The first time I used a BlueSG car a few years ago, the novelty factor of having access to an electric car on demand without needing to own the vehicle intrigued me.
But the actual experience was underwhelming. It drove like a slightly ambitious golf buggy with weak acceleration and had such poor air-conditioning that the interior felt stuffy.
The poor maintenance of the car turned me off the concept of car sharing altogether and it appears other issues have gradually driven others away from it too.
In early August, BlueSG announced it would “pause” its operations in Singapore to prepare for a relaunch in 2026. Experts cite losses caused by an ageing fleet.
But there have been plenty of online comments and user feedback about shared cars in general, griping about the cars being dirty and littered with food wrappers, or worse.
Unfortunately, this is a familiar refrain. Remember Singapore’s foray into bike sharing years ago, when random bikes could be found vandalised or dumped indiscriminately in places like HDB stairwells or even, once, in a canal?
All too often, such shared services end up being treated like disposables that we aren’t interested in maintaining.
This says something rather unflattering about us.
A culture of compliance
Singapore has long had a reputation as a carefully managed, orderly city. Yet, we can hardly collectively claim credit for this. We largely rely on an extensive list of rules and regulations to stay in line, like returning used food trays at hawker centres.
It’s built a culture of compliance where people do things because we have to, not because we want to. And once we are away from all this regulation, the edges start to fray.
In many HDB estates – mine included – used tissue, cigarette stubs and other random litter often lie strewn about.
Let’s not even start on the blue recycling bins that often end up as a dumping ground. Estimates show that about 40 per cent of what is thrown into the bins is not recyclable.
If not for an army of mostly invisible cleaners picking up after us, many of our estates would look significantly more unsightly.
All this outsourcing to cleaners, enforcement officers and stern warnings inevitably weaken our sense of civic responsibility. Perhaps this is why things and systems that rely on personal initiative to be kept in order – like shared bicycles and vehicles, and public recycling bins – keep breaking down.
Users may also believe it is the operators’ job to maintain these services, instead of assuming some personal responsibility in taking care of what we are using.
Shared accountability
There are many other places that combine efficiency with a strong sense of shared accountability.
It would be remiss not to mention Japan – interestingly, a top holiday destination for Singaporeans – as an example.
The country is often held up as a model for spotless public spaces. Despite there being hardly any public rubbish bins, one rarely sees litter because locals are accustomed to carrying their trash with them.
Elsewhere, bike sharing has been a successful and efficient way of offering affordable, convenient and eco-friendly transport in dense urban areas.
YouBike is a popular mode of transportation in Taiwan and has one of the top global usage rates for public bike-sharing schemes. New York’s Citi Bike, which was launched in 2013 and saw bikers take more than 10 million rides by 2015, continues to expand its coverage today.
No doubt the success of a bike-sharing scheme also depends on factors beyond user behaviour, such as physical geography and cooperation between operators and regulators, a BBC report showed.
But the experience of these cities shows it is possible for bike-sharing schemes to be sustainable and successful.
In Singapore, bike-sharing schemes are now being cautiously reintroduced, but it remains to be seen if users will take more care of the bikes this time round.
Positive examples also exist in car sharing overseas, like Estonia’s Bolt Drive and initiatives in Japan by car brands like Toyota and Nissan.
Of course, no system is perfect. But they do tend to be more sustainable where civic-mindedness is the norm and damaging shared resources is socially unacceptable.
By contrast, when we rely disproportionately on rules, fines and “nannies” to clean up messes instead of cultivating personal responsibility, this leads to superficial maintenance of order.
Without emotional involvement like a genuine sense of pride and community duty, shared services will continue to remain vulnerable to neglect and misuse.
Strengthening social networks
So how can we develop this culture of care? Clearly, rules and enforcement aren’t enough.
One possibility is to strengthen social networks, through community-based models that tap into local pride and foster real connections.
Take the informal but well-organised groups of animal lovers caring for neighbourhood cats in many HDB estates. These networks, born of gentle advocacy and education, have helped shift attitudes dramatically.
It warms my heart to see cats thriving in tidy “homes” at void decks, with carers even drawing up rosters to feed and tidy up after the cats and residents stopping by to share a moment with their furry neighbours.
It’s a sense of collective ownership over the space, a reminder that shared resources work best when everyone feels they have a stake in them, rather than leaving it to “someone else”.
Another example is the Casual Poet Library in Alexandra, a community-run library where individuals rent shelves to display the books they would like to loan and members pay a small fee to borrow books. This model thrives on the passion of book lovers and relies on a community willing to care for shared treasures.
It is not always smooth sailing. Other community libraries have faltered due to theft or neglect, reminding us that goodwill alone is not always enough.
Sustaining care demands engagement, accountability and sometimes a few clever nudges. The Casual Poet Library, for instance, is staffed by volunteer librarians who process loans and take time to share the library’s ethos with newcomers.
But if communities can rally around stray cats and small libraries, why not car and bike sharing?
As a car-free Singaporean, I sometimes wish I had easier access to a car, like when I need to run multiple errands or explore corners of Singapore like Mandai.
An efficient car-sharing system would help to fill this transport gap, but only if enough of us are willing to treat it with the care it deserves.
The truth is, if we want access to more nice things, like convenient, low-cost shared vehicles, we will need to play an active role in their upkeep, and not just assume others will pick up after us.
Just as community libraries and cat caretakers have built networks through mutual responsibility and trust, shared transport systems can do the same.
One possibility is to design peer accountability into the system. For instance, the next user of a car-sharing system could rate the vehicle’s condition, encouraging each individual to leave the vehicle clean and damage-free.
Real-time reporting features that empower users to flag problems and incentives like credits or discounts for consistently responsible behaviour will also help to create a feedback loop of collective care.
The aim is to create a sense of ownership and pride among users so that they stop regarding these vehicles as nobody’s responsibility. In time, this might even become second nature.
Without genuine participation and effort from each person, these services will continue to flounder no matter how many iterations they go through.
Then, it is not even about wanting to have nice things.
We will just end up stuck in this frustrating loop of having something useful presented to us, only to have it taken away when it gets broken once again.
- Karen Tee writes on lifestyle issues from Singapore.
