of nationalism and

national identities in Singapore’ (Chong, 2010:505, emphasis original). Clearly,

Singapore’s case fits with modernist and constructivist theories of nationalism that

argue for the nation’s social construction as an ‘imagined community’ (Anderson,

2006; Kong & Yeoh, 2003). Henceforth, several tenets of state-led nation-building

emerged based on the ‘ideology of survival’ (Chong, 2010:507): pragmatism (e.g.

efficiency, excellence), the 5Ms (multiracialism, multiculturalism, multireligiousity,

multilingualism and meritocracy), and communitarianism (Kong & Yeoh, 2003;

Mutalib, 2010).

The ‘where’ and ‘how’ of Singapore’s nation-building warrants further

inquiry. While these nation-building ideologies manifested island-wide post-

independence (cf. Geh & Sharp, 2008:186 on Singapore’s greening; Lai, 2013:201 on

economic nation-building; Yeoh & Huang, 2008:201 on urban redevelopment), their

imprints are visible in specific sites and landscapes. Sometimes spectacle is used to

5 People’s Action Party, leading Singapore since 1959.

24
awe Singaporeans about the nation’s success (cf. Kong & Yeoh, 1997 on NDP; Phua,

n.d. on Marina Bay). Remembrance of national history is also mobilised in heritage

landscapes and museums (cf. Choo, 2012; Yeoh & Kong, 2012). Quotidian

landscapes like public housing and streets, seemingly taken-for-granted, make good

sites for everyday reminders of the nation (cf. Kong & Yeoh, 2003; Pow, 2013). While

Changi Airport has not been explicitly explored, Raguraman (1997) comes closest,

studying SIA’s contributions to nation-building.

While the hegemonic state adopts a strong top-down approach to

Singapore’s nation-building, there is possibility for resistance and bottom-up

contestation from ordinary Singaporeans. This can range from expressing

disapproval of pinyinisation of street names (Kong & Yeoh, 2003), to formulating

counter-proposals from ground-up, viz. the Nature Society’s fight to preserve Chek

Jawa (Geh & Sharp, 2008). But in examining how nation-building landscapes are

consumed, there is tendency to think dualistically, to romanticise resistance vis-à-vis

top-down imposition of ideologies (cf. ibid.), and neglect acceptance or indifference

(except Kong & Yeoh, 2003).

2.4.2 Understanding Changi Airport

Understanding Changi requires an appreciation of its place in

Singapore… few [airports] can claim to be icons amongst their own
people. To [Singaporeans], Changi is Singapore.

(Kishnani, 2002:13)

25
 Less than 20 years after Paya Lebar Airport opened, Changi Airport was

opened in 1981, responding to Singapore’s future air transport needs as Paya Lebar

had no room for expansion (Hutton, 1981). Changi was managed by the Civil

Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) 6 and subsequently Changi Airport Group

(CAG) (Table 4.1). Changi has a unique milieu, in a city-state highly reliant on

global trade for economic growth (CAAS, 2014). As the main international airport,

hub for five carriers, world’s sixth busiest and ‘most awarded airport’ (CAG, 2013a;

2014b), it contributes substantially to Singapore’s connectivity, competitiveness,

economy and reputation for excellence, efficiency and convenience. This makes

Changi indispensable to Singapore’s economic future, deeply intertwining Changi’s

fate with Singapore’s (Lee H. L., 2013).

Academic research on Changi has thus far been limited. Past explorations

include studying the transit area’s spatial and experiential design (Teo, 2004), the

viewing mall’s affective geographies (Lean, 2013), and Changi’s policy mobilities as

‘model airport’ (Bok, 2014:1). Discussions of Changi tend to privilege passengers,

especially foreigners (cf. Hutton, 1981; Teo, 2004), rarely recognising the

Singaporean public (except Kishnani, 2002; Lean, 2013). This marks another lacuna

ripe for this thesis’ exploration.

6 Formerly Department of Civil Aviation until 1984.

26
2.5 Conceptual Framework

How my thesis is positioned in the literature can be summarised as thus:

1. With some exceptions, airport scholarship, in Singapore or beyond, privileges

travellers over non-travellers (Ferguson, 2014) (Section 2.4.2). This thesis will

study both travellers’ and non-travellers’ experiences.

2. Airport scholarship often valorises historical approaches in examining the ‘nation’

in the airport, giving short shrift to contemporary context (Section 2.3.2). This thesis

shall study nation-building within Changi’s current context, to show how this

globalised space can serve ‘national’ purposes.

3. Literature on the ‘nation’ sometimes deem hegemonic or privilege top-down

approaches, without giving equal attention or sufficient power to bottom-up

approaches (Section 2.3). This thesis adopts a balanced approach towards top-

down and bottom-up.

This thesis will unpack the ‘where’ and ‘how’ of nation-building through

Changi as hitherto-unexplored nation-building landscape. I argue for evidence in

this landscape of concurrently iconic and mundane, top-down and bottom-up

approaches to nation-building, that perhaps make Changi unparalleled in

symbolising and developing national identity, albeit not without contestation.

‘Tying the nation to territory has often involved identifying a prototypical

landscape as representative of the collective identity’ (Agnew, 2013:140). In

identifying Changi as such a landscape, this thesis examines both the landscape’s

production and consumption, to consider the state’s dominant representations vis-à-

27
vis ordinary Singaporeans’ receptivity and alternative representations of Changi

and the ‘nation’. These representations can manifest materially and discursively.

This thesis’ conceptual framework (Figure 2.1) builds on Kong and Yeoh’s

(2003) work on Singapore’s nation-building landscapes: interlinked

material/physical and discursive/symbolic strategies producing the landscape,

through the state shaping material spaces and projecting certain ideologies and

discourses. The landscape thus ‘reflects the negotiation of power’ between the state

and its citizens (ibid.:14). It offers opportunities to explore nation-building from

bottom-up through alternative narratives, without forgetting other reactions like

approval, nonchalance or resistance. Notably, bottom-up nation-building by

ordinary Singaporeans through consuming the landscape also contributes to

landscape production.

Figure 2.1: Conceptual Framework.

28
 While recognising the merits of examining both the representational and

more-than-representational elements (cf. Bunnell, 2013) of the nation-building

landscape, this thesis consciously focuses on iconographic interpretation to explicate

dominant & alternative representations of Changi and Singapore, due to time

constraints and considering that limited work has been done thus far to study

representations of Changi as national icon and its potential effects.

2.6 Conclusion

Like the airport security screening, this chapter has scanned the literature on

airports and the ‘nation’, including in Singapore. This thesis aims to plug some

lacunae spotted in this literature, guided by the above conceptual framework.

The next chapter prepares for boarding by outlining the research methods,

methodological challenges, and ethical issues.

29
Figure 3.0: Photograph by Author of Singapore Airlines Plane in Changi Airport.

30
 CHAPTER 3:

METHODOLOGY

3.1 Preamble: Now Boarding

To prepare for take-off, this chapter elucidates the research methods used.

This thesis adopts a mixed-methods approach ‘collecting, analysing, and mixing

both quantitative and qualitative data’ for more holistic understandings (Creswell &

Plano Clark, 2006:5). Specifically, this reaps benefits of data triangulation, and

allows methods to complement each other (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011). For

instance, the survey and interview processes concurrently shape each other and are

adjusted iteratively; the questionnaire obtained broad trends and identified

potential interview topics, while interviews built on and elaborated survey

responses.

Each method’s approach, challenges and limitations are outlined below,

before broaching ethics and positionality.

3.2 Structured Questionnaire

The structured questionnaire examines Changi’s consumption as nation-

building landscape through general quantitative description of Singaporeans’ views

towards Changi. 101 citizens and Permanent Residents (PRs) (Table 3.1) were

31
surveyed face-to-face at Changi or online (Google Forms) from September to

November 2014. The survey was piloted to evaluate the questions and potential

responses. Interviewees were recruited through the survey for in-depth probing of

responses (Valentine, 2005), though few signed up. Attempts at quota sampling

(citizen/PR and age) failed due to difficulties in finding such respondents.

The questions (Appendix A) first examined respondents’ background with

relation to Changi before asking about feelings and news awareness about Changi.

Consequently respondents evaluated Changi on a Likert scale for various qualities

(selected through content analysis of past discourse 7), and reflected on Changi’s

people, places and things (cf. Jones & Merriman, 2012). Questions were arranged

purposefully to avoid leading respondents. Conscious of quantitative methods’

limitations in collecting data on opinions and feelings, a mix of open-ended and

Likert-scale questions were used to elicit unrestricted responses and intensity of

feelings respectively (Preston, 2009). Questions were phrased simply to reduce

attitude forcing and bias, while questionnaires with patterned 8 or contradictory

responses were voided (ibid; Parfitt, 2005). Cover letters informed participants

about my research and ethical issues.

While data collected (Appendix B) is not statistically representative, with

small sample size and non-probability (convenience) sampling method, the survey

nevertheless provided broad general perspectives of some Singaporeans, helped

recruit interviewees, and offered directions to adjust interview questions according

7 Including https://www.facebook.com/fansofchangi/posts/10152343909463598, which asked

‘What 3 adjectives would you use to describe Changi Airport?’
8 E.g. ticked 5 on Likert scale for every question.

32
to questionnaire responses. Results were analysed using descriptive statistics in

Microsoft Excel, especially for Likert scale questions (Green, 2010).

Age [n=101]
Age Range Number of Responses* Percentage of Responses
<20 13 12.9%
21-30 33 32.7%
31-40 13 12.9%
41-50 24 23.8%
51-60 16 15.8%
61< 2 2.0%
*About 59 respondents (58.4% of responses) were born during or after Changi
Airport was built (those aged <40).
Sex [n=101]
Sex Number of Responses Percentage of Responses
Male 48 47.5%
Female 53 52.5%
Nationality [n=101]
Status Number of Responses Percentage of Responses
Singaporean Citizen 94 93.1%
Singaporean PR 7 6.9%
Q1) Do you work at the airport currently? [n=101]
Status Number of Responses Percentage of Responses
Yes 6 5.9%
No 95 94.1%

Table 3.1: Profile of Survey Respondents.

3.3 Semi-Structured Interviews

12 airport staff and scholarship holders (current and former) and 22

Singaporean members of public (Table 3.2) were interviewed between September

and December 2014, recruited through the survey, personal contacts and

snowballing. Infrequent visitors to Changi were also sought to extend beyond

understandings from frequent fliers (cf. Adey, 2006). For confidentiality, ‘airport

staff’ and ‘scholarship holder’ were used to conceal organisational affiliations.

33
Interviewees perused and signed participation information sheets and consent

forms (Appendix D).

Current & Former Airport Staff & Scholars

Name* Age Sex Ethnicity Remarks*
Former airport staff
Casey 64 M Chinese (engineer, >10 years’
experience)
Charles^ 25 M Chinese Current airport staff
Former airport staff
Daniel 24 M Chinese
(executive)
Ella^ 23 F Chinese Current airport staff
Current airport staff,
Fauziah 26 F Malay previously scholarship
holder
Current airport staff, flies
Jacelyn 25 F Chinese
from airport twice weekly
Former intern, current
Jenny 22 F Chinese scholarship holder, future
airport staff
Current airport staff (>30
Quentin 57 M Chinese
years’ experience)
Samad 27 M Malay Current airport staff
Former airport staff
Shane 67 M Chinese (catering, blue-collar
job, >40 years’ experience)
Former airport staff
Siva 54 M Indian (contractor), flies from
airport monthly
Thomas 30 M Chinese Current airport staff
General Public
Name* Age Sex Ethnicity Remarks*
Andy^ 24 M Chinese Citizen
Citizen, regularly visits
Anthony^ 19 M Chinese
airport for plane-spotting
Citizen, currently living in
Athena 38 F Chinese
Australia for 5 years
Bill 54 M Chinese Citizen
Citizen, rarely visits
Bryan 44 M Chinese
airport˜
Citizen, flies from airport
Dawn 60 F Chinese
monthly
Hannah 33 F Chinese Citizen

34
 PR from China, spent 17
Irene^ 24 F Chinese
years in Singapore
Judy^ 24 F Chinese Citizen
Keith 31 M Chinese Citizen
Citizen, spent 14 years in
Kenneth 25 M Chinese
Malaysia & Australia
Citizen, rarely visits
Lloyd 24 M Chinese
airport˜
Nathan^ 24 M Chinese Citizen
Nurul 22 F Malay Citizen
Pearl^ 50 F Chinese Citizen
Indonesian- PR from Indonesia, spent
Ron 29 M
Chinese 7.5 years in Singapore
Shilla^ 40 F Malay Citizen
Stanley 22 M Chinese Citizen
Sue^ 52 F Chinese Citizen
Sunny^ 25 M Chinese Citizen
Wayne^ 26 M Chinese Citizen
Citizen, rarely visits
Zach 24 M Chinese
airport˜
*Pseudonyms were used and personal information kept vague to protect respondents’
privacy and ensure confidentiality.
^ denotes auto-photography participants.
˜ denotes respondents who visit the airport once a year or less.

Table 3.2: Profile of Interview & Auto-Photography Respondents.

Interviews were conducted at respondents’ convenience, including at Changi

for airport staff, or via email for those too busy or overseas. While email interviews

lack face-to-face interaction for observing visual cues and questions may be

answered inflexibly in set order given (contra ‘semi-structured’ approach), they also

offer benefits – interviewees may be more frank, like Nurul: ‘you will never catch

me saying something like that out loud’.

The questions (Appendix C) first approached Singapore as a nation broadly

before narrowing down to investigate feelings about Changi and national identity,

especially certain qualities highlighted in the discourse and questionnaire.

35
Subsequently, experiences and news awareness of Changi were probed. Questions

were sharpened iteratively with more interview experience, and tweaked and/or

added based on their positionality (e.g. PRs, being based overseas, or airport staff).

