The Emperor's New Clothes

Learning from Singapore's success — how good design is more than what it looks like

In Hans Christian Andersen’s famous tale “The Emperor’s New Clothes,” a vain emperor is deceived into wearing an invisible suit, praised by fearful advisors unwilling to admit the truth. It takes the honesty of a child to reveal the obvious: the emperor is, in fact, wearing nothing at all.

Similarly, many cities today make bold claims about becoming “the next Singapore,” showcasing grand infrastructure and eye-catching designs as symbols of their success. Yet, like the emperor’s invisible clothes, these claims often lack substance. Beneath the surface, these cities frequently miss the deeper elements that define true success: long-term vision, sustainability, human-centered service design, and seamless public systems integration.

The illusion of success, much like the emperor’s invisible attire, fades when the underlying principles are absent. True success, akin to good UX design, isn’t just about what’s visible—it’s about how all elements work together harmoniously to create a sustainable, efficient experience for people.

In digital design, good UX (user experience) ensures systems are intuitive and function well. The same principles apply to city planning and governance, and Singapore exemplifies this on a broader scale. Its success is not just in grand designs, but in the UX of living—an interconnected, systemic approach that considers the long-term impact on people, the environment, and the economy. Having lived in Singapore for the past nine years, I’ve seen firsthand how these elements come together to make the city what it is.

While many urban projects worldwide aim to rival Singapore, focusing on surface-level features like large airports and skyscrapers, they often overlook the deep-rooted UX principles that have made Singapore a model of efficiency and modernity. Let’s explore why these cities fall short and how Singapore’s approach to urban design and governance is built on UX principles that truly make a city work.

Jakarta’s Soekarno-Hatta Terminal 3 Ultimate: Impressive design, but lacking seamless experience

Jakarta’s Terminal 3 Ultimate was pitched as a rival to Singapore’s Changi Airport, claiming it would “beat” Singapore. While the terminal offers impressive design and scale, it lacks the comprehensive service integration, sustainability, and regulatory efficiency that define Changi’s user experience. It is very hard to get into town with frequency and connectivity as easy as in Singapore. Lighting, temperature and flow of the airport is not as efficient.

UX in Singapore isn’t just about making things look good—it’s about how all systems work together seamlessly. Terminal 3 may be visually impressive, but without smooth transport connectivity, efficient operations, and thoughtful service design, it cannot offer the same holistic experience that makes Changi a global leader. H

Phnom Penh’s Techo International Airport: Flashy much?

Phnom Penh’s new Techo International Airport aims to position itself as a regional competitor to Singapore, focusing on its size and ambitious design. But this seems to focus on aesthetics overlooks the deeper UX principles that make a place functional and people-centric. Techo Airport lacks the forward-thinking governance and service design that underpin Singapore’s success. For example, while the terminal may be large, without an intuitive layout, efficient immigration services, and convenient access to public transport, the user experience falls short. In UX terms, the airport offers a flashy interface but lacks the usability that keeps users coming back. We don’t know yet for sure, but that’s my gut feeling. They contracted Changi Airports International to manage their F&B businesses, which is a testament in itself that service design and management matter more than fancy buildings or size.

Dubai, UAE: Grand designs but lack of public transport connectivity?

Dubai is often compared to Singapore for its rapid development and iconic infrastructure, like the Burj Khalifa and Dubai International Airport. However, Dubai’s UX suffers from a lack of integrated public transport and urban planning. A core UX principle is reducing user friction, and Singapore has mastered this with its efficient Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) system, walkable streets, and thoughtful city design. Dubai, by contrast, remains highly car-dependent, leading to congestion and a fragmented user experience. It highlights a crucial lesson: grand designs alone do not create a seamless experience—it’s the thoughtful, behind-the-scenes systems that make it work.

The point is that while weather plays a role, the lack of integrated public transport and walkability in Dubai is not solely due to the climate. Thoughtful planning, as seen in cities like Singapore and Doha, can ensure that even in harsh weather, cities provide seamless and comfortable user experiences. Singapore has mastered UX principles by anticipating challenges like heat and humidity, and Dubai could implement similar strategies by investing in air-conditioned, connected, and climate-controlled public spaces.

Even in extreme climates, cities can design systems that reduce user friction and improve overall urban experience through careful planning and climate-specific solutions. Grand designs need to be complemented with behind-the-scenes systems that make everyday life more livable and accessible, regardless of the weather.

Iskandar, Johor, Malaysia: Affordable but lacking integration

Marketed as the “next Singapore,” Iskandar Malaysia is an economic zone offering lower costs but faces challenges with inconsistent regulations, underdeveloped public transport, and fragmented urban planning. UX in urban design is about creating cohesive systems that work for all users—residents, workers, and visitors. Singapore excels at this by integrating infrastructure, services, and governance into a unified experience. Iskandar’s failure to offer a seamless user journey across these elements shows how crucial this principle is to replicating Singapore’s success.

