Asian Anthropology

ISSN: 1683-478X (Print) 2168-4227 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/raan20

Kopi culture: consumption, conservatism and

cosmopolitanism among Singapore’s millennials

Cheryl Chang & Ian McGonigle

To cite this article: Cheryl Chang & Ian McGonigle (2020): Kopi culture: consumption,
conservatism and cosmopolitanism among Singapore’s millennials, Asian Anthropology, DOI:
10.1080/1683478X.2020.1726965

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/1683478X.2020.1726965

Published online: 02 Apr 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 10

View related articles

View Crossmark

data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=raan20
ASIAN ANTHROPOLOGY
https://doi.org/10.1080/1683478X.2020.1726965

REPORT

Kopi culture: consumption, conservatism and cosmopolitanism among

Singapore’s millennials
Cheryl Chang and Ian McGonigle
Division of Sociology, School of Social Sciences, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
In Singapore, traditional local coffee (kopi) and coffee shops Asia; coffee; consumption;
(kopitiam) compete with a growing slew of third-wave caf´es global; identity; Singapore
and their specialty brews. In this context, we show that coffee offers
a window into understanding contemporary millennial youth cul-
ture in the society. This report tracks this phenomenon through
ethnographic work in Singapore’s caf´es and coffee shops,
com- bined with interviews from coffee consumers and staff. Moving
beyond describing coffee as a beverage, this report shows that coffee
is mobilized to self-fashion a traditional Singaporean heri- tage, while
also offering a platform for performing creative global consumersism
in the international city. Coffee consumption thus offers a medium
for performing an ambivalent (g)local version of what it means to be
a Singaporean. This report thus speaks more broadly to the
anthropology of consumption and to the anthro- pology of identities
in urban South East Asia.

One nation, two coffees

“Homeground Coffee Roasters” is a recent third-wave addition to the heritage shop-
house-lined streets of Katong, a neighbourhood located on Singapore’s Eastern shore.
The space is tight but homey, comprising an open counter space and plain shelves
stacked high with assorted coffee paraphernalia – single-origin beans, filters, goose-
neck kettles and the like, and even merchandise and artwork created in-house by their
barista. The simple no-frills approach follows through in menu offerings, making it
clear that this is primarily a coffee house selling a small selection of baked goods on the
side; it is not a generic caf´e chain. The place is surprisingly packed on a late
Monday afternoon as various groups trickle in for their pick-me-ups. Some visits are
more fleeting, with SG$5 “coffees to-go,” while other visitors stay to do a spot of work
or enjoy a drink with friends, occupying the horizontal benches that line the store ’s
narrow entrance.
Just a short walk down this same stretch leads to Chin Mee Chin Confectionery,
one of the last remaining open-air Hainanese kopitiams (coffee shops). This institution is
nothing if not quaint; clear steel cabinet displays, round marble tables and rickety

CONTACT Ian McGonigle ianmcgonigle@ntu.edu.sg

© 2020 The Department of Anthropology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong
2 C. CHANG AND I. MCGONIGLE

wooden chairs litter the mosaic-tiled floor, reminiscent of 1950s Singapore. On any
given day, the cloying aroma of butter and dollar-kopis (coffee in local parlance) fills
the air and a smattering of silver-haired regulars chat with their kakis (friends or com-
panions, in Hokkien dialect) while enjoying their usual orders, typically taken by sul-
len-faced and singlet-wearing elders.
In Singapore, the term “kopitiam” is a portmanteau of “coffee” in the Malay lan-
guage and “shop” in Hokkien dialect, and refers to the neighborhood coffee shops like
Chin Mee Chin that are most commonly found in Singapore or Malaysia. Kopitiams in
Singapore are said to have been pioneered by early Hainanese immigrants, who, with-
out the economic backing of powerful dialect clan associations, sought jobs in the
food, beverage and service industry (Loh and Yang 2015). Most famously known as
“Nanyang-style coffee,” local kopi is brewed with robusta beans that are traditionally
roasted with corn or sugar and margarine, filtered through a flannel coffee sock and
later mixed with condensed milk and sugar (Loh and Yang 2015). This practice of food
adulteration was typical of the early working poor in Singapore, who resorted to mix-
ing additives in their food as they were financially incapable of affording more flavor-
ful and nutritious foods (Edge 2007).
The global history of coffee tells a different story, however, one that has evolved with
global shifts in modernity and social class. The first wave usually refers to the mass pro-
duction and popularization of arabica coffee, beginning with large supermarket chains.
The second wave points to the proliferation of coffee as a lifestyle commodity, which was
largely led by Peet’s Coffee and Starbucks in the US. This saw the introduction of espresso-
based drinks such as lattes and cappuccinos, and the expansion of the coffee industry in
exploring various beans, roasting and brewing methods. Greater attention was also paid to
ensure fair-trade sourcing in the global coffee supply chain (Jewel Coffee 2018). In
contrast, the third wave celebrates coffee as artisanal craft rather than sheer commodity – from
precise technical processes to cinematic brewing contraptions that ensure the purest
extraction of flavor and beautiful latte art.
Singapore is a confluence of these local and global coffee histories, where old con-
ventions survive, and even thrive, alongside contemporary cosmopolitanisms. The
young nation-state’s coffee culture thus makes an interesting case for an anthropo-
logical reading of identity and the imaginations of global and local belonging. Indeed,
Singapore’s 55 years of independence reflect a sparse cultural and historical landscape,
leaving the state to fill these gaps with a constructed, imagined past, one based on a
generalized Asian history and narrative (Tarulevicz 2013). Drives to inculcate nationalis-
tic pride and a collective identity based on a “local” and “uniquely Singaporean” heri-
tage sit alongside increasing pressures to position Singapore as a “world-embracing”
global city (Rajaratnam 1972), leaving national and global city narratives in conflict
(Kuah 2012). These tensions are further heightened when one considers how
“modernity” is often conceived as a Western invention and a result of colonialism
(Bryant 2006). To unreflexively modernize thus puts Singapore at risk of losing her dis-
tinct Asian heritage to the dominant and homogenous West, or so it was argued by
Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew in his “Asian values” discourse (Hoon 2004).
In Singapore, food and drink have served as powerful tools for carving a “unique”
national identity and for promoting tourism. Singapore’s food and beverage industry
Figure 1. Nanyang Old Coffee, a traditional kopitiam in Singapore’s Chinatown. Photograph taken
by Ian McGonigle.