The sample’s preponderance of Chinese respondents aged 20-30 is a

methodological limitation, given time constraints and snowballing’s inherent

restrictions. Nonetheless, some effort was made to reach out to those of different

races and/or age groups. Additionally, the ethnic bias may be insignificant, given

Changi’s cosmopolitan multicultural image, as Nurul reflects:

My perception of the airport is that it is designed to cater and appeal to

all visitors, Singaporeans and tourists alike. Understanding that, my
ethnicity does not play a role in my experience of Changi.

Early attempts to interview CAG staff about intentions of Changi’s design

and operations for Singaporean users failed, precipitating my methodological re-

orientation towards using discourse analysis (Section 3.5) to examine Changi’s

production as nation-building landscape. Other sources were used to verify CAG’s

intentions, such as a televised interview (xinmsn, 2014) and magazine article (CAG,

2013b) that professed focusing its design and operations on passengers generally

rather than specific demographics of foreigners or locals, thus rendering CAG

interviews unnecessary.

36
3.4 Photography as Research Method

A two-prong approach to photography was adopted: personal visits to take

photographs in Changi (photo-documentation), and auto-photography by research

participants (photo-elicitation). Receiving increasing attention amongst geographers,

photographs make visible what words cannot: precise material field evidence for

analysis (Goh, 2014; Rose, 2007), and aid memory recollection during interviews.

Given the above benefits, the visual’s importance in daily life, and its significance in

contemporary culture (Rose, 2014), the value of photography in my research

becomes enhanced, especially since the visual is deeply implicated in nation-

building (Edensor, 2002).

12 respondents (10 ordinary Singaporeans, 2 airport staff) (Table 3.2)

participated in auto-photography before the semi-structured interview. Hitherto-

underexplored in research (Lombard, 2013), auto-photography is photography by

participants, ‘to see the world through [their] eyes’ (Thomas, 2009:244) and allow

knowledge co-production with participants (Goh, 2014). Here, participants

photographed people, places or things in Changi meaningful to them as

Singaporeans. Photograph quality is less important than its underlying motives for

selection and meanings behind them (Lombard, 2013), hence participants were

tasked (Appendices C & D) to consider why their photographs were taken, for

explanation during the interview.

Auto-photography permits ‘exploring the taken-for-granted things’ in

participants’ lives as Singaporeans, facilitating observation and reflection on the

37
banal and mundane ‘flagging’ in daily life (Billig, 1995; Rose, 2014:28). It allows

subjective interpretations about what, where and how they see and perceive the

nation, opening up multiple meanings and interpretations (cf. Lombard, 2012; Rose

2014). However auto-photography may preclude ‘non-technologically savvy’

participants (Goh, 2014:24). Contra Rose (2014), recruiting for auto-photography was

challenging despite the task’s ease, as it was seen as extraneous, time-consuming

work. To minimise inconveniencing participants, they could take photographs only

when convenient, and could use smartphone cameras (given its ubiquitous

ownership) instead of normal cameras.

Similarly, when personally taking photographs in Changi, I observed,

captured and interpreted (Rose, 2007) the space’s use and design, and the people,

places and things relevant to national identity. Photography was conducted over

several visits plus during my internship with CAAS (Section 3.6).

3.5 Content Analysis, Discourse Analysis & Netnography

Analysis was conducted to interpret primary and secondary sources,

including print and non-print resources, photographs and social media platforms.

Content analysis entailed reading and coding text and images to infer the

creators, messages and its intended audiences, through highlighting the context and

frequency of occurrence of key terms (codes) (Baxter, 2009). Discourse analysis is

similar but, drawing on Foucault, further unpacks ‘taken-for-granted and… hidden

38
frameworks of ideas that structure both knowledge and social practice’, which can

be mobilised by the powerful to hegemonically constitute reality (Berg, 2009:215).

Thus, discourse analysis examines contexts, assumptions, language, subject

positioning, regimes of truth, inconsistencies, and silences (ibid; Cox, 2014). Both

analyses are important since government policies are textual and discourse-

constituted, and discourses can be manipulated for ideological purposes to

construct particular ‘truths’, position subjects in certain ways and hence materially

impact individuals (Koh, 2010).

Text and images online are amenable to observation, content and discourse

analysis. Sites explored include corporate websites (e.g. CAAS 9, CAG 10) and social

media platforms (Table 3.3) used by relevant organisations and many Singaporeans.

Screenshots are captured and specific comments excerpted where appropriate.

Facebook https://www.facebook.com/fansofchangi

9 http://www.caas.gov.sg/caas/en/index.html.
10 http://www.changiairportgroup.com/cag/index.html.

39
Instagram http://instagram.com/fansofchangi/

Twitter https://twitter.com/fansofchangi

YouTube https://www.youtube.com/user/FansOfChangi

40
Table 3.3: Screenshots of Some Social Media Platforms Managed by Changi Airport

Group.

[Source: http://www.changiairport.com/social]

Studying the Internet is imperative given its increasing use by governments

and firms to ‘communicate influential discourses’ (Burns & Cowlishaw, 2014:750)

and by individuals to access such discourses and for communication. As social

worlds go digital, research must follow, to conduct ‘Netnography’ or online

ethnography (Kozinets, 2010). Particularly with social media’s advent, there is

opportunity to re-examine the (everyday) production and consumption of nation-

building landscapes in the Internet age (which past research could not, e.g. Kong &

Yeoh, 2003), and easily access previously-unreachable voices of ordinary

Singaporeans. Hence its value lies in providing entrée to everyday, unvarnished

user-generated content (Burns & Cowlishaw, 2014), especially helpful in unearthing

resistance to Changi as nation-building landscape, since research participants may

be coy, unwilling to be critical.

Limitations do exist however. The trustworthiness and representativeness of

online comments are particularly difficult to verify. Their provenances are also hard

to corroborate, especially since I want Singaporean rather than foreigners’ voices. I

attempted to verify (national) identities by viewing commenters’ profiles. Lastly, the

voices of those who are not Net-savvy or technologically-savvy may be elided.

Therefore data triangulation is important, to verify online information.

41
3.6 Ethics & Positionality

Problematising my positionality proffers insight into some ethical and

methodological issues. Being a CAAS scholarship holder 11, with internship stints at

Changi and bond obligations, serves as double-edged sword. Theoretically, I could

leverage my insider position to access gatekeepers and information other

researchers cannot access, presenting opportunities for new perspectives, but

obtained unfairly. In reality, I had limited leverage with CAAS or CAG, while

information gleaned from CAAS only provided background context. More

significantly, as prospective colleague to some airport staff respondents, knowing

my positionality could affect what they tell me, but non-disclosure would amount to

dishonesty. I faced similar conundrums with ordinary Singaporean respondents,

with my positionality as future public servant heightening the power asymmetry

between researcher and researched (Valentine, 2005). Respondents may speak in

politically-correct terms and not divulge dissent. To avoid influencing their

responses, I did not disclose my positionality as CAAS scholar, but sought to ensure

confidentiality and privacy by anonymising responses, using pseudonyms and not

divulging identifying information (cf. Table 3.2). Information sheets and consent

forms were issued and signed, and permission sought to audio-record interviews

for transcribing.

My affiliation poses other disadvantages and benefits. Being a government

scholar and future public servant may have restricted my ability to speak or think

critically about government policy or discourse (Koh, 2010). Yet my internship

11 http://www.caas.gov.sg/caas/en/About_CAAS/Scholarships/?__locale=en.

42
experience offered potential rapport with airport staff during interviews, allowing

‘rich, detailed conversation[s] based on… mutual respect and understanding’

(Valentine, 2005:113). Thus I appreciate how my positioning inflects and is

embedded in my landscape analysis, and how I am concurrently representing the

landscape while studying its representations (Morin, 2009).

Other ethical matters include consent for photograph reproduction (Rose,

2007), and anonymity in Netnography (Kozinets, 2010). Explicit permission was

sought to reproduce photographs from auto-photography participants and friends

who shared additional photographs (e.g. Figure 4.9), to avoid exploitation (Lombard,

2012). Whether to divulge or censor identities of those who make online posts in the

public domain is prickly. Ultimately, despite the sensitive (anti-government) nature

of some posts, I did not censor names to allow verifiability of comments, and also

since their posts were on a public page accessible to all. The risks of repercussion of

publishing such comments were deemed low, given the many anti-government

comments online without facing government retribution.

3.7 Conclusion

Notwithstanding the limitations and challenges flagged earlier, they do not

overshadow my thesis’ potential contributions to the literature and discipline. A

mixed-methods approach considers and triangulates diverse data sources,

permitting interrogation of multifarious means of producing and consuming the

nation-building landscape in Changi. Newer methods like Netnography and auto-

43
photography offer new data on nation-building and airport studies, emphasising

the visual and digital nature of the contemporary world. My unique positionality

provides opportunities balanced by trade-offs, requiring skilful and sensitive

navigation in the research process.

With boarding completed, this flight is ready for take-off.

44
Figure 4.0: Photograph by Author of Plane Taking-Off from Changi Airport.

45
 CHAPTER 4:

PRODUCING THE NATION THROUGH CHANGI AIRPORT

4.1 Preamble: Take-off

How does Changi Airport as nation-building landscape take flight? This

chapter dissects its production via largely top-down discourses and strategies in

inter-related material and symbolic ways, as piloted by the state. In the process,

certain values and ideals are naturalised and concretised in the landscape,

constructing the ‘nation’ in particular ways to achieve ideological hegemony and

political legitimacy (Kong & Yeoh, 2003).

4.1.1 Changi as Top-Down Nation-Building Project

Changi’s production as nation-building landscape is largely state-led,

significantly by the state-owned airport operator (Table 4.1), indicating the

government’s indispensable role in shaping Changi. While CAG manages the

airport today, CAAS previously managed it and remains important in shaping

policies that boost Changi as air hub (CAAS, 2014).

Years Airport Operator Status

1981 – August Department of Civil Operator since opening of Changi
1984 Aviation (DCA) Airport till formation of CAAS

46
September 1984 – Civil Aviation AuthorityStatutory board formed from DCA
June 2009 of Singapore (CAAS) under Ministry of Transport
Corporatised 12 entity formed from
July 2009 – Changi Airport Group
restructuring of CAAS*; CAAS
present (CAG)
becomes regulatory authority
*See CAG (2014c) for differences between CAAS & CAG since corporatisation.

Table 4.1: Timeline of Changi Airport’s Operators.

[Sources: compiled from CAG (2014c); Kaur (2007); NLB (2014)]

While former CAAS Chairman Sim Kee Boon declares ‘the Changi

philosophy is built around the passenger’, Singaporeans were not forgotten as

stakeholders in Changi, in expressing desire to inspire pride among them:

We wanted something that Singaporeans could be proud of – not only

visually but also in its operations.

(Kishnani, 2002:49, emphasis added)

Indeed, CAAS’ pre-corporatisation Mission tellingly signals the importance of

Singaporean stakeholders in Changi:

To connect Singapore to the world and make aviation a key contributor to

the success of our nation.

(Cheong, 2006:5, emphasis added)

Changi’s importance to Singapore’s success, through economic contributions 13 and

global reputation 14, facilitates nation-building through economic development (cf.

Chow, 2000).

12 Government-owned but private sector practices like pay-setting (Kaur, 2007).

13 Air connections, and 5.4% of Singapore’s GDP in 2009 (Oxford Economics, 2011).
14 As ‘world’s most awarded airport’ (CAG, 2014b).

47
 Subsequently, Changi’s ability to arouse pride makes it amenable to top-

down attempts to imagine and produce the nation through Changi, as reflected in

former CAAS Director-General (DG) Lim Hock San’s words:

Changi evokes a certain pride in Singaporeans and therefore, it has

become an icon… Always at the back of our minds is the question: ‘what
would Singaporeans want this building to be?’… Changi says that we
Singaporeans are pragmatic and yet warm.

(Kishnani, 2002:72-73, emphasis added)

As a form of ‘civic nationalism’ (Koh, 2010:63), pride in Changi’s iconic status and

economic contributions allows projection of values through Changi that putatively

reflects what Singapore stands for, thus leveraging Singaporeans’ embrace of

Changi to naturalise values like pragmatism and good service. This declaration of

what Changi says about Singapore demonstrates top-down attempts to imagine and

construct the nation through Changi.

This chapter now explores how Changi is produced as nation-building

landscape, i.e. how nation-building through Changi is achieved. I argue for a two-

prong interdependent approach (Edensor, 2002) through material (people, places,

things, and their symbolism) and discursive (media and education) strategies.

48
4.2 Material Construction of the ‘Nation’

4.2.1 Changi’s Material Spaces

Within the terminal buildings used by most Singaporeans, the people, places,

things and designs can symbolise and develop national identity, intentionally or

otherwise. Physical constructions can also be discursively constructed and evoke

symbolic meaning. While Changi was designed with passengers in mind, ex-DG

Lim also notes:

An airport design is a reflection of its country’s culture. It reflects the

way a country thinks.

(Kishnani, 2002:72)

As Lim’s quote in Section 4.1.1 attests, Changi was designed to be functional and

warm, in hardware and software (ibid.:48-49): a simple, pragmatic and easily-

navigable interior (Southeast Asia Building Materials & Equipment, 1981)

emphasising efficiency and the human touch in passenger interactions. Users,

Singaporean or otherwise, would feel this Changi Experience, which includes

prompt feedback channels and even clean toilets (CAG, 2010). This is not unnoticed

by survey respondents (Table 4.2) picking out qualities they felt Changi possessed.

