Singapore’s worst haze since 2015: What went right, and what are the lessons?

“The setting up of this fund and the cost sharing can be likened to a form of foreign aid from victim countries to Indonesia itself,” he added.

But regional cooperation should not come at the expense of accountability, Assoc Prof Tan cautioned.

He pointed to the principle of customary international law that countries have a responsibility not to cause environmental harm beyond their borders.

“A country has the sovereign right to exploit its natural resources within its territorial boundaries. However, that sovereign right does not justify its actions and activities that cause harm or damage to another country. If it does, it is legally liable,” he said.

“We cannot lose sight of this important customary international law. Otherwise, the haze crisis will continue with a patent lack of responsibility and accountability among stakeholders.”

Beyond governments and businesses, civil society could also play a greater role.

Prof Ang recalled how the Singapore Environment Council and Consumers Association of Singapore had previously urged consumers to boycott companies whose land-clearing practices contributed to forest fires.

“Involving civil society groups has the salutary effect of empowering individuals,” said Prof Ang.

“That is, each Singaporean must feel that they are able to do something to fight the haze, not just to accommodate it by wearing masks or staying indoors with the air conditioner and air purifier on.”