has been wielded by the state and its various agencies to position the city as a culin-
ary mecca (Eat & Drink n.d.). While Karim and Chic (2010) posit that this targeted
appeal to unique gastronomic experiences has become increasingly widespread in
culinary tourism and has undoubtedly heightened the diversity of food found in most
countries, Symons notes that the threat of homogeneity in global cultural flows con-
versely urges a return to “authenticity” and traditional heritage in foodscapes (Symons
1993, as quoted in Kong and Sinha 2015).
Nanyang Old Coffee, a kopitiam in Singapore’s Chinatown district, recently opened
a “Singapore Traditional Coffee Museum” (Figures 1 and 2). Customers can enjoy a
kopi in the replica mid-20th century kopitiam, where a sign reads “understand and
experience Singapore’s living culture through a cup of traditional coffee” (Figure 3). In
this instance, kopi is explicitly rendered a token of nostalgia and heritage, so that
Singaporean culture is rendered an object of consumption. This coffee museum is just
one example of the way kopi indexes an imagined and romanticized past. In this pres-
entation, consuming kopi is a way of aesthetically connecting to an older world of
early statehood Singapore. Though the museum projects coffee culture backward in
time, kopi is simultaneously presented as a “living culture” that is sustained. In this
report, we thus explore how this imagined object of heritage plays out today in the
coffee consumption habits of Singapore’s millennials.
Millennials, categorized as those born between 1981 and 1996, today find them-
selves situated at a crux in global history, a unique and unprecedented product of
contemporary times (Dimock 2018). Singapore’s millennials experience first-hand the
comforts of post-independence development and the magnitude of the 21 st century
Figure 2. Replica of a mid-century Singaporean kopitiam at Nanyang Old Coffee’s ‘Singapore
Traditional Coffee Museum.’ Photograph taken by Ian McGonigle.

technology boom, and are said to have surpassed baby boomers as the largest gener-
ation with the most disposable income yet (Kortekaas, Smith, and Tilford 2018).
However, they also face the tensions of rapid and rampant change, as well as the
crumbling insecurities of the world their parents had once known.
While academic and mainstream media scholarship on millennials has gained trac-
tion over the years, with particular attention paid to their workplace values, financial
stability and use of technology (Tilford 2018), these findings have been largely focused
on Western contexts (predominantly the United States and Europe) as well as East
Asia. In Singapore, however, moral panics surrounding millennials abound and tend to
center on their absorption in aesthetic or consumerist trappings of “the next big
trend,” cavalier, dismissive attitudes toward tradition, and frivolous spending (Ruggeri
2017). Recently, media portrayals have allayed this (Wong 2019) and study results
have suggested otherwise (Choo 2019). Yet these negative stereotypes continue to
proliferate among baby boomers and elder generations who seem to perceive such
millennial tendencies as an attack on the conventional Asian pieties of pragmatism
and prudence.
It is these seemingly contradictory, intersecting areas of conservatism and cosmo-
politanism where coffee and the institution of the coffee shop provide a window into the
dynamics of youth identity and consumption in Singapore. This report explores how
Singaporean millennials aged 22 to 37 years (see Dimock 2018) negotiate the pull of
nostalgia from Asian heritage while experiencing cosmopolitan consumerist
Figure 3. Nanyang Old Coffee, at its ‘Singapore Traditional Coffee Museum.’ A sign at the museum
reads ‘Understand and experience Singapore’s living culture through a cup of traditional coffee.’
Photograph taken by Ian McGonigle.

patterns in a global city. All respondents in this study can be categorized as middle-
class Singaporeans and residents of Singapore, and all respondents whose answers
were reflected in the report were educated in Singapore (with the exception of Chan,
who is from Kuala Lumpur), and spoke in English. The names of informants included
here are pseudonyms.
Specifically, we examine how local kopi competes with specialty single-origin blends
from all across the globe. We also describe how coffee is conceptualized among both
local and global camps and show how imaginations of belonging surround it. In par-
ticular, we show how millennials employ the beverage to imagine both the consump-
tion of “tradition” and participation in a delocalized global consumer trend. Finally, we
discuss how coffee informs larger issues of culture and identity in Singapore, and con-
sider how a progressive bifurcation of coffee culture may bespeak a growing fissure in
contemporary Singaporean society, a divide that conditions the self-fashioning of
Singapore’s millennials as ambivalently (g)local.

Consumption and identity

Anthropologists have long described how food and drink hold pivotal social roles, as
instruments of sociality and solidarity acting as social glue binding communities
together (Grinshpun 2014). Rozin posits that every stage from food production to con-
sumption has ritual elements and revolves around human interaction, thus fuelling
socialization (1996). Global foodways – what, where, when, how and with whom peo-
ple eat and drink (Edge 2007) – are inevitably constructed and enmeshed within
unique sociocultural contexts (Birch, Fisher, and Grimm-Thomas 1996), making con-
sumption a powerful lens for an anthropological reading (Kong and Sinha 2015). As
significant cultural products embedded with symbolic meaning and value, food and
drink also function as key boundary markers of social belonging, class and status, par-
ticularly as consumption becomes increasingly intentional and “implicated in identity”
(Hefner 1998, 25).
Echoing this perspective, Mythen (2004) suggests that in the context of reflexive
modernity and in a risk society with greater access to cross-culture information flows
and excessive choice, individualization and identities become increasingly unstable
and beg the remedy of consumption to assert a sense of self. Coffee, in particular, has
a myriad of culturally conditioned meanings and uses (Tucker 2017). Moreover, schol-
ars have noted that in recent years, global coffee chains have been instrumental in
positioning and popularizing the beverage as a stylish lifestyle commodity, and coffee
is now routinely brandished as a prop in the postmodern performance of identity and
difference (Fischer 2017). Fischer explains that conspicuous consumption sees use val-
ues becoming increasingly intertwined with symbolic values – to consume a product
is thus to also consume and adopt that which it signifies (2017, 23) Consequently,
trends have reflected a rise in informed consumers, who have grown increasingly con-
cerned with learning more about the products they consume and demanding trans-
parency from the stakeholders who produce these products (Baker 2015). Specifically,
in the field of coffee, issues of provenance and practice have become particularly
prevalent, with pushes to ensure responsible sourcing and fair-trade ethics throughout
the “bean-to-cup” process (Plu€ss 2018).
Coffee, of course, also has inherent pharmacological properties that shape its social
use. Due to its rousing effect, coffee carries the image of assiduity and productivity,
such that its consumption typically denotes a transitional shift from leisure time to
work (Douglas 2003). Alcohol consumption, by distinction, usually punctuates the tran-
sition from work to leisure time. But coffee draws parallels to alcohol as a stimulus for
conversation, albeit one that tends to be intellectual or formal in nature as coffee
marks the sphere of day-time leisure. The historical institution of the coffeehouse has
evolved in a similar vein, from its early emergence in the 15 th-century Middle East as a
tavernesque establishment to becoming a key site of social gathering (Hattox 1988).
Habermas describes the significance of coffeehouses in London, which pioneered pub-
lic spheres of discourse between otherwise stratified classes in 18 th century bourgeois
society (1991). The coffeehouse served as an open domain and middle ground, where
both bourgeoisie and proletariat could discuss economics, literature, and politics in an
inclusive manner (Habermas 1991, 33).
Early conceptualizations of coffee and the coffeehouse positioned the beverage as
almost iconic of social revolt. Today, coffee remains emblematic of revolt, albeit of a
different kind. The beverage and its entailed socialities and temporalities have been
culturally constructed as a lifestyle commodity or accessory of sorts, offering
consumers the opportunity to alter or negotiate perceptions of themselves as discern-
ing consumers. Coffee thus remains a medium through which particular social identi-
ties are cultivated. For the Singaporean millennial, those identities sit in tension
between the charming allure of old Singapore – as well as Confucianist loyalty to
Asian heritage – and the pulls of new global consumer trends and a cosmopol-
itan future.
This report is based on nine months of participant observation and interviews at caf
´es and coffee shops across Singapore. Through this material we attend to the
dynamics of tradition and cosmopolitanism in Singapore, where both food and con-
sumption feature heavily as a national pastime (Hongjun 2006; Chua 2003). Yet, des-
pite its reputation as a country famously obsessed with all things food and drink,
scholarly literature examining the Singaporean coffee scene in relation to its history
and development is sparse. Chern’s (2014) research on caf´e culture in Singapore,
how- ever, sheds some light on the significance of the socialities and spatialities
associated with coffee in Singapore. According to her, the visiting of caf´es and the
consumption of food and drinks serves not just as a marker of social differentiation, but
is a form of conspicuous consumption through which one is able to assert economic
capital, accu- mulate cultural capital among a prestigious circle and elevate one’s social
standing as belonging to an elite class (Chern 2014). To actively seek out caf´es and
consume food and drink in such atas (a colloquial Singaporean term meaning classy
and desirably high-brow) and well-adorned establishments (in comparison to the
everyday kopitiam or “hawker” dining centers) is thus not merely a casual choice but a
calculated prefer- ence. Frequenting high-end caf´es actively confers a sense of
status and sophistication; one that consolidates membership in an affluent “imagined
community”1 and social group that is comprised of other caf´e-goers and elites
(Anderson 1983, as quoted in Chong 2002).
In a related vein, Kong and Sinha (2015) provide instructive sociological examin-
ation of local foodways and their engagement with the wider sphere of food studies. While
they offer empirical insight into the issues of food policing, the construction of heritage and
nostalgia, as well as the production and consumption of food (2015), there is little focus
on the cultural significance of specific foodstuffs in relation to iden- tities in Singapore.
Moving beyond performances indexing class membership, the rit- ual consumption of
beverages and other stimulants also bear symbolic significance in constructing specific
social worlds.