Some qualities, like cleanliness (Hussain, 2013; NLB, 2012) and efficiency (Lee J. X.,

2013), are displayed in material spaces through infrastructural design and service

staff performance, and are buzzwords for the government as desirable traits

Singaporeans should emulate. Through experiencing Changi, Singaporeans would

plausibly acquire these model qualities, reinforced by government discourse

(Section 4.3). Changi hence ‘stages’ the nation, creating Singaporean experiences for

49
tourists and locals (Edensor, 2002) and serving as a pedagogic site to promote ideal

national values (Adey, 2007).

Q5) When thinking about Changi Airport, what are the first 3 feelings that come
to mind? [n=101]
Q6) When visiting Changi Airport, what are the most common 3 feelings that you
experience? [n=101]
Number of Responses^
Characteristics* Sample Responses
Q5 Q6
Clean 30 16 ‘Clean toilets’
9 2 ‘要什么有什么’ (Can easily
Convenient
get what you want)
Easy to navigate / 15 4 ‘Ease of traveling in and out
Organised of the airport’
15 5 ‘Efficient check in, efficient
Efficient
immigration clearance’
Safe 6 6 -
*Similar answers were categorised together.
^Duplicated responses for Q5 & Q6 were counted for only either question.

Table 4.2: Open-Ended Questions on Impressions of Changi Airport.

Meanwhile, many people, places and things that respondents regarded

(Table 4.3) as iconic of Singapore and symbolising national identity are found inside

the terminal, like orchids, local food and the Singapore Girl (cf. Lisle, 2003).

Particularly for the Singapore Girl, they express national identity through their

ethnic uniforms, both embodying and performing the nation (Edensor, 2002). On

special occasions like National Day, the airport is also specially decorated (Figure

4.1). Decorations within Changi are designed for passenger consumption by CAG’s

Experience Creation team (CAG, 2013b), but importantly, Singaporeans are not

precluded from consuming these national symbols meant for (foreign) passengers.

Thus, in many ways Changi’s material spaces can produce an iconic landscape for

nation-building.

50
 Q10) What places, people or things in Changi Airport best symbolise national /
Singaporean identity? [n=100]
Number of
People / Places / Things* Sample Responses
Responses^
Control tower
33 ‘Iconic control tower’
(Section 4.2.2)
Singapore Airlines /
Singapore Girl (stewardess
19 -
in sarong kebaya uniform)
(Figure 4.2)
Local food / food court ‘Kopitiam’, ‘The Curry Times by
17
(Figure 4.3) Old Chang Kee’, ‘Bee Cheng Hiang’
‘Entire terminal facade, both
Terminal building
15 landside and airside - symbolises
(Figure 4.4)
Singapore as a clean and green city’
Flowers / greenery
8 ‘Lush greenery almost everywhere’
(Figure 4.5)
Orchids
7 ‘卓锦万代兰’ (Vanda Miss Joaquim)
(Figure 4.6)
*Similar answers were categorised together
^Ranked in descending order

Table 4.3: Open-Ended Question on People, Places & Things in Changi Airport.

Figure 4.1: Photograph by Author of National Day Decoration next to Hari Raya

Puasa (Ketupat) Decoration in Terminal 3.

51
 Figure 4.2: Photograph of Singapore Girl in Terminal 3.

[Source: http://www.photoree.com/photos/permalink/11524592-51048079@N00]

Figure 4.3: Photograph by Author of Kopitiam Bowl (Printed with ‘True Singapore

Taste’) in Terminal 3.

52
Figure 4.4: Photograph by Author of Departure Hall (With Map of Singapore on

Right) in Terminal 3.

Figure 4.5: Photograph by Ella of Greenery in Terminal 2 Transit Area.

Figure 4.6: Photograph by Sue of Orchids in Terminal 1 Baggage Collection Area.

53
4.2.2 Control Tower as Icon

The control tower (Figure 4.7) was recognised by most survey respondents

as symbolising national identity (Table 4.3). Changi’s evergreen landmark was

designed to stand out while remaining functional, says ex-Chairman Sim:

All of us wanted a unique product that would be different from the run-
of-the-mill airports at that time. For instance, there is no control tower
like this in the world. It is functional & at the same time striking – an
icon shaped like a sceptre.

(Kishnani, 2002:49)

The tower’s distinctive design, its subsequent use as synecdoche for Changi,

and its replication across various media (e.g. Figures 4.8, 5.1, 5.4) (Section 4.3.2) and

objects (Section 4.2.3) reinforce the image of Changi in Singaporeans, such that

every time they see the tower, they are reminded of Changi and its positive qualities

and memories. While the tower is a material landmark, its effect on Singaporeans is

discursive and symbolic – it becomes a symbol with ‘shared meanings and

memories… [inviting] personal allegiance to it’ (Penrose & Mole, 2008:275-276),

therefore becoming a recognisable symbol and synecdoche for Singapore (Edensor,

2002). Changi’s positive qualities can be distilled into the tower as icon and

generalised to the nation, for promotion as ‘embodying [the nation’s] essential

qualities’ (Cosgrove, 2006:56). Nation-building is enabled through Singaporeans

seeing the tower and identifying it with Changi’s positive qualities and feelings of

home and belonging.

54
 Figure 4.7: Photograph of Changi Control Tower.

[Source: with permission of Andre Giam]

Figure 4.8: Advertisement in The Straits Times on National Day featuring Changi

Control Tower (Bottom-Left) Alongside Other Singapore Icons.

[Source: The Straits Times, 9 August 2014, National Day Special page 15]

55
4.2.3 Banal Nationalism: Travelling Landscape-Objects

The control tower’s nation-building capabilities are not restricted to seeing it

at Changi, but also through objects imprinted with its likeness, like postcards

(Figure 4.9), stamps (Figure 4.10), textbooks (Figure 4.11), currency (Figures 4.12 &

4.13) and even medicinal products (Figure 4.14). The tower permeates ubiquitously

in Singaporeans’ daily lives.

Figure 4.9: Photograph of Postcard of Changi Control Tower.

[Source: with permission of Yang Yang, taken at National Stamp Collecting Competition on

31 August 2014]

56
Figure 4.10: Postage Stamp of Changi Control Tower to Commemorate Changi

Airport’s Opening.

[Source: DCA & AOHD (1982:13)]

Figure 4.11: Photograph by Author of ‘Inquring into Our World’ Social Studies

Textbook showcasing Changi Control Tower.

57
 Figure 4.12: Photograph by Author of New 20-Cent Coin 15 Embossed with Changi

Control Tower.

Figure 4.13: Screenshot of Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) Website

Showing Old S$100 Banknote with Changi Airport Image.

[Source: http://www.mas.gov.sg/Currency/Circulation-

Currency/Notes.aspx#pagecontent_0_currency_repeater_carousel_2_0_1_details_repeater_1

_dialog_4]

15 http://www.mas.gov.sg/newcoins/Coin-Details/Twenty-Cent.

58
 Figure 4.14: Photograph by Author of Chinese Medicinal Product Sold at Watsons

in Terminal 1.

These objects become ‘traveling landscape-objects: graphic representations

[of Changi] embedded in different material… which physically move through space

and time’, serving as media to circulate place to shape geographical imaginations

and symbolise national identity (della Dora, 2009:334). Beyond ‘visual texts’, such

landscape representations are ‘material objects with performative qualities or

agency [that] travel around’ (Bunnell, 2013:283). Changi’s nation-building landscape

extends beyond its spatial confines to become imbued into circulating objects used

daily – yet another form of banal nationalism (Billig, 1995). Especially for coins,

banknotes and stamps, past research shows how the state introduced ‘iconography

designed to bolster national identities’ to construct ‘a sense of collective tradition

59
and memory’ (Penrose & Cumming, 2011:822), in this case to transmit and remind

Singaporean users of these objects about Changi’s and correspondingly the nation’s

ideals and shared memories (Hammett, 2014). Such objects allow the experience of

nation-building landscapes at a distance (cf. Bunnell, 2013) and ‘reify [the] imagined

national community’, who ‘[identify] with the images of the nation-state that it

promotes’ (Penrose, 2011: 429). The taken-for-grantedness of such mundane objects

belies their symbolism and nation-building abilities.

4.3 Discursive Construction of the ‘Nation’

The airport is not an important part of life, for many spending little time

there (Gottdeiner, 2001). Hence, discursive means complement material means

(intertwined with symbolic means) to construct the nation, working together to

produce Changi in certain ways to symbolise the nation. Discursive constructions

are especially useful to mould perceptions of sporadic visitors; they also buttress

material constructions to shape regular users’ views. Ideological hegemony is

important here, to persuade Singaporeans of ‘natural’ and ‘common-sense’ ideals

portrayed through Changi (Kong & Yeoh, 2003:12). Changi is particularly construed

as economically critical and showcasing Singapore’s best values like pragmatism,

pursuing excellence etc. Such discourse can shape Singaporeans’ ‘rationality and

disposition’ to define the nation in specific ways (Koh, 2010:66).

60
4.3.1 Government Speeches & Publications

Unpacking government discourse unveils its views about Changi’s place in

the nation – as vital to and symbol of Singapore, contributing to nation-building –

and helps reveal the ‘regime of truth’ (cf. Koh, 2010) constructed about Changi and

Singapore. Such discourse can include speeches (subsequently reported in mass

media) and publications.

While Section 4.1.1 highlighted examples of government discourse by CAAS

officials, here I inspect Changi’s discursive constructions epitomised in Prime

Minister (PM) Lee Hsien Loong’s National Day Rally (NDR) 2013. Broadcasted live

after National Day annually, this speech by the ‘embodiment and symbol of the

government’ (Koh, 2010:111) is arguably the state’s most important discourse 16

serving ideological purposes, ‘as a motivational and agenda-setting exercise’ and

‘platform for announcing and justifying major policy changes’ (Tan, 2007:293). In

2013, he specifically extolled Changi’s virtues and significance before premiering

plans to upgrade Changi to maintain its assets to Singapore. He begins by asserting

Changi’s place in Singapore:

What is Changi Airport? To travellers, an icon of Singapore. To

Singaporeans, a welcome landmark telling us that we have arrived
home. To me it is a part of the Singapore identity, a symbol of renewal
and change… But Changi Airport is more than an emotional symbol. It
is how the world comes to Singapore and how Singaporeans connect
with the world… We have Changi Airport today because in the 1970s, 40
years ago, Mr Lee Kuan Yew had the vision to imagine the old RAF
Changi Airbase becoming an international airport to replace Paya Lebar.

(Lee H. L., 2013)

16 Comparable to US State of the Union Address (Tan, 2007).

61
Changi’s economic and symbolic importance is exalted, which he attributes to the

government’s pragmatic foresight in pushing for Changi’s development. At once he

validates Changi’s and the government’s role in Singapore’s progress and nation-

building. He then leverages this to justify upgrading Changi for Singapore’s future:

Do we want to stay this vibrant hub of Southeast Asia or… let somebody
take over our position, our business and our jobs? …We have to plan
ahead and continually build up Changi. And we have plans to do so…
We are going to replace [the Terminal 1 carpark] with what we have
codenamed “Project Jewel”… [It is] not just for visitors but for
Singaporeans too – families on Sunday outings, students maybe
studying for exams… These are very ambitious, long-term plans. It is an
example of how we need to think and plan for our future. And it reflects
our fundamental mindset and spirit – to be confident, to look ahead, to
aim high.

Grounding Project Jewel’s development in planning for Changi’s (and Singapore’s)

future, he again demonstrates the government’s farsightedness and ingenuity,

which he associates with Singaporean qualities of foresight and pursuing excellence.

And ordinary Singaporeans are not forgotten since they can also use Project Jewel.

Besides speeches like NDR, government (e.g. CAAS, 1991; Cheong, 2006)

and government-sanctioned publications (e.g. Kishnani, 2002) also demonstrate

similar attempts to emplace Changi’s role in Singapore and use Changi to symbolise

national characteristics and identity. For example, peppered throughout Cheong

(2006) are reminders of Changi’s importance linked to declarations of its ideal

qualities that Singaporeans should embody:

International recognition of Changi has enhanced Singapore’s

reputation for excellence. For many Singaporeans, in a country where
the cityscape is constantly changing, Changi Control Tower remains an
affective anchor, immediately recognisable as a source of pride.

62
 (then-Transport Minister Raymond Lim, in Cheong, 2006:11)

The strength of Changi is really the strength of Singapore… Travellers

see Changi before the rest of the country, so Changi Airport has to be
representative of Singapore and where we aspire to be. Changi Airport
cannot lag behind our national aspirations… If Changi is… a showcase
to the world, but not a showcase of excellence, I think we’ve failed to
reflect the psyche and aspirations of Singapore.

(ex-Transport Minister Yeo Cheow Tong, in ibid.:14,16)

Changi becomes discursively represented as nation-building landscape: in

contributing to Singapore’s economic success, defining certain superlative

characteristics as Singaporean, and engendering feelings of pride and belonging.

4.3.2 The Mass Media

It is often through media that national identities are both created and
consumed. One may even say it is through media that nations are built.

(Barr, 2012:86)

Anderson (2006) highlights how the media moulds the imagined community:

creating shared rapport and national consciousness, and defining this community’s

preferred character (Barr, 2012; Penrose & Mole, 2008). Singapore’s mass media

arguably plays a similar role, to advocate government policy and promote national

identity, underpinned by government regulations on reporting and control through

government-linked firms (cf. Bokhorst-Heng, 2002; Koh, 2005; Ortmann, 2009). Thus

its role in discursively constructing Changi as nation-building landscape is crucial,

through disseminating government discourse and portraying Changi in positive

light to maintain national awareness and pride. Indeed, many survey respondents

63
claimed encountering news on Changi from mass media platforms like print and

broadcast media (Table 4.4), indicating the importance of scrutinising their role.

