Squatting in Asia
Open-knowledge reference entry

Squatting in Asia occurs when land or buildings are occupied without formal right of tenure. Following the end of World War II and the collapse of many colonial regimes, there was a huge net migration from rural to urban areas across Asia, which resulted in people living in informal settlements. By the 2010s, places such as Hong Kong and Singapore succeeded in reducing the number of squatters, whereas in Bangkok and Jakarta still have high numbers. Factors such as war and natural disaster can result in displacement and squatting.
Overview
Asia has a history of squatting which reaches back to ancient times. Archaeologists have documented evidence of Bronze Age squatters in what is now Jordan at Tall al-Fukhår and Tell Brak in modern-day Syria. In the sixth or seventh century, churches were constructed on the islands of Dalma, Marawah and Sir Bani Yas in the Persian Gulf; after they fell out of use, there is evidence that squatters occupied them.
Following the end of World War II and the collapse of many colonial regimes, there was a huge net migration from rural to urban areas across Asia. This urbanization process was not necessarily in response to demand for labour and many migrants were forced to find shelter in informal settlements, which were often squatted, meaning that people lived there without formal right of tenure. The number of residents in Jakarta, the capital of Indonesia, increased from almost 3 million in 1961 to over 4.5 million a decade later.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Squatting in Asia” is open-knowledge reference entry. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Squatting, Asia and Open-knowledge, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “open-knowledge reference entry” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 25, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q130685635. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1961.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Squatting in Asia”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Squatting in Asia primary sources, Squatting in Asia archive and Squatting research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Squatting in Asia”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Squatting in Asia” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.