“People always talk business over coffee, not alcohol”

Beverages and drugs can encode social events with specific meanings (Douglas 2003;
Hazan 2003; McGonigle 2013; McGonigle 2019). Joseph Gusfield’s analysis of alcohol
and coffee, for example, positions each as antipodal ends of the spectrum in the mod-
ern division of labor (Douglas 2003). Hattox makes a similar distinction in dismissing
religious zealots of the Middle East who were historically opposed to coffee due to its
contentious comparison to intoxicants like alcohol. For him, the key lies simply in the
disparate effects of both drinks – although both drinks can be said to alter a person’s
state of mind, alcohol leaves one inebriated, while coffee alerts (1988). While these
analyses make interesting points in contrasting alcohol with coffee, we hesitate to
reify such reductive distinctions in the comparison of these drinks, particularly with
regard to the roles and symbolisms of coffee in Singapore. In questioning this firm
dichotomy, we suggest that these beverages might also be considered as variants
along the same theme: social drinks bearing similarities in sociality and spatiality. Our
rationale is that both alcohol and coffee serve as social gateways for jovial conversa-
tion. This view is born out of an interview with a third-wave barista, John, who draws
a comparison to the alcohol industry:
What I’ve experienced … in the drinks industry is that you go to a bar, then the bartender
will talk to you, get to know more about you and try to craft a drink especially for you
based on their expertise. So this is a very similar aspect between coffee and alcohol,
which is interesting … because both these drinks are like a starting point for
conversation … Of course, alcohol gets you more liberated lah, in terms of thoughts. And
coffee is more for conversation from a professional standpoint, like people always talk
business over coffee, not over alcohol.

Wherein specialty coffee servers often assume an amicable demeanor and appeal
to customers’ flavor preferences before recommending a blend or drink, John empha-
sizes how it levels out the typical hierarchy or boundary between servers and custom-
ers, turning the interaction and relationship between the two into one likened to
a friendship.
Chan, who plays the role of both barista and bartender, agrees. The casual coffee
shop she works at doubles as a dive bar in the evenings, and she enjoys the laid-back
atmosphere and casual, cheeky interaction that both allow her to have with custom-
ers. For instance, she has no qualms about taking random off-menu coffee orders and
spontaneously customizing them to suit patrons’ preferences, much like the ad-lib
practices typical of bars. Nonetheless, like John, she too notes the need for more cau-
tious decorum surrounding coffee.
I think for alcohol-based drinks … you can talk whatever shit you want to the customer,
because no matter whether they are drunk or sober, they’re just like, “Eh, anything” and
just forget it. But for here during the day, I think certain people you have to really be
aware of what they don’t like or what they’re okay with.

This sense of professional esteem, composure, and respectability surrounding coffee

and the coffeehouse can be seen in early practices in the Middle East. While coffee
was first consumed discreetly in places akin to taverns, strengthening its comparison
to alcohol (Hattox 1988), legalization cleared it of all alcoholic associations, making
coffee the drink of choice for many influential religious and political leaders. The bev-
erage was beloved for its marqaha – the euphoric energy and alertness it brought to
mind and spirit. Aside from home and the mosque, coffeehouses 2 were also popular-
ized as alternative sites of socialization for respectable men, who could find respite
and pursue both conversation and consumption without morally debasing themselves.
These loci drew large and diverse publics, from the rich and revered to the dregs of
society, and other social behaviors and classes soon became associated with the cof-
feehouse. Besides providing a pleasurable buzz, marqaha spurred much coffee shop
talk among patrons, particularly the lazing and unemployed. These crowds populated
the coffeehouse in the day and were often viewed with disdain for sitting idly and
participating in the scandalous activities 3 of the coffeehouse, which were perceived as
morally depraved and undermining the Islamic work ethic (Hattox 1988). Nonetheless,
although the dignified image of coffee and coffeehouses may have consequently been
adulterated by exposure to the masses, modern socialities and spatialities (e.g. the
norm of discussing business over coffee) suggest that there has remained a certain
solemnity surrounding the caffeinated beverage.
It is thus interesting to observe the parallels which may be drawn between alcohol
and coffee, particularly in how each drink is constructed – the symbolic meanings and
purposes attributed to them, which can be unique across various sociocultural con-
texts – and how the consumption of each in turn also constructs everyday social life.
Where alcohol has typically borne the image of breezy banter and liberation because
of its inebriating and disinhibiting effect on drinkers, this has led to its construction as
a drink of leisure, and by proxy, its consumption demarcating the bounds of nighttime
leisure. In the same vein, coffee has been constructed as a drink of efficacy and vigor,
boosting the sharpness of drinkers’ minds, thereby marking the sphere of work.
However, in certain cultural contexts where coffee is also consumed as a lifestyle
drink, it may also come to distinguish the day-time leisure sphere. During this
research, we note that for the most part, coffee has been conceptualized and con-
sumed as both a pragmatic beverage and a lifestyle commodity through which a
uniquely Singaporean identity and citizenship is negotiated and performed.