Q7) From which avenues do you encounter or find out news (of any kind) about
Changi Airport? [n=100]
Avenues Number of responses Percentage of responses
Print media 68 68.0%
Television or radio 57 57.0%
Online news or websites 47 47.0%
Facebook 28 28.0%
Twitter 9 9.0%
YouTube 6 6.0%
Instagram 8 8.0%
Word of mouth 29 29.0%
I don’t encounter news on
11 11.0%
Changi Airport

Table 4.4: Close-Ended Question on Sources of News on Changi Airport.

The media’s importance lies beyond dissemination of government discourse,

like NDR’s (Section 4.3.1) transmission through live broadcasts on television and

radio, and print and digital coverage (AsiaOne, 2014). Its prioritised publication of

positive news on Changi also helps to create good impressions of Changi that

cement ideas of Changi’s contributions to Singapore’s economy and reputation. This

was noted by interviewee Keith:

[I recall] seeing mostly positive news on Changi, about its rankings. Is it

meant to be so? To create a sense of pride in Changi? That seems to be
all I remember… The last article I read was about a several hours delay
for a budget airline due to change in baggage handlers, but the focus
was on the airline rather than Changi, diverting negative attention away
from the airport.

The survey results corroborate Keith’s views (Table 4.5), showing strong awareness

of good news about Changi and limited knowledge of bad news.

64
 Q8) What kind of news have you encountered about Changi Airport? [n=87]
Number of Percentage of
Types of news*
responses responses
Positive news stories (e.g. “Changi Airport soars
86 98.9%
high in global survey”)
Negative news stories (e.g. “Customer satisfaction
22 25.3%
falls 12 per cent at Changi Airport”)
Neutral news stories (e.g. “Changi Airport handled
52 59.8%
4.58m passengers in July”)
*Real news headlines used to exemplify each type of news.

Table 4.5: Close-Ended Question on Types of News Seen on Changi Airport.

While media reporting on Changi might be balanced, the supposed selective

coverage of news on Changi seems borne out by observing news placements. For

instance, The Straits Times (ST) on 3 November featured on its front page the

awarding of contracts for building Project Jewel (Kaur, 2014a), while deeper in

(page A6) was negative news Keith mentioned on Changi’s newest ground handler

(Kaur, 2014c). Also, ‘aviation correspondents’ (Figure 4.15) are important in focused

reporting on Changi-related news. Particularly for ST, Karamjit Kaur is a key

reporter of such news (positive, negative and neutral), and also pens opinion pieces

on Changi’s future (cf. Kaur, 2014d). Monthly updates of Changi’s performance

remind Singaporeans of Changi’s economic importance (cf. Kaur, 2013a; 2013b).

Even negative news articles (cf. Kaur, 2014d) serve as warnings about complacency,

further emphasising Changi’s importance to Singapore:

With growing customer expectations, Changi… must continue to up

their game and invest in new initiatives, products and technology.

The photographs published also matter: dark clouds looming threateningly over

Changi accompanies Kaur’s article (Figure 4.16), conveying her worries to readers

and buttressing the control tower’s image in the national imaginary (Section 4.2.2).

65
 Figure 4.15: Aviation-Related Article in The Straits Times by Karamjit Kaur,

Aviation Correspondent.

[Source: The Straits Times, 7 January 2015, page A6]

Figure 4.16: Photograph of Dark Clouds Looming over Changi Control Tower.

[Source: http://news.asiaone.com/news/relax/situation-changi-airport-likely-worsen-it-gets-

better]

66
4.3.3 The Internet & Social Media

Extending Anderson’s (2006) thesis of mass media’s role in nation-building,

the Internet operates like traditional mass media in creating ‘imagined communities’

(Tynes, 2007; Uimonen, 2003). Singapore’s high Internet and social media

penetration (Huang, 2014) makes digital spaces fertile terrain for the state to

discursively construct Changi as nation-building landscape, even though the

Internet also allows alternative views of national identity to proliferate (Krotoski,

2011) (Section 5.4.2). Significant numbers of survey respondents acquiring Changi

news online (Table 4.4) also makes examining its digital presence worthwhile.

CAG has made good use of engaging netizens through social media,

reaching out to not just foreigners but also Singaporean followers via Facebook,

Instagram, Twitter and YouTube (CAG, 2014a). Their posts act as nation-branding

and nation-building: promoting Singapore as a nation for both foreign and local

consumption, and influencing locals to live the Singapore brand (Barr, 2012; Koh,

2011). This can be through, for instance, selling to foreigners (and reminding

Singaporeans) of Singapore’s multiculturalism (Figure 4.17).

Posts can also serve overt nationalistic purposes, through flagging (Billig,

1995) (Figure 4.18) or celebrating occasions like National Day (Figure 4.19).

67
 Figure 4.17: Screenshot of Changi Airport’s Facebook Page on 8 November 2014.

[Source:

https://www.facebook.com/fansofchangi/photos/a.119476558597.102944.113770598597/101

52611824193598/]

Figure 4.18: Screenshot of Changi Airport’s Instagram Profile on 24 August 2014.

[Source: http://instagram.com/p/sEiAY6p2q5/]

68
 Figure 4.19: Screenshot of Changi Airport’s Facebook Page on 9 August 2014.

[Source:

https://www.facebook.com/fansofchangi/photos/a.119476558597.102944.113770598597/101

52396909208598/]

For Singaporean followers, seeing visitors praise Changi can boost pride in

Changi as world-class airport and speaks well of Singapore as a whole (Raguraman,

1997), increasing confidence and sense of belonging to Singapore as a successful

nation (Barr, 2012).

4.3.4 National Education: Aviation/Airport Learning Journeys

National Education (NE) as citizenship education imagines the nation by

instilling in youth values and attitudes making them Singaporean (Koh, 2010). Its

69
role in Singapore’s nation-building is well-explored (cf. Koh, 2005; 2010; Ng, 2002),

while the airport’s role in ‘education’ of visitors and students has been uncovered in

Nazi Germany (Fritzsche, 1992) and Britain (Adey, 2007). Aviation/Airport Learning

Journeys (LJs) under Singapore’s NE ‘enlighten pupils on the role and importance

of… institutions [like Changi] in Singapore's development’ (MOE, 1998), thus

discursively constructing Changi for nation-building.

Aviation was infused into the Nazi German curriculum as a form of air-

mindedness & nation-building, linking knowledge of aviation with loyalty to nation

and citizenship (Fritzsche, 1992). Airports can also educate visitors about aviation’s

importance to the nation, and the prospects of modernity, technology and progress

(Adey, 2007). Similarly in Singapore, school visits to Changi and aviation industries

for NE LJs impress students of Changi and aviation’s importance to Singapore

(MOE, 2011a), allow imbibing of qualities ‘making Changi the world’s best’ (MOE,

2011c), and hence inculcate ‘pride of what Singapore has achieved’ (MOE, 2011b).

LJs to Changi, targeting upper-primary and lower-secondary students, entail

visiting Changi Aviation Gallery (Terminal 3) (Figure 4.20) to learn about aviation

and Changi’s history in Singapore (Figure 4.21), and touring Terminal 3 to

appreciate Changi’s efficient operations contributing to its success (MOE, 2011c).

70
 Figure 4.20: Photograph by Author of Changi Aviation Gallery’s Introduction.

Figure 4.21: Photograph by Author of a Changi Aviation Gallery Exhibit.

Here, the discursive and experiential of the material (cf. Section 4.2.1) unite

to conjure pride and confidence in Changi’s and Singapore’s success, to create

emotional bonding to the nation (Koh, 2010).

71
4.4 Conclusion

Studying how Changi as nation-building landscape takes flight materially

and discursively offers insight into its top-down state-led production by politicians

and airport authorities for purposes of ideological hegemony, political legitimacy

and scripting national identity. In experiencing the terminal spaces and seeing the

control tower physically and in photographs and travelling landscape-objects,

Singaporeans eventually view Changi as symbolising Singapore, possibly

developing a sense of national identity through it. This is augmented by discourse

about Changi through government speeches and publications, mass media and

social media, and NE, to concretise particular ideals in Changi that putatively

represent Singapore. Evidently material, symbolic and discursive strategies are

deeply imbricated (Edensor, 2002), and for success must work together holistically.

The next chapter thus evaluates these strategies’ touchdown on Singaporeans.

72
Figure 5.0: Photograph of Singapore Airlines Plane Approaching Changi.

[Source: with permission of Andre Giam]

73
 CHAPTER 5:

CONSUMING CHANGI AIRPORT AS NATION-BUILDING LANDSCAPE

5.1 Preamble: Touchdown

What happens when top-down nation-building, through strategies and

discourses producing Changi Airport as a particular national landscape, ‘touches

down’ for Singaporean consumption? Using data from the questionnaire, interviews,

auto-photography and Netnography, this chapter discusses three types of reactions

in consumption; paralleling Changi’s three runways (cf. Kaur, 2014e): positive

reactions of acceptance, bottom-up nation-building through alternative narratives,

and negative reactions of indifference and rejection.

5.1.1 General Sentiments of Respondents

Results from the survey’s Likert-scale questions indicate Singaporeans’

strong positive identification with the airport currently (Table 5.1). As Likert-scale

questions are prone to central tendency bias (Gingery, 2009), the high mean rating

for qualities like ‘pride’ and ‘symbol of Singapore’ show strong sense of pride and

significant agreement that Changi symbolises Singapore. However, sentiments of

‘home’, ‘belonging’ and ‘attachment’ to Changi are weaker or absent in some.

74
 Q9) On a scale from 0 (no feeling) to 5 (strong feeling), rate how much you
associate Changi Airport with the following words / qualities. [n=93]
Number of Number of Number of
Qualities Mean responses rating responses responses
‘2’ & below rating ‘0’ rating ‘5’
Pride 4.41 1 (1.1%) 0 48 (51.6%)
Symbol of Singapore 4.29 4 (4.3%) 1 (1.1%) 51 (54.8%)
National identity 4.06 7 (7.5%) 1 (1.1%) 41 (44.1%)
Singapore as nation 3.95 7 (7.5%) 3 (3.2%) 38 (40.9%)
Home 3.85 10 (10.7%) 4 (4.3%) 31 (33.3%)
Belonging 3.67 15 (16.1%) 4 (4.3%) 30 (32.3%)
Attachment 3.50 14 (15.1%) 4 (4.3%) 19 (20.4%)

Table 5.1: Likert-Scale Questions on National Identity.

These results mirror media-reported surveys (Figure 5.1) and interview

responses: all interviewees were proud of Changi, but only some felt Changi

symbolised or developed national identity, like Dawn:

When I return [to Changi], I feel a sense of belonging, and at ease that
I’m coming home.

Meanwhile, Wayne explained his photograph of the control tower (Figure 5.2):

It is a symbol of Changi Airport. It holds much fame, and I've seen it as a

monument of Singapore since young. The photo doesn't do it justice, but
standing before it makes me proud. Maybe I relate to it as a symbol of
home (emphasis added).

75
 Figure 5.1: Article in The Straits Times on Changi Control Tower 17 Voted as Top

Buildings ‘Sacred’ 18 to Singaporeans.

[Source: The Straits Times, 21 June 2014, page D2]

Figure 5.2: Photograph by Wayne of Changi Control Tower.

Such images also foster Singaporeans’ identification with Changi (Sections 4.2.2 & 4.3.2).
17

‘Sacred’ in its ‘role in the national story’ and helping to ‘foster a love for Singapore’ (cf.
18

Zaccheus, 2014).

76
Some think Changi does not symbolise home and belonging because it is the place

to depart Singapore for abroad.

I associate it with leaving Singapore.

(Lloyd, emphasis added)

I think the airport does not really keep one rooted to Singapore, as it is
our gateway to the world.

(Sunny)

Nevertheless such weak feelings of attachment might not preclude feelings of pride

about Changi and relatedly Singapore, according to Sunny:

Yes, Changi Airport is one important reason why I am proud of

Singapore.

Are feelings of pride, attachment and national identity constructed by

government exhortations of Changi, or does it come from one’s embodied personal

experiences and memories? I argue it is both, as elucidated below.

5.1.2 Netnography of Changi’s Digital Spaces

Reconnoitring Changi’s digital spaces, particularly its social media sites,

helps triangulate survey and interview responses. For instance, when Changi’s

Facebook page asked followers how they would describe Changi, some

Singaporeans shared about feeling at home (Figure 5.3) or described Changi

positively. Occasional posts on Changi’s Instagram profile also show Singaporeans

flaunting their pride (Figure 5.4).

77
 Figure 5.3: Screenshot of Changi Airport’s Facebook Page on 16 July 2014.

[Source: https://www.facebook.com/fansofchangi/posts/10152343909463598]

Figure 5.4: Screenshot of Changi Airport’s Instagram Profile on 17 November 2014.

[Source: http://instagram.com/p/vf7dMzp2rA/]

78
5.2 Acceptance of Top-Down Impositions

Most survey, interview and auto-photography respondents appear satisfied

and proud of Changi, and many see it symbolising national identity. Does such

approval of Changi point to absorption and acceptance of government discourse

about Changi and its positive qualities, and hence its nation-building potential? I

argue it is more complex: in some cases agreement could indicate ideological

hegemony (cf. Kong & Yeoh, 2003), while in others agreement stems from validating

personal experiences at Changi. Given the difficulties in teasing out whether views

are influenced by experiences, discourse or hearsay, the voices of those who rarely

visit Changi are hence important to show ideological hegemony’s influence.

5.2.1 Ideological Hegemony: Imbibing Government Discourse

The power of ideological hegemony is in persuading Singaporeans of ideal

national values (Kong & Yeoh, 2003). As discussed in Chapter 4, the government

has infused the airport landscape with certain ideological messages for

consumption, as captured in the survey and interview results.

