Cultural Contestations and Social Integration: What Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area Can Learn from the Experiences of Malaysia and Singapore?

  • H. C. J. WongEmail author
  • S. L. Fung


China is rapidly developing and many cities have expanded in tremendous scale. To what extent economic development is par with social policies and services support is a great challenge for sustainable growth. Employing designs of social indicators first to evaluate social progress and then to guide social integration has a long tradition worldwide. The Central government of China has just proclaimed the plan of developing the Guangdong – Hong Kong – Macao Greater Bay Area in order to give the economic development of the region another push. Nevertheless these efforts will only be successful if the cities in the region can gradually form into supplementary and complimentary unions. Without a gradually leveling in terms of social welfare and social life, free mobility of professional talents and innovative human resources will be jeopardized. This will make the next phase of development difficult. Malaysia, Singapore and neighboring countries along the Melaka Gateway give us a vivid example in modern history particularly in this century on economic and cultural integration. The historical and continuing presence of the Chinese communities in the Melaka Gateway region makes it a perfect example for us to study and compare respective models of social development.

The paper examines social indicators of the two regions and highlights on what we can learn from each other. The research mainly adopts the secondary data analysis approach.


  1. Abbott, P., & Wallace, C. (2012). Social quality: A way to measure the quality of society. Social Indicators Research, 108, 153–167. Springer. Scholar
  2. Bringel, B. M., & Domingues, J. M. (2015). Global modernity and social contestation. New Delhi: SAGE: Studies in International Sociology.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chan, T. (2017). China’s Central Government promotes the Guangdong ‑Hong Kong ‑Macao Greater Bay Area, Macao Magazine: 2017-6-9. Extracted from: the-guangdong%C2%AD%E2%80%91hong-kong%C2%AD%E2%80%91macao-greater-bay-area/
  4. Chua, K. H. (2010). Social capital and inequality in Singapore. A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Sociology, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
  5. CUHK. (2014). Attitude towards working in Mainland among Young People of Hong Kong. Extracted from:
  6. Department of Statistics Singapore. (2011). Singapore Census of Population 2010, Statistical Release 1: Demographic Characteristics, Education, Language and Religion,
  7. Fenger, M. (2012). Deconstructing social cohesion: Towards an analytical framework for assessing social cohesion policies. Corvinus Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 2, 39–54.Google Scholar
  8. Global-is-Asian. (2017). Singapore’s lesson: Managing immigration to create a win-win situation, 2017-6-23. Extracted from:
  9. Hofmeister, W., & Rueppel, P. (2014). Social cohesion, addressing social divide in Europe and Asia. Singapore: Konrad-Adenauer Stiftung and European Union.Google Scholar
  10. Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department. (2016). Hong Kong 2016 population by-census – Key statistics. Hong Kong: The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.Google Scholar
  11. Housing Development Board. (2013). “Ethnic Integration Policy (EIP),” June 27, 2013, Accessed July 20 2013,
  12. Lau, S. K. (2002). Hongkong people or Chinese people, Identity problems of Chinese Diaspora in Hong Kong 1985–1995. Extracted from:
  13. Li, P. W., & Zhuang, H. S. (2018). Viewpoints. Ming Pao Daily, 2018-02-02.Google Scholar
  14. Malaysia Economic Planning Unit. (2013). Malaysian Economy in Figures 2013, downloaded on 25 February 2014 from: b1448a6a1475.
  15. Malaysia Economic Planning Unit (2013a). Table 5: Gini Coefficient by Ethnicity, Strata and State, Malaysia, 1970–2012, downloaded on 11 January 2014 from:
  16. Malaysia, the Government of (2010). Tenth Malaysia Plan 2011-2015, Putrajaya: The Economic Planning Unit, Prime Minister’s Department.Google Scholar
  17. Malaysia Prime Minister’s Department Economic Planning Unit, (2004). Malaysia: 30 years of poverty reduction, growth and racial harmony. Scaling Up Poverty Reduction: A Global Learning Process and Conference Shanghai, May 25–27, 2004. Extracted from:
  18. Merdeka Center for Opinion Research. (2006). Public opinion poll on ethnic relations: Experience, & expectations. March, 2006. Extracted from:
  19. National Integration Council. (2010). Home for the New Singapore citizens. Singapore. Extracted from:
  20. Ng, J. Y. (2013, July 15). Our Singapore conversation themes identified, dialogue to continue. Today Online. Accessed 30 Aug 2013. Extracted from:
  21. Nurhidayah, H., & Yeo, L. H. (2014). Social cohesion in Singapore – Challenges and policy response. In W. Hofmeister & P. Rueppel (Eds.), Social cohesion, addressing social divide in Europe and Asia (pp. 46–58). Singapore: Konrad-Adenauer Stiftung and European Union Extracted from:
  22. Park, R. E., & Burgess, W. E. (1969/1921). Introduction to the science of sociology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  23. People’s Association. (2009). “Residents’ Committees”, People’s Association, October 30, Accessed July 13, 2013,
  24. Putnam, R. D. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of Democracy., [Internet], 6(1), 65–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Spoonley, P., Peace, R., Butcher, A., & O’Neill, D. (2005). Social cohesion: A policy and indicator framework for assessing immigrant and host outcomes. Social Policy Journal of New Zealand, 24, 85–110.Google Scholar
  26. Tan, C., & Ng, P. K. (2011). Functional differentiation: A critique of the bilingual policy in Singapore. Journal of Asian Public Policy, 4(3), 331–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ting, M. H. (2014). Social cohesion in Malaysia. In W. Hofmeister & P. Rueppel (Eds.), Social cohesion, addressing social divide in Europe and Asia (pp. 59–74). Singapore: Konrad-Adenauer Stiftung and European Union.Google Scholar
  28. Tse, K. L. (2017). Cooperation is key to building China’s Bay area. China Business Knowledge @ CUHK, 2017-8-14. Extracted from:
  29. Tully, J. (2009). Public philosophy in a new key: Volume 1, democracy and civic freedom (ideas in context). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  30. United Nations. (1995a). Copenhagen Declaration on Social Development and Programme of Action of the World Summit for Social Development, World Summit for Social Development, Copenhagen, March 6–12, 1995. Extracted from:
  31. United Nations. (1995b). Dialogue in the social integration process: Participation by, for and with people. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Division of Social Policy and Development. Extracted from:
  32. United Nations Development Programme. (2016). Human development reports. United Nations. Extracted from:
  33. Wiener A. (2014) Cultural cosmopolitanism: Contestedness and contestation (pp. 45–53). In: A theory of contestation. Springer Briefs in Political Science. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  34. Wu, W. Q. (2017). Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay area synergy innovation development report. Guangzhou Daily 2017-7-22. Extracted from:
  35. You, J. (2017). Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay area synergy innovation development report, 2017. Extracted from:

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Director of Student Affairs Office and Professor of Social Work and Social AdministrationUnited International CollegeZhuhaiChina
  2. 2.Chinese Language CenterUnited International CollegeZhuhaiChina

Personalised recommendations