Some unflattering comparisons for Scotland to absorb

The Herald Scotland

27-05-2025

It was therefore fascinating to read the report on Singapore's economic success recently published by Oxford Economics for The Hunter Foundation. Several columns have already been written in response, with some challenging the relevance of Singapore's experience to the economic challenges we face here in Scotland. I have no doubt that Sir Tom Hunter relishes the debate.
The transformation of Singapore's economy is undeniably extraordinary. In 60 years, the country has changed from one of the world's poorest and most resource-limited states into the eighth-richest in the world with a gross domestic product (GDP) per capita 1.4 times higher than the UK. Understanding how this was achieved is well worth our attention.
There are some unflattering comparisons for Scotland to absorb; in education outcomes, population health and industry productivity. The quality and efficiency of Singapore's transport infrastructure and the management of its public realm are all immediately apparent to any first-time visitor. Singapore has not just caught up economically with the more established developed countries, it has well surpassed them.
The section to which I was especially drawn was that on Singapore's research and innovation. The country now consistently ranks among the top 10 nations of the Global Innovation Index produced by the World Intellectual Property Organisation. This success is underpinned by strong government direction, guided by a long-term innovation strategy that clearly defines national research priorities. Our own delegation met with the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR) which leads so much of that work. We could see how advanced their thinking is and how much of an advantage there is in having a clear and consistent commitment to developing expertise in a targeted set of technologies.
I know the usual argument against government innovation strategies is that governments should not get involved in picking "winners". They will more than likely get it wrong. Well, Singapore offers a compelling counterexample. Take just one case study: in the late 1960s, the Singaporean government decided that the arrival of containerised shipping would transform global trade. In 1969, it committed to build the country's first container terminal and the first in Southeast Asia. That bold decision, starting from a comparatively small port, set Singapore on the road to having one of the largest trading ports in the world, second only to Shanghai for the tonnage it processes.
The Hunter Foundation's report argues that Scotland should concentrate its efforts on a small number of high-growth sectors, choosing renewable energy and the low-carbon economy, life sciences and medical technology and software, big data and artificial intelligence (AI). We can debate whether these are the only options. They are all certainly set out in the UK's industrial strategy but so too are advanced manufacturing, financial services and the creative industries. Each offers its own potential for economic growth and global competitiveness.
Read more
We also have a national network of what are named "catapults" - centres of innovation excellence part-funded by government and spread around the UK, all aiming to find ways of accelerating technology research into commercial exploitation. In Glasgow, for example, the National Manufacturing Institute for Scotland, the Offshore Renewable Energy Catapult, the Satellite Applications Catapult, the Medicines Manufacturing Innovation Centre and the Compound Semi-Conductor Applications Catapult are all part of the wider UK network.
Without going into the specifics of each technology, my point is simple: we have a rich set of options we could exploit and these are all emerging from our genuinely world- leading academic institutions. We already have examples of agencies like Singapore's A*STAR. The UK Government has been doing the consultation work to decide what the national industrial strategy should be.
The point is that we have all the ingredients needed to rise to the challenge posed by The Hunter Foundation report and to position Scotland at the forefront of high-potential sectors.
I would add one other ingredient that we are experimenting with in Glasgow. Both the University of Strathclyde and the University of Glasgow are using the innovation district concept to nurture complex systems of innovation support. The idea is to bring academic research teams, entrepreneurs, businesses both large and small, investors, government agencies and civic bodies all together in relatively small geographies - making it more likely they will collaborate and turn technology into commercial success.
Glasgow has three very different innovation districts already in place; in our city centre, along the River Clyde, and at Glasgow Airport. One consequence has been the emergence of Glasgow Technology Week – delivering more than 40 events exploring all that is happening in the city region. And Glasgow Technology Week is taking place right now.
There are many aspects of The Hunter Foundation report that are deeply sobering but I would argue at the very least that we can make meaningful and early progress in developing our innovation economy.
Singapore currently ranks fourth in the Global Innovation Index, with the UK close behind at fifth, which is evidence that the foundations are already in place.
The Scottish Government's international trade programme is helping small and medium-sized companies grow their exports. It is also giving Scottish companies and chambers of commerce the chance to learn how other countries are developing their innovation economies. We will be back in Singapore in the autumn and we will be reflecting on the insights and challenges set out in The Hunter Foundation Report.
Stuart Patrick is chief executive of Glasgow Chamber of Commerce