From the survey, a significant proportion of respondents construe Changi as

important to Singapore and its economy and showcasing Singapore’s best, as shown

by the high mean ratings (Table 5.2). Such views are difficult to be shaped by

personal experience alone and are probably socially constructed or indoctrinated by

the state, since no individual can know or measure these qualities objectively. The

79
idea of Changi as Singapore’s and the world’s model and vital to Singapore has

apparently been imbibed and accepted by many Singaporeans.

Q9) On a scale from 0 (no feeling) to 5 (strong feeling), rate how much you
associate Changi Airport with the following words / qualities. [n=93]
Number of Number of Number of
Qualities Mean responses rating responses responses
‘2’ & below rating ‘0’ rating ‘5’
Vital to Singapore 4.44 2 (2.2%) 1 (1.1%) 55 (59.1%)
Contributes to economy 4.30 1 (1.1%) 0 44 (47.3%)
Showcasing the best of
4.29 7 (7.5%) 0 49 (52.7%)
Singapore

Table 5.2: Likert-Scale Questions on Ideological Hegemony.

This manifests in the interviews, like Lloyd’s reflection about pursuing

excellence as a Singaporean characteristic that can be seen in Changi. As an irregular

airport visitor, he nevertheless recognises the state’s construction of ‘excellence’ as

ideal value for Singaporeans and in Changi:

Yes we are pretty kiasu 19… I don’t think it’s a stereotype of Singaporeans
so much as it is our way of life and something that’s been constructed
and “maintained” as an ideological hallmark of Singapore, for better or
worse. Not all Singaporeans are like that, obviously, but “excelling” has
always been a key part of our national identity and drive… the
government has been working on stuff that airports don’t normally have,
turning it into a tourist attraction in its own right.

When asked for his thoughts about Changi, Samad mentions ‘progress’, in

terms of Singapore’s historical evolution. As airport staff in his 20s, he would be too

young to have experienced much of this history, thus his views would have been

shaped by (national) education, and perhaps while working:

19 Colloquial expression for ‘being afraid to lose’.

80
 The airport is where we experience the essence of Singapore…
Singapore was a bustling port and a station for traders back when the
country was in its infancy. Now with technological advancements, the
most preferred way of transport between countries, is by flight. The
airport carries on this essence right through to this very day.

5.2.2 Verification through Personal Experience

While difficult to prise apart the extent to which personal experience vis-à-

vis discourse influences one’s views of Changi Airport, some interview responses

gesture towards the importance of (positive) experiences of Changi in shaping their

views. After all, as Changi’s architect Teng Wai Man says:

[Icons like the Eiffel Tower] became symbols of nationhood… not

because the architectural community or the politicians dictated it so.
They became important because they mirrored a reality that was already
out there.

(Kishnani, 2002:131)

This ‘reality’ is what this section tries to understand. For instance, strong

feelings of pride towards Changi often come from experience of its virtues like

efficiency and cleanliness, both hallmarks of Singapore and Changi. Well-travelled

PR Irene concurs, comparing her ‘Changi Experience’ (CAG, 2010) with elsewhere:

I recall seeing news about how Changi was number one in the world
and [its ranking] dropped. But I feel proud about Changi as number 1,
and it is still number 1 in my heart… Other airports are really
substandard pieces of work comparing to Changi.

Meanwhile, Nathan took a photograph (Figure 5.5) of the atrium leading to the

Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) station to spotlight the efficient design and easy access

from airport to train station, which made him feel ‘proud as a Singaporean’.

81
 Figure 5.5: Photograph by Nathan of Atrium between Terminal 2 & MRT Station.

For airport staff, the ‘everyday rhythms’ of work can sustain ‘a sense of

national belonging’, which Edensor (2006:525) refers to as ‘national temporalities’.

As Quentin proclaims, based on his long working experience in Changi:

I have watched Changi grow from day one. Today, 33 years after it came
into operation, it has never failed to impress me with its perpetual fresh
appearance which makes the place so welcoming to any visitor, thanks
to the relentless upgrading programmes that are constantly on-going,
and the strict maintenance regime that premises are subjected to.

This quotidian landscape of work ‘underpins a common sense that this is how things

are and this is how we do things’ as a nation (ibid.:529, emphasis original), though the

overlap between personal experience and discourse in fostering national identity for

staff is hard to untangle.

This section’s focus on personal experience marks a good transition to the

next section, emphasising alternative representations of nationhood constructed

through personal experience.

82
5.3 Alternative Representations: Bottom-Up Nation-Building

Spotlighting bottom-up nation building through alternative narratives and

experiences considers how ‘grassroots responses’ (Kong & Yeoh, 2003:6) contribute

to nation-building in their own ways, so as not to valorise top-down approaches to

nation-building (Chapter 4). The landscape is reimagined in ways unintended or

unmanaged by the government (ibid.:2), but without necessarily challenging the

state’s ultimate intentions to gel Singaporeans to a common identity and belonging.

5.3.1 The Airport as ‘Home’

The airport as ‘home’ is not an unimaginable idea to many Singaporeans

(Table 5.1; Figure 5.3). The idea of ‘home’ is multifarious and can refer to various

scales from ‘house’ to ‘nation’ (Edensor, 2009). I argue that one alternative nation-

building narrative is to imagine airport as ‘home’, in this case extending the concept

of ‘home’ from one’s residence towards Changi and thus the nation.

For airport staff, unsurprisingly their workplace feels like home:

It is like a second home to me. I have been working here since its opening
in 1981. The comprehensive amenities, facilities and services in the
airport give me a feeling of being in a very well managed and self-
sufficient town by itself.

(Quentin, emphasis added)

Quentin asserts that others who visit regularly might feel the same way too:

83
 Students come in droves to soak in the ambience as they find their
favourite spots to study and do their homework. Families come here on
weekends to eat and shop and mingle with the crowd… Changi is like a
second home to many Singaporeans.

The idea that regular visits can create a sense of home lends support to Edensor’s

(2006) thesis that mundane visits to Changi to plane-spot, shop etc., repeated over

time, can foster a sense of national identity (Edensor, 2002), akin to creating a ‘field

of care’ through ‘time spent, repeated experiences, or meaningful interaction’ (Teo &

Huang, 1996:310). Quentin’s claim presumes that Singaporeans do visit regularly. 28%

of survey respondents (Appendix B) visit Changi more than seven times a year,

some as often as twenty times or more 20. The potential for sinking deep roots of

belonging is immense, though notably my interviews indicate that many regular

visitors live in eastern Singapore, near Changi, and those who live in the west might

visit less often.

Travellers, especially frequent fliers, can also see the airport as home:

My family used to travel a lot when I was a child. The airport was not
only a place to go to when we needed to fly off, or come back. It was the
last or first piece of ‘home’ that we will step on or feel.

(Samad, emphasis added)

The airport always symbolises home whenever I return from overseas

travels… it is the first sight of home. It embodies everything I think is
good about Singapore: the efficient gates, the good shopping, the wave
of humidity, and I know I am home.

(Daniel)

Seeing the airport as home after returning from abroad maps onto Skey’s

(2011:233) assertion that ‘‘homely spaces’ are imagined and experienced in relation

20 One respondent declared bringing her child to Changi almost daily!

84
to journeys elsewhere’, with Changi serving as homely space to enhance national

identity after ‘negotiating encounters with other people and cultural forms’ overseas.

Returning via Changi thus reminds of home’s (and Singapore’s) comfort and

familiarity (Edensor, 2002), a feeling which the state recognises (cf. Lee H. L., 2013)

but has not sought to engender explicitly in Singaporeans.

5.3.2 Childhood Shared Memories: Airport as Memoryscape

The aforementioned regular visits can help Singaporeans develop shared

memories, developing Changi as a landscape of memory (or memoryscape) serving

nation-building purposes by bonding people over this shared past (Muzaini, 2006;

Penrose & Mole, 2008), despite Changi’s relatively short history compared with

other memoryscapes like Bukit Brown Cemetery (Tan, 2013).

Many interviewees report exposure to Changi from young, recounting

various fond memories with nostalgia. Two auto-photography participants took

photos of the ‘flipboard’ (split-flap display) (Figure 5.6), which they recalled seeing

from their childhood:

This is a classic sight. My first time to Changi in kindergarten, this was

the first thing that greeted me by sight.

(Charles)

This giant flipboard display is one reason why I loved to visit the
airport… Great that CAG decided to retain such symbols of memories of
Singaporeans at Changi when it was renovated so that successive
generations can relate to the same object & share these memories.

85
 (Sunny)

Figure 5.6: Photograph by Sunny of ‘Flipboard’ in Terminal 2.

Such shared memories can allow ‘transference of an experience to more

general feelings about’ the nation (Barr, 2012:85), by crystallising certain memories

and experiences as Singaporean. For SG50, Changi is suggested on crowd-source

website SG Heart Map 21 as a place meaningful to Singaporeans and the nation,

because of certain shared experiences there like studying there together (Figure 5.7).

Unplanned by the state, these recollections shape a shared imagination of Changi,

tying Changi closer to memories of Singapore.

21 https://www.heartmap.sg/faq/.

86
 Figure 5.7: Screenshot of Post on SG Heart Map’s Website on 27 November 2014.

[Source: https://www.heartmap.sg/bf14/bf14001p.nsf/index.html]

5.4 Nonchalance & Resistance

Despite ideological hegemony’s power, it is never fully achieved, as

discourse may not actualise completely in practice or may produce inadvertent

effects (Kong & Yeoh, 2003). Resistance is thus always inherent, whether ‘overt and

material’ or ‘latent and symbolic’ (ibid.:13). This section discusses instances where

people show indifference or contest the government’s attempts in nation-building

through Changi, thereby challenging the state’s ideological hegemony.

87
5.4.1 Indifference: Airport as Simply Functional

Some interviewees seem unmoved by suggestions that the airport can help

develop national identity, even if they agree Changi symbolises the nation. Such

nuanced views of indifference frustrate efforts in nation-building through Changi.

Respondents like Wayne see the airport solely for its functions: ‘just a place for

planes to land and for me to get out [of Singapore]’. Jodie does not associate Changi

with nation-building, as she believes:

[It] is more a government-level idea of the nation, not so much a local

Singaporean level… Changi is more of a symbol rather than helping to
shape your identity. Places can shape your identity only through
regularly interactions with other people that build memories and
experiences. People don’t go to the airport that much or for that kind of
reason.

Alternatively, Changi could be perceived as simply a recreational place: one

survey respondent records only ‘shopping’ when thinking of Changi, given the

regular promotions and deals offered 22 . That said, these respondents, living in

western Singapore, claim to visit Changi only sporadically. With more regular visits

and more interaction opportunities with people and place, their views may change.

Even occasional visits can engender memorable experiences of Changi’s qualities

like efficiency, which probably led to them feeling that Changi symbolises

Singapore. Nevertheless, seeing just the airport’s functions seemingly prevents its

being imagined in other ways.

22 http://www.changiairport.com/shopping-and-dining.

88
5.4.2 Voicing Displeasure: The Vocal Minority?

While Changi is perceived in almost-overwhelmingly positive terms,

occasional voices of disapproval and resistance do exist. Some interviewees speak in

less-glowing (even condescending) terms when asked if Changi has ‘national’

meanings to other Singaporeans:

To the common, less-thinking strata of society, yes, it probably

engenders some kind of national identity: “Wah we are the top 3 airport
of the world” kind. That happens because most of the population would
never get a chance to really experience many other air hubs outside of
holidays, and won’t bother to look at other airports critically and ask
themselves what’s working and what’s not.

(Bryan)

Personally I don't feel that it has been promoting national identity,

especially to the younger generations. They only know the airport as a
place that you go to, to escape. Not as a cultural symbol.

(Samad, emphasis added; cf. Lloyd & Sunny in Section 5.1.1)

Despite professing a personal sense of belonging to Changi, Samad’s claim shows

he might feel his attachment as an exception rather than the norm. Bryan is

conversely critical about Singaporeans who take pride in Changi. Others express

disdain with what Changi purportedly represents to Singaporeans:

I don’t agree with what is promoted by the government on

competitiveness and being ahead in the global economy… The
government or whoever running Changi wants it to be the top airport.
But some things are a bit overdone: building of more shopping malls
like Project Jewel, demolition of Budget Terminal (despite its being quite
new) to make way for new terminals… They are a waste of resources.
Ridiculous, I think it’s too much. ‘Excellence’ becomes the only criteria
to decide whether to do something or not.

(Jodie)

89
 Project Jewel is an indication of growing income inequality in Singapore.
Pump a lot of money into the airport, but constrained in one particular
landmark… I don’t see equal levels of investment in other parts of
Singapore.

(Keith)

Their discontent echoes the sentiments of some netizens towards the upcoming

Project Jewel. Singaporeans against Project Jewel are airing their opposition on

social media. Not all netizens disapprove of Project Jewel, but loud voices of

resistance remain. Such negative comments are rarely found on Changi‘s Facebook

page 23 but often on ST’s Facebook page 24 , like comments (both supportive and

opposing) about Terminal 1 carpark’s closure to construct Project Jewel (Figure 5.8).

One commenter lamented the ad nauseum repeating of this news as ‘long winded’,

while others protested against Project Jewel’s unnecessary shopping focus and the

inconvenience posed by the carpark’s closure, despite its justification as for the

nation’s future (Section 4.3.1). Another Facebook post on Project Jewel (Figure 5.9)

saw similar reception.

23 The page might be moderated, inferring from moderators’ replies to comments.

24 https://www.facebook.com/TheStraitsTimes.

90
Figure 5.8: Screenshot of The Straits Times’ Facebook Page on 16 November 2014.

[Source: https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10152379964827115]

91
Figure 5.9: Screenshot of The Straits Times’ Facebook Page on 19 December 2014.

[Source: https://www.facebook.com/TheStraitsTimes/posts/10152418071027115:0]

92
Diverging visions of Changi and Singapore become apparent: some feel Changi

should remain functional (‘just fly in or fly out’) instead of adding embellishments

that are a ‘waste [of] money’, contra the state’s view that it is ‘not just another mall’

but critical to Changi’s and Singapore’s future (Kaur, 2014b).