A kopi class
Similar to Japan, coffee first arrived in Singapore as a foreign commodity in the mid- 19 th
century by way of trade and migrant culture in the port city. Europeans may have
been the first to introduce the caffeinated beverage, but it was quickly adapted. Nanyang
kopi was fuller in flavour and contextualized to local resources, palates and lifestyles. Kopi
served as a cheap, strong caffeine kick popular among migrants, who needed to boost their
energy to power through days of intensive menial labor (Loh and Yang 2015). Over
time, the unassuming kopitiam also evolved into key spaces of socialization, enabling the
rapid exchange of information. These were local nexuses where people (mainly men at
the time) across various cultures, religions and social classes could come to enjoy cups of
coffee at almost any time of day, play games of chess and share conversations, often
involving politics and current affairs, which occa- sionally resulted in factious slander against
the state (Lai 2015). Kopitiams thus grew prominent as autonomous “free” spaces of escape
and sites of everyday resistance against economic and political pressures. This merited
their alternative titles as “domains of contentious publics” and a “counter public sphere”
(Aljunied 2014).
Much like the coffeehouses of the Middle East, which provided publics with a locus
of respite and social engagement beyond the four walls of home (Hattox 1988), kopi-
tiams also thrived as they met local needs for a “third place” beyond the realms of
home and work (Aljunied 2014). Given that mass entertainment at the time was
expensive and thus inaccessible to most, the introduction of Rediffusion (Singapore’s
first commercial, cable-transmitted radio station) and black-and-white televisions into
kopitiams as additional forms of entertainment for patrons also drew crowds, whose
bonding and sense of solidarity were further bolstered by the consumption of the
same media content. This further cemented local coffee shop spaces as communal pla-
ces of gathering and key sites for the emergence of everyday culture in colonial
Singapore (Loh and Yang 2015).
In post-independence Singapore, even after years of rapid socioeconomic change
and inflation, the kopi has remained a treasured icon of the working class, kept afford-
able to the general masses at around SG$1-2 per cup, and serving as a ubiquitous
mainstay across various food establishments. These sites of kopi consumption have
remained indispensable to modern Singapore society as one of the few sites left bear-
ing low barriers to entry, where any patron, regardless of age, ethnicity, social class or
educational attainment may commune and partake of the same economical pleasures.
The mass commoditization and proliferation of kopitiam chains such as Ya Kun and
Killiney as institutions of local heritage and nostalgia have also served to perpetuate
their popularity (Lai 2015). Here, the appeal of both kopitiam and kopi are simple –
cheap, convenient and a consistent, distinct taste of Singapore in a cup. One of our
millennial informants, Adam, drinks kopi exclusively and says,
I feel that [local] coffee has a certain kind of fragrance behind it. It has a very original,
traditional taste. I prefer the original cup because the taste is captured … the brew of the
coffee, and they put condensed milk also, so it’s a very interesting blend that I like.

Another informant, Jake, notes the same:

Cost-wise, the kopitiam coffee is one of the cheapest that you can find out there. And to be
honest, if you compare taste-wise, most of them, their taste will be relatively similar … There
might be slight changes, but I think that’s like the safest … Most of the time when I just
feel like drinking coffee, the easiest location to go for is just the kopitiam. It’s readily available
around most places, and the thing about caf´e coffee is that it’s usually in a very ulu
[isolated] place.

When asked which institution he feels more at ease in, he says that he prefers kopi-
tiams as he is able to enjoy his coffee without incurring judgement from onlooking caf´e-
goers.
Jake: Because in a caf´e, personally lah, there’s a slightly too atas [classy, high-brow]
feel whenever you enter the door, and it’s just oppressive when you’re alone. Like you just
go in and you feel like everyone will stare at you.

Author: So you feel like it’s a higher barrier to entry?

Jake: Yes. It’s like the high SES [socio-economic status] group. I choose to be low SES and
drink kopi-o kosong [black coffee without sugar or condensed milk] …

For Chan, despite being a barista at a third-wave establishment, local kopi remains
her coffee of choice on her days off as she enjoys its familiar taste and simplicity.
It feels very local, very homey … I think overall, I still prefer hawker stalls … like I’m able to
connect with those different kinds of people, it’s very casual and I can just sit there and
order my iced cham-o kosong [a mix of black coffee and tea, sans sugar or milk] … I just
want to go for something normal.

Evidently, both kopi and the kopitiam have come to bear a nostalgic sense of famil-
iarity and home for the many who have been exposed and grown accustomed to them.
The kopi’s economical price and wide availability near most local food establishments
have secured its place as a fail-safe option in the hearts of most Singaporeans.
Although for these reasons it may appear as though purchasing a kopi is less conse-
quential a consumer decision as compared to trawling the Internet for a third-wave caf
´e to visit, we maintain that it is nonetheless the choice of this particular beverage over
the various other drinks available that demonstrates active consumer intent and deci- sion-
making. Furthermore, it is precisely the principles of being cheap, convenient and consistent
that continue to position the kopi as representative of a uniquely Singaporean sense of
home and heritage.
There have been moral panics surrounding Singaporean millennials’ reputed loss
of Asian-Confucian ethics and tradition in favor of modern (and thereby Western)
values and ways.4 However, this is based on questionable assumptions: that age-
old traditions are obliterated by the trendy, for instance with coffee sock filters
traded in for fancy expresso machines and chemex sets, and that frugality is for-
saken for frivolous and reckless consumption, with common negative stereotypes
being $15 avocado toast and the caf´e-hopping trend. Concerns over a
dwindling regard for local customs and heritage are rampant, and certainly some of
these concerns do appear to ring true. One respondent, Ben, spends SG$15-20 on
coffee in one sitting alone, and often visits more than one coffee establishment in a
day, he told us.
Yet it appears that for the most part millennials opt for kopi over specialty blends
for their cost-effectiveness, convenience and consistency, thus prioritizing loyalty, fru-
gality and pragmatism. These values align with Confucian-tinted constructs of Asian-
ness, and have been popularized via Singapore’s various state narratives, such as the
Asian values debate (Hoon 2004). For all their purported grievances toward conserva-
tism, millennial patterns of kopi consumption suggest a loyalty to what is “local” and
“traditional.” In symbolizing homey comfort and a nostalgic reminder of a uniquely
Singaporean past, one which draws on associations with migrant forebears who built
the foundations of the nation, the kopi and kopitiam thus symbolize local pride and
the prized Asian-Confucian values of loyalty and community. Both the beverage and
space in which it is served thus appeal to what it means to be Singaporean. Kopi con-
sumption is unlikely to be as simple or one-dimensional as signifying class, home, or
longings for a simpler past. Rather, kopi appears to be a medium through which the
“traditional” aspect of one’s Singaporean identity is reified; to lim kopi (Hokkien for
“drink coffee”) may thus be perceived as a conspicuous and highly symbolic yet every-
day negotiation and performance of identity and citizenship in the modern city-state.
It should be noted, however, that not all associations with kopi are laced with nos-
talgia. For some millennials, local coffee often offers a glaring aesthetic reminder of
mediocrity and disappointment. One informant, Nadia, suggests that the blas´e
atti- tudes of most kopitiam brewers has left her with more negative coffee experiences in
comparison to specialty caf´es:
I think that if you go to a caf´e, you kind of have the impression that they care
more about the coffee that they’re serving. I really can’t say the same for some kopitiams …
I feel that baristas take more care in their coffee. So I haven ’t really had negative
experiences, or many negative experiences anyway, whereas kopitiams, I think they’re
usually in a rush with a million orders at once.
 As elucidated above, kopi culture was born out of humble migrant beginnings, a
casual, make-do caffeine fix which hardly denotes connoisseurship. Perhaps it is this
perceived ignorance or nonchalance of genuine craftsmanship that has in part fuelled
the rise of third-wave specialty coffee and caf´es in Singapore. Elaborating on the
vari- ous waves of coffee, it may be said that the third wave emerged as a reaction to
the aesthetically dulling mass commodification and production of coffee.