Colombo Port City, Sri Lanka: Ambitious but unsustainable?

Colombo’s Port City was envisioned as a regional hub to compete with Singapore. However, it faces environmental sustainability issues, political instability, and weak regulations. Good UX in city planning goes beyond immediate user needs to consider long-term sustainability. Singapore’s forward-looking Green Plan 2030 and urban policies ensure that today’s infrastructure won’t create problems tomorrow. Colombo’s Port City, while ambitious, lacks this future-focused approach, leading to a user experience that may be enjoyable today but unsustainable in the long run.

Shenzhen, China: Tech giant with human-centric gaps

Shenzhen has rapidly become a global tech powerhouse, sometimes compared to Singapore for its innovation. However, it struggles with issues like pollution, congestion, and lack of walkability. Good UX means creating environments that work for people on a human scale, and Singapore does this exceptionally well through green spaces, pedestrian-friendly areas, and efficient public transport. Shenzhen’s rapid growth has prioritized economic output over livability, highlighting that success in one domain doesn’t always translate into a better user experience for residents. It is also important that to be the next Singapore, one region has to stay open to migration and be friends with most if not all in the world, which I see lacking in China. It is simply too high of a barrier to get into. Whether it is an excellent choice as an alternative to Singapore, remains a debate.

Naypyidaw, Myanmar: Poor user-centric design

Naypyidaw, Myanmar’s purpose-built capital, was designed to be a modern city like Singapore. Despite its vast highways and government buildings, it’s often described as a “ghost town.” This is a prime example of failing to design with the user in mind. In UX, understanding user needs is crucial, and Singapore does this by ensuring public spaces are accessible, services are efficient, and infrastructure supports the daily lives of residents. Naypyidaw’s failure to create a livable, engaging environment shows the importance of designing cities for real people—not just for political or aesthetic goals.

Putrajaya, Malaysia: Administrative hub, but lacking good flow

Putrajaya was built to serve as Malaysia’s new administrative capital, modeled in part on Singapore’s success. While it features impressive government buildings and parks, it lacks the livability, economic diversity, and public transport efficiency that make Singapore so successful. Putrajaya’s UX issue is its disconnection between the needs of the people who work and live there and the design of the city itself. In UX terms, it’s as if the interface looks clean and functional, but the underlying systems do not work well together to create a fluid experience.

Masdar City, UAE: Sustainability stuck in a prototype stage

Masdar City in Abu Dhabi was designed to be the world’s first carbon-neutral city, aiming to rival Singapore’s reputation for sustainability. However, delays and scaling issues have left the city stuck in a prototype stage. Singapore’s approach to sustainability is practical, integrated, and long-term. Masdar City’s failure to execute on its sustainability goals reflects a breakdown in long-term planning and user-centricity. In UX, it’s akin to launching a flashy beta product without ensuring that all the features work cohesively. People say it’s a failed project.

—

Singapore’s success is not just about infrastructure—it’s about applying the core principles of good UX to every aspect of city planning and governance. Here’s how these principles manifest in Singapore’s broader success:

User-centric design – Singapore designs its systems with people in mind, whether it’s the intuitive flow of Changi Airport, the efficient public transport network, or the integration of green spaces in a dense urban environment. These aren’t just isolated wins—they are the result of thoughtful, human-centric design across the board.

Seamless experience – Like any great digital product, Singapore offers a seamless experience for its “users”—its residents and visitors. From housing to healthcare, public services to education, everything is designed to work together, minimizing friction and enhancing quality of life.

Sustainability – A good UX product isn’t just about the present but also about future-proofing. Singapore’s Green Plan 2030 and water management systems like Newater show a deep commitment to long-term sustainability, ensuring the city works for generations to come.

Efficiency – Just like efficient code in a digital product, Singapore’s governance, regulatory frameworks, and infrastructure systems are optimized for smooth operation. This isn’t achieved by accident—it’s the result of a culture that values order, planning, and precision.

Good service design – Singapore is a master of service design, ensuring that every interaction with public services, from housing applications to transport, is streamlined and user-friendly. Cities like Jakarta and Phnom Penh focus on the infrastructure “interface,” but without service design, they struggle to deliver the same level of satisfaction.

If Singapore is an example of good UX, then its success lies in its ability to apply these principles across every aspect of city life. Cities that aspire to “be the next Singapore” often focus on surface-level achievements—grand buildings, airports, and shiny infrastructure—but without understanding the deeper UX principles, they miss what truly makes Singapore work.

Becoming “the next Singapore” isn’t just about building bigger and better; it’s about adopting user-centricity, seamless integration, sustainability, and efficiency as core values. Only when cities design for the people who live in them, just like a good UX designer would for their users, can they hope to replicate Singapore’s holistic success.

So, every time you hear a big claim somewhere in the world about being the “next Singapore,” it’s likely to fail. A good city or project doesn’t boast grand claims about itself but instead focuses on working out its strategies.