Comments on both occasions show how some Singaporeans refuse to buy

into government justifications of Project Jewel’s necessity, hence snubbing the

government’s vision for Changi and the nation. They may be a vocal minority,

compared to those supportive of Project Jewel, but nonetheless they show that

ideological hegemony is ‘never fully achieved’ (Kong & Yeoh, 2003:12), and their

voices cannot be disregarded, especially in the Internet age. Nation-building

through this landscape is always being contested by alternative representations.

5.5 Conclusion

While there are clear evidences of state success in the ways in which
Singaporeans applaud the material fruits of state policy and action –
and even accept the state’s ideological arguments – there are also
signs of fragmentation.

(Kong & Yeoh, 2003:207)

The above declaration sums up this chapter well, fleshing out the

agreements and resistances that can emerge as Singaporeans consume the nation-

building landscape. To that, I add the possibility of bottom-up nation-building

developing organically, that need not necessarily challenge the state’s view but is

unintentional or unmediated by the state, thus feeding into the landscape’s

93
production and permitting multiplicities in imagining, representing and effecting

nation-building.

With these different trajectories of consumption landing safely, it is time to

disembark to conclude this thesis.

94
Figure 6.0: Photograph by Author of Immigration at Arrival in Terminal 2.

95
 CHAPTER 6:

CONCLUSION

Ladies and gentlemen, we have landed at Changi International Airport.

The local time is 8 am on the 9th of August. The temperature outside is 28
degrees and the weather outlook is expected to be sunny and breezy.
Thank you for choosing Singapore Airlines and we hope to be of service
again on your next flight.

To all Singaporeans and Permanent Residents: welcome home!

(Ng, 2014:4, emphasis added)

6.1 Arrival: Revisiting Thesis Aims & Arguments

Like Ng (2014), many interviewees fondly recall SIA pilots announcing

‘welcome home’ after landing at Changi. This arguably initiates the process of

home-coming: stepping into air-conditioned comfort, walking past orchids, clearing

immigration through automated gates and collecting luggage efficiently. To

conclude this journey, this chapter strives to hit home some key ideas.

Via a mixed-methods approach, this thesis addresses research gaps

identified in ‘airport’ and ‘nation’ scholarship and adopts a landscape studies

approach to investigate the state’s production of Changi as nation-building

landscape and how Singaporeans consuming this landscape feel about Changi and

Singapore. Specifically, the landscape is produced through interlinked material,

discursive and symbolic strategies, while Singaporeans can react to this landscape

by acceptance or rejection of what Changi represents, or develop new meanings

organically through personal experiences and memories, enabling bottom-up

96
nation-building. In short, as an iconic and everyday nation-building landscape,

Changi is represented by the state as symbolising and/or developing national

identity, though Singaporeans view it in multiple, sometimes antagonistic, ways.

6.2 Thesis Contributions

While cautious about using this single case study to generalise towards other

airports, sites or nations, undoubtedly this thesis has several contributions to future

scholarship on airports, Singapore or nationalism generally.

Re-examining some questions posed in Section 1.1, this thesis has illustrated

how Changi is ‘never simply an airport’ (Adey & Lin, 2014:64) – a supposed

globalised ‘non-place’ (Augé, 1995) of hypermobility can engender strong feelings of

national identification, and contribute to the national cause beyond economic

contributions but also socio-culturally. This thesis shows the ‘national’ still matters,

even in a cosmopolitan and digital age with well-travelled citizens.

In terms of nation-building’s mechanics, this thesis has demonstrated

possibilities for bottom-up nation-building unplanned or unimagined by the state.

That little mundane experiences at Changi can contribute to national identity

demonstrates the salience of ‘banal’ nationalism (Billig, 1995; Edensor, 2002). This

economic landscape without a long history can also serve nation-building purposes

(contra Kong & Yeoh, 2003), by anchoring highly-mobile Singaporeans to the nation.

Moreover, Changi as travel node is cosmopolitan and multicultural, offering

97
enhanced nation-building capabilities cutting across Singapore’s racial divides

compared to other landscapes associated with specific ethnicities like heritage

districts (e.g. Muzaini, 2013).

Yet this thesis hints at murky undercurrents lurking beneath the veneer of

Changi as ‘perfect’ and ‘world’s best airport’, as signalled by netizens’ resistance to

Project Jewel’s necessity for Changi’s and Singapore’s future. Without romanticising

resistance (Abu-Lughod, 1990, in Razali, 2012), this thesis reminds of the nation’s

multiple (possibly opposing) imaginations and representations, some of which

manifest evidently online. Thus the value of Netnography (particularly social media

analysis) to studying nation-building (especially its consumption and resistance)

cannot be discounted.

6.3 Implications & Future Directions

Several possibilities emerge from this thesis. Having explicated Changi’s

nation-building potential, its prospective policy implications can be explored by

policymakers or academics. For instance, Changi might serve as landscape to anchor

‘diaspora strategies’ that engender national identity in overseas Singaporeans too (cf.

Ho et al., 2014). Other airports and contemporary aviation landscapes can also be

interrogated for nurturing national (e.g. Weiss, 2014) or regional identities.

2015, which marks SG50, is a good time for introspection about Singapore as

a nation, and its important, symbolic and memorable places. Changi’s role and

98
image in the national imaginary can be further unpacked, especially with the

upcoming Project Jewel. This thesis has been necessarily partial, focusing on breadth

rather than depth to unearth the production and consumption of Changi as nation-

building landscape. Future research can study particular strands of production and

consumption of nation-building (through Changi or otherwise), especially bottom-

up nation-building, to better illuminate its processes. Research possibilities are

immense, which this thesis hopefully lays the groundwork for.

99
 REFERENCES

Adey, P. (2004) Surveillance at the Airport: Surveilling Mobility/Mobilising

Surveillance. Environment & Planning A, 36: 1365-1380.

Adey, P. (2006) Airports & Air-mindedness: Spacing, Timing & Using the Liverpool
Airport, 1929-1939. Social & Cultural Geography, 7(3): 343-363.

Adey, P. (2007) Airports for Children: Mobility, Design & the Construction of an
Airport Education. Built Environment, 33(4): 417-429.

Adey, P. (2008) Aeromobilities: Geographies, Subjects & Vision. Geography Compass,

2(5): 1318-1336.

Adey, P. (2010) Aerial Life: Spaces, Mobilities, Affects. Chichester, Wiley-Blackwell.

Adey, P., Budd, L. & Hubbard, P. (2007) Flying Lessons: Exploring the Social &
Cultural Geographies of Global Air Travel. Progress in Human Geography,
31(6): 773-791.

Adey, P. & Lin, W. (2014) Social & Cultural Geographies of Air Transport. In Goetz,
A. R. & Budd, L. (eds.) The Geographies of Air Transport. Farnham, Ashgate:
61-72.

Agnew, J. (2013) Nationalism. In Johnson, N. C., Schein, R. H. & Winders, J. (eds.)

The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Cultural Geography. Chichester, John Wiley
& Sons: 130-145.

Anderson, B. (2006) Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin & Spread of

Nationalism, Revised Edition. London, Verso.

Ang, B. (2014) Places We Heart. The Straits Times, November 25.

AsiaOne. (2014) PM's National Day Rally on TV, Radio & Online. [Online] Available at:
http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/pms-national-day-rally-tv-radio-
and-online (accessed 27 December 2014).

Augé, M. (1995) Non-Places: Introduction to an Anthropology of Supermodernity.

London, Verso.

Barr, M. (2012) Nation Branding as Nation Building: China’s Image Campaign. East
Asia, 29: 81-94.

100
Baxter, J. (2009) Content Analysis. In Kitchin, R. & Thrift, N. (eds.) International
Encyclopedia of Human Geography, Volume 2. Amsterdam, Elsevier: 275-280.

Berg, L. D. (2009) Discourse Analysis. In Kitchin, R. & Thrift, N. (eds.) International

Encyclopedia of Human Geography, Volume 3. Amsterdam, Elsevier: 215-221.

Billig, M. (1995) Banal Nationalism. London, SAGE Publications.

Bok, R. (2014) Airports on the Move? The Policy Mobilities of Singapore Changi
Airport at Home & Abroad. Urban Studies,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0042098014548011.

Bokhorst-Heng, W. (2002) Newspapers in Singapore: A Mass Ceremony in the

Imagining of the Nation. Media, Culture & Society, 24: 559-569.

Bunnell, T. (2002) (Re)Positioning Malaysia: High-Tech Networks & the

Multicultural Rescripting of National Identity. Political Geography, 21: 105-124.

Bunnell, T. (2013) Urban Landscapes. In Johnson, N. C., Schein, R. H. & Winders, J.

(eds.) The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Cultural Geography. Chichester, John
Wiley & Sons: 278-289.

Burns, P. M. & Cowlishaw, C. (2014) Climate Change Discourses: How UK Airlines

Communicate Their Case to the Public. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 22(5):
750-767.

Castells, M. (1996) The Rise of the Network Society – Volume 1: The Information Age:
Economy, Society & Culture. Oxford, Blackwell.

Changi Airport Group (CAG). (2010) Enhancing the Changi Experience. [Online]
Available at: http://www.changiairport.com/our-business/airport-
news/enhancing-the-changi-experience (accessed 17 December 2014).

Changi Airport Group (CAG). (2013a) About Changi Airport. [Online] Available at:
http://www.changiairport.com/our-business/about-changi-airport (accessed
14 December 2014).

Changi Airport Group (CAG). (2013b) Changi Connection, Issue 22, December 2013.
[Online] Available at:
http://www.changiairportgroup.com/export/sites/caas/assets/changi_connect
ion/issue22/281113_22_low.pdf (accessed 20 December 2014).

Changi Airport Group (CAG). (2014a) Annual Report 2013/2014: Rethinking Travel.
[Online] Available at:

101
 http://www.changiairportgroup.com/export/sites/caas/assets/changi_connect
ion/Changi_Airport_Group_Annual_Report_2014_Full-Report.pdf (accessed
21 December 2014).

Changi Airport Group (CAG). (2014b) Awards. [Online] Available at:

http://www.changiairport.com/our-business/awards (accessed 14 December
2014).

Changi Airport Group (CAG). (2014c) Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs). [Online]
Available at: http://www.changiairportgroup.com/cag/html/media-
centre/faqs.html (accessed 20 December 2014).

Cheong, C. (2006) From Ground Up: Stories from the CAAS Experience. Singapore, Civil
Aviation Authority of Singapore.

Chong, T. (2010) Fluid Nation: The Perpetual ‘Renovation’ of Nation & National
Identities in Singapore. In Chong, T. (ed.) Management of Success: Singapore
Revisited. Singapore, ISEAS: 504-520.

Choo, F. L. T. (2012) National Museum of Singapore: A Museum to Reinforce National

Identity. Unpublished Honours Dissertation, Department of Geography,
National University of Singapore.

Chow, A. L. Y. (2000) Economic Development & the Quest for National Identity in
Singapore. Unpublished Honours Dissertation, Department of Political
Science, National University of Singapore.

Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS). (1991) Airtropolis Singapore Changi

Airport – A Commemorative Publication. Singapore, Al Hilal Publishing.

Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS). (2014) Air Hub Development. [Online]
Available at:
http://www.caas.gov.sg/caas/en/About_CAAS/Our_Strategic_Thrusts/Air_H
ub_Development/ (accessed 20 December 2014).

Cosgrove, D. (2006) Modernity, Community & the Landscape Idea. Journal of

Material Culture, 11(1/2): 49-66.

Cosgrove, D. & Daniels, S. (eds.) (1988) The Iconography of Landscape: Essays on the
Symbolic Representation, Design & Use of Past Environments. Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press.

Cox, K. R. (2014) Making Human Geography. New York, Guildford Press.

102
Creswell, J. W. & Plano Clark, V. L. (2006) Designing & Conducting Mixed Methods
Research, 1st Edition. Thousand Oaks, SAGE Publications.

Creswell, J. W. & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011) Designing & Conducting Mixed Methods
Research, 2nd Edition. Thousand Oaks, SAGE Publications.

Cwerner, S., Kesselring, S. & Urry, J. (eds.) (2009) Aeromobilities. Abingdon,

Routledge.

Daniels, S. (1993) Fields of Vision: Landscape Imagery & National Identity in England &
the United States. Cambridge, Polity Press.

della Dora, V. (2009) Travelling Landscape-Objects. Progress in Human Geography,

33(3): 334-354.

Department of Civil Aviation (DCA) & Archives and Oral History Department
(AOHD). (1982) Singapore Fly-Past: A Pictorial Review of Civil Aviation in
Singapore, 1911-1981. Singapore, MPH Magazines.

Dodge, M. & Kitchin, R. (2004) Flying Through Code/Space: The Real Virtuality of
Air Travel. Environment & Planning A, 36: 195-211.

Duncan, J. S. (1990) The City as Text: The Politics of Landscape Interpretation in the
Kandyan Kingdom. New York, Cambridge University Press.

Edensor, T. (2002) National Identity, Popular Culture & Everyday Life. Oxford, Berg.

Edensor, T. (2006) Reconsidering National Temporalities: Institutional Times,

Everyday Routines, Serial Spaces & Synchronicities. European Journal of Social
Theory, 9(4): 525-545.

Edensor, T. (2009) Nation Spatialities. In Kitchin, R. & Thrift, N (eds.) International

Encyclopedia of Human Geography, Volume 7. Amsterdam, Elsevier: 242-247.

Ferguson, J. M. (2014) Terminally Haunted: Aviation Ghosts, Hybrid Buddhist

Practices & Disaster Aversion Strategies amongst Airport Workers in
Myanmar & Thailand. The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology, 15(1): 47-64.

