Scotland, Singapore and the Problem of Being “Expensive but Boring”

Singapore may need to move from asking “who can afford to come?” to asking “why must people come?” Only when culture becomes the core of the visitor experience can the city aspire to become a cultural destination worth returning to.

“Singapore is too expensive, and there’s not much to do.” In recent months, variations of this comment have appeared repeatedly on Chinese social media. It may sound blunt, but it is not entirely without basis. More than a matter of individual sentiment, it points to a question Singapore needs to take seriously: as the cost of visiting Singapore continues to rise, is the value perceived by visitors rising at the same pace?

In recent years, Singapore has consistently promoted “quality tourism”, seeking visitors with greater spending power and longer stays. Yet in practice, quality can sometimes become little more than a euphemism for higher prices, while the experience itself receives comparatively less attention.

Whether visitors are willing to pay for a destination depends not simply on how expensive it is, but on whether it feels worth the price. When prices rise rapidly without a corresponding increase in the distinctiveness, depth and richness of the experience, a sense of disappointment is inevitable.

Singapore is safe, clean and efficient. These are advantages built over decades. But in the increasingly competitive regional tourism landscape, they are becoming baseline conditions rather than decisive reasons for visitors to stay longer. Without a stronger cultural proposition, Singapore can easily be perceived as a city where one stays for a night before moving on.

Scotland offers an instructive contrast. Its appeal as a tourist destination has not been built primarily through the constant creation of new attractions. Instead, it has been strengthened through a long and sustained process of cultural interpretation and storytelling, allowing visitors to enter a cultural world with a strong and recognisable sense of identity.

When I visited Edinburgh, Glasgow and the Scottish Highlands this August, this cultural logic was evident almost everywhere. In city museums, street music performances and community events in remote towns, local culture was not presented as something artificially staged for tourists. It was simply part of everyday life.

From the visibility of Gaelic in public spaces to the institutionalised presence of bagpipes, tartan and Highland Games; from literature and folk music to the reimagining of whisky-making as cultural heritage, Scotland has successfully transformed local culture into something that can be experienced, participated in and easily communicated. Visitors do not travel to Scotland merely to “see the scenery”. They enter a complete and coherent cultural context.

Film and television have played an important role in this process. Earlier works such as *Braveheart*, centred on Highland history and national consciousness, helped shape a global imagination of Scotland’s landscape and spirit. More recently, the hugely popular television series *Outlander* has brought Scottish culture closer to audiences through its detailed portrayal of language, clothing, music and landscapes, making that culture more intimate and emotionally accessible. The cultural imprint of the *Harry Potter* series on Edinburgh has likewise created a lasting connection between literature, the city and tourism.

What is important is that these productions did not simply invent a fictional Scotland. Instead, they repeatedly reinforced the connections between language, history, landscape and collective memory. They provided global audiences with an initial doorway into Scottish culture, while creating an emotional and intellectual foundation for those who would later visit in person.

In the Highlands, even the experience of appreciating the landscape is often accompanied by stories of land, clans, language and history. The cultural imagination constructed by film and television does not necessarily conflict with the reality encountered on the ground. In many cases, the two reinforce one another.

What visitors experience, therefore, is not simply scenery, but a way of life that can be understood and entered into.

Singapore Lacks a Way to “Step Inside”

This is perhaps why Scotland, despite not being a cheap destination, is less likely to be dismissed as poor value for money. When culture is reinforced through community practice, education and visual storytelling, price becomes less a question of cost and more a reflection of value.

Singapore is not lacking in cultural substance. Hawker culture, its multicultural society, its history as a port city and its extraordinary trajectory of urban development all possess depth and distinctiveness. The problem is that these elements often remain at the level of being *introduced* to visitors, rather than being transformed into experiences in which visitors can genuinely participate.

In recent years, some hotels, tourism operators and cultural organisations have begun experimenting with ways of incorporating community history, food and everyday life into travel itineraries, allowing visitors to experience, for a short time, what it might be like to live “like a local”.

The significance of these initiatives lies less in the format itself than in the direction they suggest: when culture is alive, tourism acquires warmth.

Another reality facing Singapore tourism is the decline in average visitor length of stay. This is not entirely a matter of market fluctuations. It is also related to how the destination is positioned.

When a place lacks sufficient cultural content to sustain a longer stay, visitors naturally struggle to find reasons to remain for several more days. Reversing this trend will require more than increasingly expensive hotels or more shopping options. Culture needs to become part of the itinerary itself.

Festivals, community routes, art events, and connections between food, history and everyday life all offer possible entry points. When cultural experiences have continuity and depth, tourism becomes more than consumption. It becomes an experience worth remembering.

The description of Singapore as “expensive but boring” may not be entirely fair. But it does offer a useful warning.

Prices can be determined by the market. Value, however, has to be deliberately cultivated.

If Singapore truly wants to move towards quality tourism, perhaps it needs to shift from asking *“Who can afford to come?”* to asking *“Why must people come?”*

Only when culture is no longer merely the backdrop, but becomes the core of the visitor experience, can Singapore move beyond being an efficient regional hub and become a cultural destination that people have a reason to return to.

*Originally published in Chinese by Lianhe Zaobao (Singapore) on 2 January 2026.*

——————