Petition updateRethink the Western Island Plan for Singapore: Save the Coral Reefs

Policy Recommendations: Protecting Singapore’s Marine Biodiversity in the Western Island Development

Zoah TanSingapore, Singapore
Oct 9, 2026

Singapore has an opportunity to demonstrate that long-term national development and environmental conservation can be pursued together.

The proposed Western Island development presents potentially irreversible risks to marine ecosystems surrounding Pulau Semakau, Pulau Bukom and Pulau Sudong. These waters contain important coral reefs, mangroves and seagrass meadows that support marine biodiversity and contribute to the health of our coastal environment.

We recognise that Singapore has legitimate long-term needs relating to energy, industry, national security and land use. We are not asking the Government to abandon development. We are asking it to demonstrate that the proposed plan is the most responsible option available after environmental impacts and feasible alternatives have been rigorously assessed.

We respectfully propose the following recommendations.

 

1.Publish comprehensive environmental assessments before finalising the development plan

We request that the Government publish environmental findings early enough for them to meaningfully influence the island's design and boundaries, rather than only after fundamental decisions have already been made.

Assessments should include:

  • Detailed mapping of coral reefs, mangroves, seagrass meadows and other ecologically important habitats.
  • Baseline surveys of marine species, including vulnerable and rare species, and the ecological connectivity between habitats.
  • Assessments of sedimentation, turbidity, water quality, hydrodynamics and the effects of construction on nearby reefs.
  • Cumulative impacts from other reclamation, dredging, coastal engineering and industrial activities in the surrounding waters.
  • Long-term effects on ecosystem resilience, carbon storage, fisheries and coastal processes.
    Where sensitive ecological information must be protected, appropriate summaries should still be made available to the public.

 

2. Conduct a transparent assessment of alternatives
Before committing to a particular reclamation footprint, we ask the Government to compare the proposed plan with less damaging alternatives.

These should include:

  • Reducing or redesigning the reclamation footprint to avoid the most ecologically significant reefs.
    Considering alternative island boundaries and layouts.
  • Assessing whether phased development could reduce the scale and duration of environmental disturbance.
  • Evaluating empoldering and other engineering approaches where technically and environmentally appropriate.
  • Investigating whether some proposed land uses could be accommodated through existing industrial land, redevelopment or alternative locations.
  • Comparing the economic costs, engineering feasibility and environmental impacts of each viable option.

The assessment should explain why the preferred plan offers a better overall outcome than the alternatives, including the ecological losses that cannot be reversed.

 

3. Identify and protect critical marine habitats
We request that the Government identify priority conservation areas before finalising reclamation boundaries.

Where feasible, these should include ecologically important and resilient coral reefs, reef areas that support marine connectivity, mangroves and seagrass meadows.

The Government should establish clear protection measures and construction safeguards for habitats that can be retained. These measures should be supported by enforceable requirements, monitoring and transparent reporting.

Avoiding the destruction of a mature reef should take priority over attempting to restore a similar habitat elsewhere.

 

4. Require a transparent, professionally managed coral relocation programme if relocation is proposed

Coral relocation should be treated as a last resort for unavoidable impacts, not as a substitute for protecting existing reefs.

If the Government intends to relocate corals affected by the Western Island development, we request the publication of a detailed relocation plan before reclamation works begin.

The plan should specify:

  • The total budget and funding allocated to relocation, specialist personnel, equipment and long-term monitoring.
  • The number and species of corals proposed for relocation, with the selection criteria clearly explained.
  • The scientific basis for selecting recipient sites and the methods used to assess their suitability.
    Independent oversight by qualified marine scientists and coral ecologists.
  • Survival, growth and ecological recovery targets at six months, one year, five years and beyond.
  • Public reporting of outcomes, including mortality, unsuccessful transplants and corrective measures.
  • Clear accountability for the agencies, contractors and specialists responsible for implementation.


Historical experience in Singapore shows why these safeguards matter. Earlier coral relocation efforts associated with development around Jurong Island faced significant survival challenges. The Government should therefore explain what lessons have been learned, what methods have improved, and what independent evidence demonstrates that the proposed approach is appropriate for the reefs affected by this project.

Volunteer efforts and community participation are valuable, but a conservation programme of national significance requires adequate professional expertise, funding and long-term accountability.

Even a successful relocation programme cannot guarantee the recreation of an ancient reef with the same ecological complexity and relationships as the original.

 

5. Explore nature-inclusive coastal engineering
We request that the Government assess whether ecologically designed coastal structures and nature-based solutions can reduce environmental harm where infrastructure is necessary.

Potential approaches include:

  • Ecologically designed seawalls and suitable artificial reef substrates.
  • Coastal configurations that retain or create sheltered habitats where appropriate.
  • Nature-based coastal protection using suitable mangrove or seagrass habitats.
  • Engineering designs that reduce sediment dispersion and protect nearby marine habitats during construction.


These approaches should be evaluated through site-specific scientific assessments. They must not be treated as automatic compensation for the destruction of natural reefs.

 

6. Establish independent monitoring and public accountability
We request an independent monitoring framework that begins before construction and continues throughout development and subsequent ecological recovery.

This should include:

  • Publicly accessible baseline environmental data and monitoring results.
  • Independent verification of compliance with environmental safeguards.
  • Clear thresholds for unacceptable sedimentation, water quality changes and ecological damage.
  • Corrective action when environmental limits are exceeded.
  • Public reporting on coral relocation and restoration outcomes.
  • A clear explanation of the financial and regulatory consequences of failing to meet environmental commitments.
  • Monitoring must be capable of influencing construction activities and project decisions, rather than simply documenting damage after it occurs.

 

7. Make public consultation meaningful
We welcome the Government's commitment to make the environmental study report available for public feedback when ready.

We ask that the consultation process provide sufficient time for residents, researchers, marine scientists, nature groups and other stakeholders to review the findings and submit evidence-based recommendations.

The Government should publish a response explaining how significant feedback has influenced the final design and which recommendations were not adopted, together with the reasons.

Meaningful consultation should take place while alternatives remain open and changes can still be made.

 

Our requests
We respectfully call on the Ministry of National Development, Minister Chee Hong Tat, Prime Minister Lawrence Wong and the relevant Government agencies to:

  1. Reconsider the Western Island development plan before committing to irreversible reclamation.
  2. Publish comprehensive environmental assessments and transparent comparisons of viable alternatives.
  3. Prioritise the avoidance and protection of irreplaceable marine habitats.
  4. Disclose the methodology, funding, targets and independent oversight of any proposed coral relocation programme.
  5. Establish transparent environmental monitoring, accountability and public consultation before major reclamation decisions are finalised.

Singapore's prosperity is a significant national achievement. Protecting the natural ecosystems that make our country distinctive should be part of that achievement, not a cost that we accept without fully considering the alternatives.

We have the opportunity to demonstrate that a land-scarce nation can plan ambitiously while making responsible choices about its natural heritage.

We ask the Government to make the protection of irreplaceable marine ecosystems a fundamental consideration in planning Singapore's future.

 

Further reading

 

Scientific Publications

54 people signed this week
Sign this petition
Copy link
WhatsApp
Facebook
Nextdoor
Email
X