Third-wave connoisseurship
From conspicuous to conscious consumption, in the context of a global modernity with
workers alienated from the fruits of their labour (Cox 1998), the third-wave caf´e
has gained an aura of authenticity through an obsessive veneration of the artisan. It is
precisely these “specialty” and “artisan” labels which brand third-wave coffee as a
micro-luxury, justifying the exorbitant prices charged for a cup, and conveying exclu-
sivity through a lexicon of connoisseurship akin to the wine world. Several baristas
even likened coffee-making to an art or science. That the specialty brew offers them a
canvas for creative artistic expression (via latte art, 5 and exotic flavour concoctions) and
demands precision in both flavor and calibration 6 is what they enjoy most about third-
wave coffee culture, and piques their curiosity to pursue it full-time beyond a mere
hobby.
John: There’s a lot of history, a lot of culture and science to it. So it’s not just a drink, it’s
more of an art and science combined together … Firstly, it’s what makes coffee a good coffee.
Like what does a good taste taste like? So from there you get to explore different things, like
different brewing methods, beans, roasting levels … You get to explore a lot of technical
stuff like water, the chemistry behind this bean and that bean, and what it gives you when
you put it together.

Chan: I like the science of making a cup of coffee and calibrating it to get the perfect
taste. Because every calibration gives you a different flavor. Just a tiny bit of calibration might
affect your bean to become either too sour or too bitter, so it’s very exact.

Wendy: Baristas and coffee experts are like artists … everything is a form of art, and as a
barista, the kind of coffee I want to make is an expression of my individuality, an
extension of who I am, my story and the mark I want to make.

The passion for creativity features as a recurring theme in discussions of coffee and
millennial culture in Singapore. Another worry which surrounds this generation is the
presumption that they are far too idealistic, particularly in terms of their career
choices, and are often led by their emotions into making impulsive decisions for which
they do not necessarily consider the consequences (Paulo, Grosse, and Lee 2019).
While most informants who worked as coffee professionals admitted to diving into
the industry on a whim, just to see how far it could take them, they were also quick
to point out the precautions they were taking for their long-term careers. Some set
themselves specific timelines for the goals they wanted to achieve, and cut back on
other lifestyle expenses in efforts to save. Pat is one such example. The recruiter- turned-
barista felt unfulfilled at her previous job and decided to try turning her inter- est into a
full-time gig. She has been in the industry for six years.
 One day I was sitting in front of the computer and looking at the clock, and I realized
that I don’t want to spend my whole life doing this, just waiting for time to pass, so I
decided to try [working in] coffee and see how it goes. It’s a risk for me because I need a
stable income, and I’d have to start all over again. So, at that point I was thinking that
[because I need money] I had to do maybe full-time. I also heard that [people working in]
food and beverages aren’t paid high and it’s tiring, but if you don’t take a risk, you won’t
know what will happen … I still think it’s worth it. You need passion to keep going. But I
also feel that you need to have that hunger for knowledge, because at the end of the
day, passion can’t feed you. You really have to try to find out everything yourself … At
least in the next one-two years’ time, I would like to compete in the National Barista
Championships. And if you want to compete you need financial support, support from
your loved ones, mentor and of course, [you need to] improve yourself.

Although she agrees that leaving her stable job was a risky albeit calculated career
move, the switch has proven satisfying for her. For most informants, however, a vague
sense of purpose and fulfilment seems to belie the narrative of passion, and pragma-
tism appears to be a distant, or at least secondary consideration. Many seemed uncon-
cerned with matters of advancement and unsure of the alternative pathways available
to them in the industry, while others seemed to be grasping at straws when asked
what they sought to achieve through their scope of work. It appears that they were
simply happy to continue pursuing coffee for as long as they could sustain them-
selves, which lends license to the conservative criticism that millennials are blinded by
the glamourized ideals of pursuing passions and dreams popularized in the West
(Hoffower 2018).
Widespread media romanticism concerning owning a caf´e, or the opportunity to
be part of what Hongjun terms the “chill out factor” ambience of coffeehouses (2006)
are perhaps other factors fuelling the precarious millennial fixation with working in the
coffee industry. This is significant to note as cafe´s have become popularized as
“in- between” spaces for millennials in Singapore, where public spaces (air-conditioned,
especially) are scarce. Caf´es are thus places where millennials can simply “be,”
“do their own thing” and “hang out” – places where it seems the only agenda is
leisure and where the daily grind is temporarily suspended. Of course, having to
purchase something in order to lounge at these caf´es ensures that consumerism
abounds in these spheres, although the young consumers may not perceive themselves
as con- sumers at independent caf´es when compared to global coffee chains. Indeed,
millenni- als are notoriously averse to the idea of big companies or chains milking
them for their money, and tend to prefer supporting independent ventures as they offer
more autonomy, and are often owned by passionate individuals themselves (Hongjun
2006). It is ultimately the burgeoning affluence and cultural capital of the middle class in
Singapore, that propels this sector of leisure consumption and even necessitates pas-
sion and purpose as valid considerations for millennials in choosing careers to pursue.
The stabilization and advancement of Singapore’s economy has undoubtedly raised
citizens’ expectations for creative fulfilling labor in conjunction with a rising standard
of living. Singapore has ranked top in Asia and 25 th globally for quality of life
(Sregantan 2018), granting people greater wiggle room for participation in the global
economy. As a result, consumer spending has increased at a steady rate alongside
growing affluence (Choo 2019). That millennials are at the forefront of these patterns
of consumption may be attributed to wealth and asset transfer from their baby
boomer parents, who, having gone through several financial crises, are more likely to
be prudent and pragmatic in their spending (CTA [Council for Third Age] 2009). Along
with increased salaries and disposable incomes, this has positioned millennials to be
more susceptible to spending their money on self-fashioning a sophisticated identity,
part of which warrants pursuing their interests instead of merely working for sustenan-
ce’s sake. Lance, a graduate of economics, comments that this consumer phenomenon
is the response of a formerly repressed class which is now indulging in the thrills of
consumerism and breaking out of traditional structures:
Singaporeans are really brought up in such sterile environments, very staunch savers in
average families who save on this, save on that. It is unlike an angmoh [Caucasian] family,
you know? [Our] American dream kind of lifestyle only started in recent years. So
imagine, the typical Singaporean – he’s starved for a big part of his life in HDB [public
housing], where there’s nothing. Now is the point of unleashing, so he’s living it up, you
know? Everything he consumes from the moment he wakes up will be in a neighborhood
mall; you sell whatever things; they buy it … It’s the rise of a particular class of people
who are just experiencing this surge in lifestyle.