Fritzsche, P. (1992) A Nation of Fliers: German Aviation & the Popular Imagination.
Cambridge, Harvard University Press.

Fuller, G. & Harley, R. (2010) Airports. In Hutchison, R. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Urban

Studies. Thousand Oaks, SAGE Publications: 10-14.

103
Geh, M. & Sharp, I. (2008) Singapore’s Natural Environment, Past, Present & Future:
A Construct of National Identity & Land Use Imperatives. In Wong, T. C.,
Yuen, B. & Goldblum, C. (eds.) Spatial Planning for a Sustainable Singapore.
Dordrecht, Springer & Singapore Institute of Planners: 183-204.

Gillen, M. (2014) Tourism & Nation Building at the War Remnants Museum in Ho
Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Annals of the Association of American Geographers,
104(6): 1307-1321.

Gingery, T. (2009) Survey Research Definitions: Central Tendency Bias. [Online]

Available at: http://survey.cvent.com/blog/market-research-design-tips-
2/survey-research-definitions-central-tendency-bias (accessed 17 December
2014).

Goh, J. (2014) Seeing Like the Singapore State? Exploring the Subject – Making of New
Citizens using Auto­Photography. Unpublished Honours Dissertation,
Department of Geography, National University of Singapore.

Gottdiener, M. (2001) Life in the Air: Surviving the New Culture of Air Travel. Lanham,
Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Graham, A. (2014) Managing Airports: An International Perspective, 4th Edition.

Abingdon, Routledge.

Green, R. J. (2010) Coastal Towns in Transition: Local Perceptions of Landscape Change.

Dordrecht, Springer Netherlands.

Hakfoort, J., Poot, T. & Rietveld, P. (2001) The Regional Economic Impact of an
Airport: The Case of Amsterdam Schiphol Airport. Regional Studies, 35(7):
595-604.

Hammett, D. (2014) Expressing ‘Nationhood’ Under Conditions of Constrained

Sovereignty: Postage Stamp Iconography of the Bantustans. Environment &
Planning A, 46: 901-919.

Ho, E. L. E., Hickey, M. & Yeoh, B. S. A. (2014) Special Issue Introduction: New
Research Directions & Critical Perspectives on Diaspora Strategies. Geoforum,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2014.12.006.

Huang, E. (2014) Internet Penetration: Singapore scores 73, Thailand 26, Indonesia
15. e27 [Online] Available at: http://e27.co/southeast-asia-25-internet-
penetration-109-mobile-penetration/ (accessed 27 December 2014).

104
Hussain, A. (2013) LKY’s Attention to Detail Helped Ensure Clean Toilets at Changi
Airport. TODAY, September 17.

Hutton, P. (1981) Wings Over Singapore: The Story of Singapore Changi Airport.
Singapore, Department of Civil Aviation.

Jazeel, T. (2005) ‘Nature’, Nationhood & the Poetics of Meaning in Ruhuna (Yala)
National Park, Sri Lanka. Cultural Geographies, 12(2): 199–227.

Jones, M., Jones, R. & Woods, M. (2004) An Introduction to Political Geography: Space,
Place & Politics. London, Routledge.

Jones, R. (2008) Relocating Nationalism: on the Geographies of Reproducing

Nations. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 33: 319-334.

Jones, R. & Fowler, C. (2007) Placing & Scaling the Nation. Environment & Planning
D: Society & Space, 25: 332-354.

Jones, R. & Merriman, P. (2012) Network Nation. Environment & Planning A, 44: 937-
953.

Kaur, K. (2007) CAAS to be Corporatised to Help It Stay Ahead. The Straits Times,
August 31.

Kaur, K. (2013a) Changi Airport Handled 4.33m Passengers in January, Up 1.9%

from 2012. The Straits Times, February 20.

Kaur, K. (2013b) Changi Airport's June Passenger Traffic Hits 4.67 Million. The
Straits Times, July 23.

Kaur, K. (2014a) Billion-Dollar Contract Awarded as Changi Starts Expansion

Works. The Straits Times, November 3.

Kaur, K. (2014b) Changi’s Jewel: Not Just Another Mall. The Straits Times, December
6.

Kaur, K. (2014c) New Ground Handler Asig Under Probe by MOM. The Straits Times,
November 3.

Kaur, K. (2014d) Situation at Changi Airport Likely to Worsen Before It Gets Better.
AsiaOne [Online] Available at: http://news.asiaone.com/news/relax/situation-
changi-airport-likely-worsen-it-gets-better (accessed 15 September 2014).

105
Kaur, K. (2014e) Soil at Third Runway Site ‘Poor’. AsiaOne [Online] Available at:
http://news.asiaone.com/print/news/singapore/soilthirdrunwaysitepoor
(accessed 17 December 2014).

Kishnani, N. (2002) Changi by Design: Architecture of the World’s Best Airport.

Singapore, Page One Publishing.

Koh, A. (2005) Imagining the Singapore “Nation” & “Identity”: The Role of the
Media & National Education. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 25(1): 75-91.

Koh, A. (2010) Tactical Globalization: Learning from the Singapore Experiment. Bern,
Peter Lang.

Koh, B. S. (2011) Brand Singapore: How Nation Branding Built Asia’s Leading Global City.
Singapore, Marshall Cavendish Business.

Kong, L. & Yeoh, B. S. A. (1997) The Construction of National Identity Through the
Production of Ritual & Spectacle. Political Geography, 16(3): 213-239.

Kong, L. & Yeoh, B. S. A. (2003) The Politics of Landscapes in Singapore: Constructions of

‘Nation’. Syracuse, Syracuse University Press.

Kozinets, R. (2010) Netnography: Doing Ethnographic Research Online. London, SAGE

Publications.

Krotoski, A. (2011) Being British: How has the Internet Affected our National
Identity? The Guardian [Online] Available at:
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/may/15/aleks-krotoski-
britishness-internet (accessed 27 December 2014).

Lai, K. P. Y. (2013) Singapore’s Economic Landscapes: Local Transformations &

Global Networks. In Ho, E. L. E., Woon, C. Y. & Ramdas, K. (eds.) Changing
Landscapes of Singapore: Old Tensions, New Discoveries. Singapore, NUS Press:
196-217.

Lean, Q. (2013) Appraising Landscapes: Affective Geographies of the Airport Viewing Mall.
Unpublished Honours Dissertation, Department of Geography, National
University of Singapore.

Lee, H. L. (2013) Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s National Day Rally 2013. [Online]
Available at:
http://www.pmo.gov.sg/content/pmosite/mediacentre/speechesninterviews/
primeminister/2013/August/prime-minister-lee-hsien-loong-s-national-day-
rally-2013--speech.html#.Uz_i8_mSytM (accessed 15 April 2014).

106
Lee, J. X. (2013) Real-time Inspection & Feedback Helps Changi Airport Cut Costs &
Manpower. The Straits Times, December 16.

Lin, W. (2013) Flying through Ash Clouds: Improvising Aeromobilities in Singapore

& Australia. Mobilities, 9(2): 220-237.

Lisle, D. (2003) Site Specific Medi(t)ations at the Airport. In Debrix, F. & Weber, C.
(eds.) Rituals of Mediation: International Politics & Social Meaning. Minneapolis,
University of Minnesota Press: 3-29.

Lloyd, J. (2003) Dwelltime: Airport Technology, Travel & Consumption. Space &
Culture, 6(2): 93-109.

Lombard, M. (2012) Auto-Photography. Methods@Manchester Workshop, Global

Urban Research Centre, University of Manchester, December 10.

Lombard, M. (2013) Using Auto-Photography to Understand Place: Reflections from

Research in Urban Informal Settlements in Mexico. Area, 45(1): 23-32.

Lowenthal, D. (1991) British National Identity & the English Landscape. Rural
History, 2(2): 205-230.

Ministry of Education (MOE). (1998) Press Release: Launch of Learning Journeys.

[Online] Available at: http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/press/1998/980224.htm
(accessed 28 December 2014).

Ministry of Education (MOE). (2011a) LJ CAAS. [Online] Available at:

http://ne.edu.sg/ljs/lj_caas.htm (accessed 8 September 2014).

Ministry of Education (MOE). (2011b) LJ CAG. [Online] Available at:

http://ne.moe.edu.sg/ne/slot/u223/ne/ljs/lj_cag.html (accessed 8 September
2014).

Ministry of Education (MOE). (2011c) LJ CAG. [Online] Available at:

http://ne.moe.edu.sg/ne/slot/u223/ne/ljs/lj_cag_prog01.html (accessed 8
September 2014).

Morin, K. M. (2009) Landscape: Representing & Interpreting the World. In Clifford,

N. J., Holloway, S. L., Rice, S. P. & Valentine, G. (eds.) Key Concepts in
Geography, 2nd Edition. London, SAGE Publications.

Mutalib, H. (2010) PM Lee Hsien Loong & the “Third Generation” Leadership:
Managing Key Nation-Building Challenges. In Chong, T. (ed.) Management of
Success: Singapore Revisited. Singapore, ISEAS: 51-66.

107
Muzaini, H. (2006) Producing/Consuming Memoryscapes: the Genesis/Politics of
Second World War Commemoration in Singapore. GeoJournal, 66: 211-222.

Muzaini, H. (2013) Heritage Landscapes & Nation-Building in Singapore. In Ho, E.

L. E., Woon, C. Y. & Ramdas, K. (eds.) Changing Landscapes of Singapore: Old
Tensions, New Discoveries. Singapore, NUS Press: 25-42.

National Library Board (NLB). (2012) Keep Singapore Clean Campaign. [Online]
Available at: http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infopedia/articles/SIP_1160_2008-
12-05.html (accessed 21 December 2014).

National Library Board (NLB). (2014) Establishment of the Civil Aviation Authority of
Singapore - Singapore History. [Online] Available at:
http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/history/events/2f697180-79c5-4f80-a59f-
cbaa42b57bc9 (accessed 16 December 2014).

Ng, K. S. (2014) Welcome Home: A Year of Loving Singapore. Singapore, Wareham

Educational.

Ng, W. C. (2002) A Studied Nationalism: Education & National Identity in Singapore.

Unpublished Honours Dissertation, Department of Sociology, National
University of Singapore.

Nikolaeva, A. (2012) Designing Public Space for Mobility: Contestation, Negotiation

& Experiment at Amsterdam Airport Schiphol. Tijdschrift voor Economische en
Sociale Geografie, 109(5): 542-554.

O’Connor, K. (1995) Airport Development in Southeast Asia. Journal of Transport

Geography, 3(4): 269-279.

Ortmann, S. (2009) Singapore: The Politics of Inventing National Identity. Journal of

Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 28(4): 23-46.

Oxford Economics. (2011) Economic Benefits from Air Transport in Singapore. [Online]
Available at: http://www.iata.org/policy/Documents/Benefits-of-Aviation-
Singapore-2011.pdf (accessed 21 December 2014).

Parfitt, J. (2005) Questionnaire Design & Sampling. In Flowerdew, R. & Martin, D.

(eds.) Methods in Human Geography – A Guide for Students Doing a Research
Project, 2nd Edition. Harlow, Pearson Education: 78-109.

Pascoe, D. (2001) Airspaces. London, Reaktion Books.

108
Penrose, J. (2009) Nation. In Kitchin, R. & Thrift, N (eds.) International Encyclopedia of
Human Geography, Volume 7. Amsterdam, Elsevier: 223-228.

Penrose, J. (2011) Designing the Nation: Banknotes, Banal Nationalism & Alternative
Conceptions of the State. Political Geography, 30: 429-440.

Penrose, J. & Cumming, C. (2011) Money Talks: Banknote Iconography & Symbolic
Constructions of Scotland. Nations & Nationalism, 17(4): 821-842.

Penrose, J. & Mole, R. C. M. (2008) Nation-States & National Identity. In Cox, K. R.,
Murray, L. & Robinson, J. (eds.) The SAGE Handbook of Political Geography.
London, SAGE Publications: 271-285.

Phua, J. (nd) Spectacular! Spectacular! The Theatrics of Nation-Building: A Case Study of

Singapore. [Online] Available at:
https://www.academia.edu/1025492/Spectacular_Spectacular_The_Theatrics_
of_Nation-Building_A_Case_Study_of_Singapore (accessed 22 March 2014).

Pow, C. P. (2013) From Housing a Nation to Meeting Rising Aspirations: Evolution

of Public Housing over the Years. In Ho, E. L. E., Woon, C. Y. & Ramdas, K.
(eds.) Changing Landscapes of Singapore: Old Tensions, New Discoveries.
Singapore, NUS Press: 43-60.

Preston, V. (2009) Questionnaire Survey. In Kitchin, R. & Thrift, N (eds.)

International Encyclopedia of Human Geography, Volume 9. Amsterdam,
Elsevier: 46-52.

Raguraman, K. (1997) Airlines as Instruments for Nation Building and National

Identity: Case Study of Malaysia and Singapore. Journal of Transport
Geography, 5(4): 239-256.

Razali, N. (2012) Visualizing Singapore: National Day Music Videos & the Aesthetics of
Nation Building. Unpublished Honours Dissertation, Department of
Sociology, National University of Singapore.

Rose, G. (2007) Visual Methodologies: An Introduction to the Interpretation of Visual

Methods, 2nd Edition. London, SAGE Publication.

Rose, G. (2014) On the Relation between ‘Visual Research Methods’ &

Contemporary Visual Culture. The Sociological Review, 62: 24-46.

Salter, M. (2008) The Global Airport: Managing Space, Speed & Security. In Salter, M.
(ed.) Politics at the Airport. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press: 1-28.

109
Sidorov, D. (2000) National Monumentalization & the Politics of Scale: The
Resurrections of the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow. Annals of the
Association of American Geographers, 90(3): 548-572.