John’s response, as we have seen, focused on how this shift in consumer demand
has effected change in the coffee industry, particularly with third-wave appeals to arti-
sanal excellence that prioritize enhancing the consumer experience (Jewel Coffee
2018). In line with this, Petro’s findings suggest that ahead of goods, millennial con-
sumers are growing increasingly concerned with accumulating unique experiences
instead (2018).
Clear lines of connection may be drawn from third-wave coffee culture to larger
global patterns of consumption and identity, particularly among millennials. Another
informant, Jim, summarizes this appeal and voices his perceived participation in global
youth culture:
I feel comfortable here [in this coffee shop]. It’s more of a global culture, rather than
local. In Singapore, most of our coffee places are inspired by Australia, and I think that
comes in line with global youth culture … These places usually tend to be a lot more conducive
to relax or do work in, there’s usually wi-fi, they serve water, etc. and you’re generally around
like-minded people. I feel that I perhaps have more in common with someone else my age
living on the other side of the world, because of accessibility, technology and how we’re much
more connected. And that’s something unique to our generation compared to the
generations before us, and I think that this [caf´es or coffeehouses] is the physical
manifestation of it.

Beyond being a mere beverage, coffee has come to symbolize belonging, class
and a clamoring for other worlds and ways of life beyond the island-city. Third-wave
coffee makes multiple global connections: beans come in harvested from Brazil,
brewing methods hail from the US, and caf´e or coffeehouse culture dates back
to the 15th-century Middle East, with modern influences arriving from Australia and
Japan. This renders the final product being roasted and brewed in Singapore the
object of global production par excellence. To consume specialty coffee is thus to
consume a web of global culture by proxy. While kopi is an emblem for engaging
Singapore’s local identity, heritage, and citizenship, specialty blends serve as a
medium for performing the sophisticated cosmopolitan dimension of what it means
to be a global Singaporean.
Conclusion
This report has built on Chern’s (2014) work on coffee in Singapore as well as
Grinshpun’s (2014) and White’s (2012) work on coffee as commodity and culture in
Japan. Coffee in Japan, much like in Singapore, has long had a foreign status. Both
the beverage and coffeehouses gained acclaim as symbols of progressive liberalism, 7
which was in turn associated with the West. Even the discourses that surrounded cof-
fee in Japan – various terminologies, imageries, names of caf´es and the parts of
the city where they were located – seemed to project a generically Western or inter-
national image of coffee as foreign “other” in contrast to the local and nostalgic furu-
sato8 yearning for a Japanese past. In Japan, participation in this foreign consumption
thus became a marker of the sophisticated cosmopolite, conferring class and cultural
capital and allowing the Japanese consumer to be temporarily transported to an imag-
ined, generic West without having to leave the comforts of the coffee shop. Singapore
has shared this, in constructing a traditional Asian heritage in polarity to its modern and
globalized present, yet in the wake of globalization, neither nation has completely
forsaken one for the other. Japan has carefully navigated a borrowing and strategizing
of cultural elements for code-switching, 9 thereby reifying their co-existence in
Japanese society (Silverberg 2006 as quoted in Grinshpun 2014). This “harmonious
hybridity” of cultures (Goldstein-Gidoni 2001, 70 as quoted in Grinshpun 2014) is
exemplified in coffee, which is conceptualized in Japan as a foreign (Western) com-
modity, yet has become an increasingly indigenized and necessary part of everyday
Japanese life.10
Coffee has similarly become central to Singapore’s social scene, both as a medium for
social communitas in the densely populated city-state that is dependent on extensive
shared public space, but also as a site for mediating particular class identities through
connotations of both local traditionalism and global connoisseurship. In Singapore, we
find it is the discourse, mannerisms and norms surrounding both local and global varia-
tions of coffee that equip Singapore’s millennials with the cultural capital and habitus
necessary to successfully navigate each field (Bourdieu 1977). Ordering a kopi siew dai (a
less sweet coffee) (Loo 2016) in the kopitiam is somewhat equivalent to ordering a single-
origin chemex pour over in a third-wave caf´e – both require a great deal of
context-spe- cific understanding and demand that consumers be adept in linguistic code-
switching (Silverberg 2006, 4 as quoted in Grinshpun 2014; Featherstone 1995) and
performances of social distinction. This grants millennials the capacity to navigate and
negotiate what it means to be a Singaporean in quotidian life.
While this phenomenon holds true for coffee culture in Singapore, the bifurcation
we have characterized here is not meant to represent a clear fissure in Singapore soci-
ety per se, where tradition may be pitted against the trendy, frugality against frivolous-
ness, and the pragmatic against the passion-led. Rather, our findings indicate that the
consumption of coffee among millennials is hardly as simplistic a phenomenon as
moral panics and dominant media narratives suggest. When asked if they could ever
imagine or want kopi and kopitiams eradicated from the coffee scene, all interviewees
responded with a vehement “NO,” suggesting a welcome space for a plural and hybrid
coffee landscape. Many held that as far as third-wave specialty coffee could evolve in
Singapore, there would still be place for local kopi. One respondent, Wendy, even
went so far as to say,
It will always be part of us, and you can never take that away … with innovation, who
knows? You might even get specialty Hainanese kopi one day, because you can imitate
the taste but change the process. That’s where creativity comes in.

What coffee offers in contemporary Singapore is the everyday opportunity to engage

with the entangled traditional conservative and cosmopolitan dimensions of a
Singaporean identity, to ambivalently wrestle with what it means to be a young
Southeast Asian millennial in a global city, and therefore to creatively perform youth
identity and (g)local citizenship.

Notes
1. In reference to sociologist Benedict Anderson’s term “imagined communities” (Anderson
1983, as quoted in Chong 2002), like citizens of a nation or society, the members of this
group are likely to never meet each other, yet continue to believe in and subscribe to a
collective identity that is based on shared commonalities, and an imagined communion.
2. Three key types of coffee establishments prevailed in the Middle East. Early coffeehouses
were located in the central, important parts of town and drew distinguished guests
accordingly, while coffeeshops were smaller neighborhood establishments. Coffee stands
catered mainly to takeaways (Hattox 1988).
3. These included indulging in gossip and slander, enjoying the live entertainment of
storytellers or performers, gambling, using drugs, or partaking in homosexual activities (Hattox
1988).
4. Both articles by Ying (2017) and Stein (2013) corroborate that millennials are more
exposed to Western cultures than their predecessors, which has associated them with a
slew of unfortunate traits, such as being self-obsessed, dismissive of traditional culture or
the status quo and being hasty in embracing change.
5. This involves the skilful pouring of milk foam over an espresso shot to create an artistic
design or pattern with the foam. Common designs include a heart, tulip or leaf-like rosetta
(Tamang 2017).
6. This involves considering the temperamentality of coffee beans – adjusting grind size and
extraction times to changes in the climate or weather, and balancing acidity in drawing
out the delicate flavors of each blend.
7. Coffee shops were one of the first places in conservative Japan where girls and boys could
socialize. In the late 1960s and 1970s, coffee shops also served as hubs for the
introduction of jazz music, as well as progressive demonstrations and discussions on
politics, the avant-garde and feminism.
8. “Furusato” directly translates to home or hometown, and refers to a nostalgic appeal for a
Japanese (rural) past.
9. Code-switching in this cultural context means to alternate or move forward and backward
between various cultural elements in order to make sense of a phenomenon (Silverberg
2006, 4 as cited in Grinshpun 2014; Featherstone 1995).
10. The term glocalism refers to the adapting of a global product or strategy to suit the needs
or tastes of the local market, essentially involving both global and local considerations
(Featherstone 1995).

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes on contributors
Cheryl Chang is a graduate of Sociology from NTU. She is currently working in the PR industry,
expanding her knowledge in the world of communications for B2B technology and healthcare.
Ian McGonigle is a Nanyang Assistant Professor of Global Science, Technology, and Society at
Nanyang Technological University. He specializes in ethnic identity, medical technology and
national development. In 2018 he was awarded SG$1 million to launch a Science, Technology,
and Society Research Group at Nanyang Technological University. Ian has Ph.D.s in Biochemistry
(Cambridge 2010) and Middle Eastern Studies and Anthropology (Harvard 2018). His doctoral
dissertation at Harvard, ‘Genomic Citizenship’ was awarded the Association of Middle East
Anthropology dissertation award for work judged to provide the most significant and potentially
influential contribution to Middle East anthropology.