Skey, M. (2011) ‘Thank God, I’m Back!’: Redefining the Nation as a Homely Place in
Relation to Journeys Abroad. Journal of Cultural Geography, 28(2): 233-252.

Southeast Asia Building Materials & Equipment (1981) Changi Airport among the Top
Ten in the World. Kuala Lumpur, AR Format.

Talentino, A. K. (2004) The Two Faces of Nation-Building: Developing Function &

Identity. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 17(3): 557-575.

Tan, G. F. Y. (2013) Reading & Reproducing the Memoryscape of Bukit Brown Cemetery.
Unpublished Honours Dissertation, Department of Geography, National
University of Singapore.

Tan, K. P. (2007) Singapore’s National Day Rally Speech: A Site of Ideological

Negotiation. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 37(3): 292-308.

Teo, J. A. X. (2004) From Functional to Experiential Space: The Changi Experience.

Unpublished Honours Dissertation, Department of Geography, National
University of Singapore.

Teo, P. & Huang, S. (1996) A Sense of Place in Public Housing: A Case Study of Pasir
Ris, Singapore. Habitat International, 20(2): 307-325.

Thomas, M. E. (2009) Auto-Photography. In Kitchin, R. & Thrift, N (eds.)

International Encyclopedia of Human Geography, Volume 1. Amsterdam,
Elsevier: 244-251.

Tynes, R. (2007) Nation-Building & the Diaspora on Leonenet: A Case of Sierra

Leone in Cyberspace. New Media & Society, 9(3): 497-518.

Uimonen, P. (2003) Mediated Management of Meaning: On-line Nation Building in

Malaysia. Global Networks, 3(3): 299-314.

Vainikka, J. (2005) The Globalising Place-Network of Air Traffic: The Functional Shape
and the Symbolic Landscape of International Airports. Unpublished Master’s
Dissertation, Department of Geography, University of Turku.

Valentine, G. (2005) Tell Me About…: Using Interviews as a Research Methodology.

In Flowerdew, R. & Martin, D. (eds.) Methods in Human Geography – A Guide

110
 for Students Doing a Research Project, 2nd Edition. Harlow, Pearson Education:
110-127.

Weiss, E. (2010) Establishing Roots at Israel's Ben Gurion Airport Garden:

Landscapes of National Identity. National Identities, 12(2): 199-210.

Williams, C. H. & Smith, A. D. (1983) The National Construction of Social Space.

Progress in Human Geography, 7: 502 – 518.

Winchester, H. P. M., Kong, L. & Dunn, K. (2003) Landscapes: Ways of Imagining the
World. Harlow, Pearson Education.

Wood, N. (2012) Playing with 'Scottishness': Musical Performance, Non-

Representational Thinking & the ‘Doings’ of National Identity. Cultural
Geographies, 19(2): 195-215.

xinmsn. (2014) 50 Ways to be a Singaporean: Episode 8. [Online] Available at:

http://xin.msn.com/en-sg/video/watch/50-ways-to-be-a-singaporean-
episode-8/vp-e44b64f8-47a3-4998-9cad-75b46979e5eb (accessed 9 November
2014).

Yeoh, B. S. A. & Huang, S. (2008) Strengthening the Nation’s Roots? Heritage

Policies in Singapore. In Lian, K. F. & Tong, C. K. (eds.) Social Policy in
Post‑Industrial Singapore: Options for a Post-Industrial State. Leiden, Brill
Academic Publishers: 201–224.

Yeoh, B. S. A. & Kong, L. (2012) Singapore’s Chinatown: Nation Building & Heritage
Tourism in a Multiracial City. Localities, 2: 117-159.

Zaccheus, M. (2014) What Future for Our Past? The Straits Times, June 21.

Zukowsky, J. (ed.) (1996) Building for Air Travel: Architecture & Design for Commercial
Aviation. New York, Prestel-Verlag.

111
 APPENDIX A: STRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRE

Dear Sir / Madam,

I am an undergraduate student from the Department of Geography in National University of

Singapore (NUS), currently conducting research for my Honours Thesis.

My research aims to study how Singaporeans feel about Changi Airport. Your opinions
will be used for the writing of my Honours Thesis for submission as part of my
undergraduate degree in Geography, and could potentially enhance how Changi Airport is
designed for and promoted to Singaporeans.

You are invited to participate in this study if you are a citizen or Permanent Resident of
Singapore. As part of my research, I will be conducting a survey, which will take about 5-10
minutes.

If you are interested, you may choose to participate in a follow-up interview or photography
study. To do so, you may leave your contact details at the end of the survey.

There are no foreseeable risks in your participation, and participation is entirely optional.
You may choose to opt out at any time during the study for any reason. Information given
would be kept strictly confidential, and data collected will be used solely for research
purposes.

Please feel free to contact me if you have any queries or issues.

Thank you for spending time on the survey!

[Researcher’s name]

[Researcher’s contact information]

112
113
114
115
 APPENDIX B: STRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES

(For responses to questions not featured above)

*Q3) On average, how often do you visit Changi Airport in a year? [n=94]
Range^ Number of Responses Percentage of Responses
1-3 times 39 41.5%
4-6 times 29 30.9%
>7 times 26 27.7%
*Q4) What is/are your usual purpose(s) for visiting the airport? [n=95]
Purpose Number of Responses Percentage of Responses
Travel 75 78.9%
Send/receive a traveller 61 64.2%
Recreation 45 47.4%
Plane-spotting 9 9.5%
Study 12 12.6%
Previously worked there 5 5.3%
Others 2 2.1%
*These questions are for non-airport staff.
^Answers were categorised into several ranges: 1-3 times would mean a visit every
4 months or less, 4-6 times would mean a visit every 2-3 months, >7 times would
mean a visit every 2 months or more.
Q9) On a scale from 0 (no feeling) to 5 (strong feeling), rate how much you
associate Changi Airport with the following words / qualities. [n=93]
Qualities Mean˜
Clean 4.73
World-class 4.54
Excellence 4.47
Vital to Singapore 4.44
Pride 4.41
Global 4.39
Efficient 4.32
Contributes to economy 4.30
Symbol of Singapore 4.29
Showcasing the best of Singapore 4.29
'Heart of Aviation' 4.08
National identity 4.06
Singapore as nation 3.95
Familiar 3.89
Home 3.85
Expensive 3.80
Local 3.76
Joy 3.71
Innovation 3.69
Belonging 3.67

116
 Attachment 3.50
Long history 3.37
Good service 3.22
˜Arranged in descending order.

117
 APPENDIX C: AIDE-MEMOIRE FOR INTERVIEWS & AUTO-
PHOTOGRAPHY

(Guiding questions, not necessarily asked in listed order)

As a Singaporean:

• How would you describe Singapore as a nation?

• What do you think a Singaporean identity is about?
• Which places do you think represent Singapore as a nation?
• Which places in Singapore help to strengthen your national identity?
• Does the airport come to mind for the above 2 questions? Why?
• What does the airport mean to you?
• What words / feelings come to your mind when you think about Changi
Airport?
• How do you feel when you are at Changi Airport?
• Do you think a Singaporean identity includes the following qualities? Do
you think the airport promote these qualities? Explain.
o Pursuit of excellence
o Efficiency
o Innovation
o Good service
• How much exposure do you have to Changi Airport in your whole life?
What memories do you have of Changi Airport?
o How often did you go to the airport in the past?
• How often do you visit the airport nowadays?
o Where in Singapore do you live?
• Which people / places / things in Changi Airport best symbolize Singaporean
identity? Why?
• Explain how much is the airport:
o Important to Singapore?
o The pride of Singapore?
• Explain how much does the airport:
o Showcase the best of Singapore?
o Symbolize home & sense of belonging?
o Keep you rooted to Singapore?
o Make you feel proud about Singapore as a nation?
• What kind of news on Changi Airport do you encounter / find out about?
How do you feel when you encounter such news?

118
 • Do you use social media platforms? Do you follow any Changi Airport-
related social-media platforms? Which ones? How do you feel when you
visit these platforms?
• In your opinion, how much does the airport promote / increase national
identity among Singaporeans? Explain.
• In your opinion, how much does the airport symbolize / represent national
identity among Singaporeans? Explain.
• Any other comments about Changi Airport and/or national identity?

As an airport staff / scholar:

• What does / did your work at the airport entail?

• What got you interested in / to apply for a job / scholarship with
[organisation] / at the airport?
• What memories did you have of work (& of Changi Airport)?
• How do you feel about working at [organisation] / at the airport?
• What kinds of company values or beliefs guide your work at Changi Airport?

For auto-photography:

• Why did you take this photo? What did you find meaningful / symbolic in
this photo as a Singaporean?
• How does what is depicted in this photo help you to feel Singaporean?

119
APPENDIX D: PARTICIPANT INFORMATION SHEET & CONSENT FORM

1. Project Title: Changi Airport as Landscape for Nation-Building

2. Principal Investigator:
Woon Wei Seng (Mr), Department of Geography, National University of
Singapore
Email: woonweiseng@gmail.com; Telephone: (65) 97603918

3. Purpose of this Research:

This project aims to study how Changi Airport serves as a site to symbolise
or develop national identity amongst Singaporeans. Your opinions will be
used for the writing of my Honours Thesis for submission as part of my
undergraduate degree in Geography.

4. Who can participate in the research? What is the expected duration of my

participation? What is the duration of this research? What will be done if I
take part in this research?
You are invited to participate in this study if you are a citizen or Permanent
Resident of Singapore. This study is expected to end in January 2015.

As a research participant, you will be interviewed about your views about

Changi Airport and Singapore’s national identity. With your permission, the
interview will be audio-recorded for subsequent transcription. The interview
will last about 30-50 minutes.

5. How will my privacy and the confidentiality of my research records be

protected?
Your verbal contributions will be anonymised. Information given would be
kept strictly confidential, and data collected will be used solely for research
purposes.

120
6. Will there be reimbursement for participation?
There will not be any reimbursement for participating in this project.

7. What are the possible benefits to me and to others?

There is no direct benefit to you by participating in this research. However,
your input could potentially enhance how Changi Airport is designed for
and promoted to Singaporeans, as well as contribute to wider academic
understandings of airports and nation-building.

8. Can I refuse to participate in this research?

Yes, you can. There are no foreseeable risks in your participation, and
participation is entirely optional. You may choose to opt out at any time
during the study for any reason, and all information collected from you will
be erased.

121
Project Title: Changi Airport as Landscape for Nation-Building

Principal Investigator:

Woon Wei Seng (Mr), Department of Geography, National University of Singapore

Email: woonweiseng@gmail.com; Telephone: (65) 97603918

I hereby acknowledge that:

1. My signature is my acknowledgement that I have agreed to take part in the

above research.
2. I have received a copy of this information sheet that explains the use of my
participation in this research. I understand the contents of this information
sheet and agree to allow my opinions to be used for this research project.
3. I understand I can withdraw from the research at any point of time by
informing the Principal Investigator and my interview will be discarded.

Name: ______________________________

Signature: ______________________________

Date: ______________________________

122
1. Project Title: Changi Airport as Landscape for Nation-Building

2. Principal Investigator:
Woon Wei Seng (Mr), Department of Geography, National University of
Singapore
Email: woonweiseng@gmail.com; Telephone: (65) 97603918

3. Purpose of this Research:

This project aims to study how Changi Airport serves as a site to symbolise
or develop national identity amongst Singaporeans. Your photographs and
opinions will be used for the writing of my Honours Thesis for submission
as part of my undergraduate degree in Geography.

4. Who can participate in the research? What is the expected duration of my

participation? What is the duration of this research? What will be done if I
take part in this research?
You are invited to participate in this study if you are a citizen or Permanent
Resident of Singapore. This study is expected to end in January 2015.

As a research participant, you will be tasked to take photographs of Changi

Airport using a camera phone or other personally owned photographic
devices whenever you visit the airport. These photographs should be of
places, things or people in Changi Airport that you find meaningful and/or
symbolic to you as a Singaporean. The photographs taken should be sent to
me via email. There is no set limit to the number of photographs you can
take.

After that, you will be interviewed about your thoughts and intentions
behind the photos taken, as well as your views about Changi Airport and
Singapore’s national identity. With your permission, the interview will be
audio-recorded for subsequent transcription. The interview will last about
40-60 minutes.

123
5. How will my privacy and the confidentiality of my research records be
protected?
Your visual and verbal contributions will be anonymised. Information given
would be kept strictly confidential, and data collected will be used solely for
research purposes. In addition, faces of those depicted in the photographs
will be obscured.

6. Will there be reimbursement for participation?

There will not be any reimbursement for participating in this project.

7. What are the possible benefits to me and to others?

There is no direct benefit to you by participating in this research. However,
your input could potentially enhance how Changi Airport is designed for
and promoted to Singaporeans, as well as contribute to wider academic
understandings of airports and nation-building.

8. Can I refuse to participate in this research?

Yes, you can. There are no foreseeable risks in your participation, and
participation is entirely optional. You may choose to opt out at any time
during the study for any reason, and all information collected from you will
be erased.

124
Project Title: Changi Airport as Landscape for Nation-Building

Principal Investigator:

Woon Wei Seng (Mr), Department of Geography, National University of Singapore

Email: woonweiseng@gmail.com; Telephone: (65) 97603918

I hereby acknowledge that:

1. My signature is my acknowledgement that I have agreed to take part in the

above research.
2. I have received a copy of this information sheet that explains the use of my
participation in this research. I understand the contents of this information
sheet and agree to allow my photographs and opinions to be used for this
research project.
3. I understand I can withdraw from the research at any point of time by
informing the Principal Investigator and my photographs and interview will
be discarded.

Name: ______________________________

Signature: ______________________________

Date: ______________________________

125