References
Aljunied, Khairudin. 2014. “Coffee-Shops in Colonial Singapore: Domains of Contentious Publics.”
History Workshop Journal 77 (1): 65–85.
Anderson, Benedict. 1983. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of
Nationalism. London: Verso.
Baker, Jessi. 2015. “The Rise of the Conscious Consumer: Why Businesses Need to Open up.” The
Guardian, April 2. https://www.theguardian.com/women-in-leadership/2015/apr/02/the-rise-of-
the-conscious-consumer-why-businesses-need-to-open-up
Birch, Leann L., Jennifer Orlet Fisher, and Karen Grimm-Thomas. 1996. “The Development of
Children’s Eating Habits.” In Food Choice, Acceptance and Consumption, edited by H. L.
Meiselman and H. J. H. MacFie, 161–206. Boston, MA: Springer.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1977. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
doi:10.1017/CBO9780511812507.
Bryant, Joseph M. 2006. “The West and the Rest Revisited: Debating Capitalist Origins, European
Colonialism, and the Advent of Modernity.” Canadian Journal of Sociology/Cahiers Canadiens
de Sociologie 31 (4): 403–444. doi:10.2307/20058730.
Chern, Cheryl S. 2014. “Coffee, Tea or Me? – The Caf´e Culture in Singapore.” Final Year
Project, School of Humanities and Social Sciences.” Nanyang Technological University. Accessed 22
October 2019. https://repository.ntu.edu.sg/handle/10356/55828
Choo, Cynthia. 2019. “From Luxury Items to Basic Necessities: Consumer Patterns Changing
Amid Rising Affluence, Technological Advances.” TODAY, August 2. https://www.todayonline.
com/singapore/luxury-items-basic-necessities-consumer-patterns-changingamid-rising-
affluence
Choo, Daryl. 2019. “Singapore’s Millennials Are Practical, Non-Materialistic and Care for
Community: OCBC Survey.” TODAY, April 3. https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/singa- pore-
millennials-are-practical-non-materialistic-and-care-community-ocbc-survey
Chong, Terence. 2002. “Asian Values and Confucian Ethics: Malay Singaporeans’ Dilemma.”
Journal of Contemporary Asia 32 (3): 394–406. doi:10.1080/00472330280000271.
Chua, Beng Huat. 2003. Life Is Not Complete without Shopping: Consumption Culture in Singapore.
Singapore: NUS Press.
CTA (Council for Third Age). 2009. “Data from: Understanding Singapore’s Baby Boomers”
(Dataset). Accessed 1 March 2019. https://s3-ap-southeast-1.amazonaws.com/c3a-java-files/
5f5a4384216a74717302d8effebc20ad.pdf
Cox, Judy. 1998. “An Introduction to Marx’s Theory of Alienation.” International Socialism (79): 41–
62.
Douglas, Mary. 2003. “A Distinct Anthropological Perspective.” In Constructive Drinking:
Perspectives on Drink from Anthropology. Mary Douglas: Collected Works, 2nd ed., Vol X, 3–15.
London: Routledge.
Dimock, Michael. 2018. “Defining Generations: Where Millennials End and Generation Z Begins.”
Pew Research Center. Accessed 22 October 2019. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-
tank/2018/ 03/01/defining-generations-where-millennials-end-and-post-millennials-begin/
Eat & Drink. (n.d.). “Eat & Drink.” Visit Singapore. Accessed 28 October 2019. https://www.visitsin-
gapore.com/dining-drinks-singapore/
Edge, JohnT. 2007. “Foodways.” In The New Encyclopedia of Southern Culture, edited by J. T.
Edge, Vol. 7. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
Featherstone, Mike. 1995. Undoing Culture: Globalization, Postmodernism and Identity. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing.
Fischer, Edward F. 2017. “Quality and Inequality: Taste, Value, and Power in the Third Wave
Coffee Market.” No. 17/4. MPIfG Discussion Paper.
Goldstein-Gidoni, O. 2001. “The Making and Marking of the ‘Japanese’ and the ‘Western’ in
Japanese Contemporary Material Culture.” Journal of Material Culture 6 (1): 67–90.
Grinshpun, Helena. 2014. “Deconstructing a Global Commodity: Coffee, Culture, and
Consumption in Japan.” Journal of Consumer Culture 14 (3): 343–364. doi:10.1177/
1469540513488405.
Habermas, Ju€rgen. 1991. “Social Structures of the Public Sphere.” In The Structural
Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Translated by
Thomas Burger, 27–56. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Hattox, Ralph S. 1988. Coffee and Coffeehouses: The Origins of a Social Beverage in the Medieval
Near East. Seattle: University of Washington Press. doi:10.1086/ahr/92.4.1010-a..
Hazan, Haim. 2003. “Holding Time Still with Cups of Tea.” In Constructive Drinking: Perspectives
on Drink from Anthropology. Vol. X of Mary Douglas: Collected Works, 2nd ed., 205–219.
London: Routledge.
Hefner, Robert W. 1998. Market Cultures: Society and Values in the New Asian Capitalisms.
Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
Hoffower, Hillary. 2018. “People of All Ages Define the American Dream the Same Way – But
Millennials Take It One Step Further.” Business Insider, July 19. https://www.businessinsider.sg/
millennials-baby-boomers-gen-x-define-the-american-dream-2018-7/?r=US&IR=T.
Hongjun, Wang. 2006. “Food and the Singapore Young Consumer.” Young Consumers 7 (4): 53–
59. doi:10.1108/17473610610717973.
Hoon, Chang Yau. 2004. “Revisiting the Asian Values Argument Used by Asian Political Leaders
and Its Validity.” Indonesian Quarterly 32 (2): 154–174.
Jewel Coffee. 2018. “What Is Third-Wave Coffee?” Jewel Coffee, February 14. https://jewelcoffee.
com/blog/third-wave-coffee-explained/
Karim, Shahrim A., and Christina G.-Q. Chic. 2010. “Culinary Tourism as a Destination Attraction:
An Empirical Examination of Destinations Food Image.” Journal of Hospitality Marketing &
Management 19 (6): 531–555. doi:10.1080/19368623.2010.493064.
Kong, Lily, and Vineeta Sinha. 2015. “Theorising Contemporary Foodscapes: Conceptual and
Empirical Insights from Singapore.” In Food, Foodways and Foodscapes: Culture, Community
and Consumption in Post-Colonial Singapore, edited by Kong Lily and Vineeta Sinha, 1–21.
Hackensack, NJ: World Scientific. doi:10.1142/9789814641234_0001.
Kortekaas, Vanessa, Alan Smith, and Cale Tilford. 2018. “Who Are the Millennials? – In 5 Charts.”
Financial Times, June 5. https://www.ft.com/video/4ec8ed22-19d6-455f-b86b-a979a05fd5e3 Kuah,
Adrian W. J. 2012. “Defining Singapore: Reconciling the National Narrative and the Global
City Ethos.” S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies Commentaries. Accessed 22 October
2019. https://www.rsis.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/CO12196.pdf
Lai, Ah E. 2015. “The Kopitiam in Singapore: An Evolving Story about Cultural Diversity and
Cultural Politics.” In Food, Foodways and Foodscapes: Culture, Community and Consumption in
Post-Colonial Singapore, edited by Kong Lily and Vineeta Sinha, 103–132. Hackensack, NJ:
World Scientific. doi:10.1142/9789814641234_0006.
Loh, Jahan, and Chong Y. Yang. 2015. One Kopi at a Time: Retracing Singapore’s Coffee Culture.
Singapore: Invasion Studios Pte. Ltd.
Loo, Fabian. 2016. “Kopitiam Talk – The Art Behind Your Everyday Kopi O Siew Tai.” Discover SG,
July 4. Accessed 22 October 2019. https://discoversg.com/2016/07/04/singapore-kopitiam-lan-
guage-culture/
McGonigle, Ian V. 2019. “In Vino Veritas? Indigenous Wine and Indigenization in Israeli
Settlements.” Anthropology Today 35 (4): 7–12.
McGonigle, Ian V. 2013. “Khat: Chewing on a Bitter Controversy.” Anthropology Today 29 (4): 4–7.
doi:10.1111/1467-8322.12042.
Mythen, Gabe. 2004. “Risk, Reflexivity and Trust.” In Ulrich Beck: A Critical Introduction to the Risk
Society, 137–156. doi:10.2307/j.ctt18fs3c4.11.
Paulo, Derrick A., Sara Grosse, and Tracy M. Lee. 2019. “How Singapore Sees Its Millennials (and
It’s Not a Pretty Picture).” Channel NewsAsia, November 15. https://www.channelnewsasia.
com/news/cnainsider/how-singapore-sees-its-millennials-regardless-of-generation-gap-
12003764
Petro, Greg. 2018. “More Debt, Less Stuff: The Millennial Spending Dilemma.” Forbes, August 19.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/gregpetro/2018/08/19/more-debt-less-stuff-the-millennial-spend-
ing-dilemma/#edc3a8e314d6
Plu€ss, Jessica D. 2018. “Nestle´: Battle for the Millennial Coffee Drinker.” Swissinfo.ch.
Accessed 22 October 2019. https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/business/something-brewing_nestl
´e–battle-for- the-millennial-coffee-drinker/44404208
Rajaratnam, Sinnathamby. 1972. “Singapore: Global City.” Text of Address by Minister for Foreign
Affairs S. Rajaratnam to the Singapore Press Club. National Archives of Singapore. Accessed
22 October 2019. http://www.nas.gov.sg/archivesonline/speeches/record-details/fd2918de- 3270-
11e4-859c-0050568939ad
Rozin, Paul. 1996. “Socioiocultural Influences on Human Food Selection.” In Why We Eat What
We Eat, edited by Elizabeth D. Capaldi, 233–263. Washington: American Psychological Association.
Ruggeri, Amanda. 2017. “What Everyone Gets Wrong About ‘MillennialSnowflakes’.” BBC,
October 3. http://www.bbc.com/capital/story/20171003-millennials-are-the-generation-thats- fun-
to-hate
Silverberg, Miriam. 2006. Erotic Grotesque Nonsense: The Mass Culture of Japanese Modern Times.
Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Stein, Joel. 2013. “Millennials: The Me Me Me Generation.” Time, May 21. http://time.com/247/
millennials-the-me-me-me-generation/
Sregantan, Navin. 2018. “Singapore Ranks First in Asia Again, 25th Globally For Quality of Living:
Mercer Survey.” Business Times, March 20. https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/government-
economy/singapore-ranks-first-in-asia-again-25th-globally-for-quality-of-living-mercer
Symons, Michael. 1993. The Shared Table: Ideas for Australian Cuisine. Canberra: AGPS Press.
Tamang, Dhan. 2017. Coffee Art: Creative Coffee Designs for the Home Barista. London: Cassell.
Tarulevicz, Nicole. 2013. Eating Her Curries and Kway: A Cultural History of Food in Singapore.
Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
Tilford, Cale. 2018. “The Millennial Moment – In Charts.” Financial Times, June 6. https://www.ft.
com/content/f81ac17a-68ae-11e8-b6eb-4acfcfb08c11
Tucker, Catherine M. 2017. Coffee Culture. London: Routledge.
White, Merry. 2012. Coffee Life in Japan. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Wong, Cara. 2019. “Millennials are Snowflakes? Look Up Generation Grit.” The Straits Times,
March 31. https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/millennials-are-snowflakes-look-up-gener- ation-
grit
Ying, Shee Siew. 2017. “The Young and Restless: Re-Examining Media Portrayals of Youth.” Social
Space 9: 11–16.