The recommendations made by the Economic Strategies Committee (ESC) have drawn plenty of analysis since its long-awaited report was released on Monday.

While more details are still coming out, two key questions may need to be addressed as well if the ESC is to achieve its goal of transforming the economy.

For Singapore to become an innovator and cultural capital, do we need to change the fundamental factors that promote creativity? And who should lead the change?

The ESC seems to focus on government programmes as the way to innovation.

It recommends actions such as setting up "use-driven innovation platforms" and expanding "Centres of Innovation in polytechnics", for example, as well as inculcating "a mindset for innovation amongst young Singaporeans" through school curricula and assessment programmes to increase innovation.

Becoming a leading cultural capital would come from "strengthening programming, marketing, and linkages between cultural institutions" as well as initiatives such as "active stakeholder coordination, government funding and the development of place management expertise".

While these snippets reflect just a fraction of the many recommendations, they exemplify the focus on programmes and training to increase innovation and the city's creative energy.

Yet, innovation and vibrancy may actually require more basic changes.

Leading author Richard Florida says in The Flight of the Creative Class, for example, that the drivers of innovation are Talent, Technology and Tolerance.

While the ESC focused on the first two, an increase in tolerance for diversity and new or unconventional ideas may also be critical for enabling innovators to flourish as well as for making neighbourhoods more vibrant.

Moreover, innovative ideas and cultural vibrancy often spring from creative individuals.

Encouraging creativity from the earliest years in school and fostering admiration for success in the arts could have a major impact.

As educator James Moran has said, a non-evaluative atmosphere as well as "the opportunity to express divergent thought and to find more than one route to the solution" at young ages can help foster creativity.

It may thus be necessary to consider fundamental changes in education to enable children to be more creative in their primary school years so they can be more innovative in the long run.

Private sector LEADERSHIP?

Then, there is the question of whether the leadership for change should come from the private sector rather than Government.

For now, the references sprinkled throughout the recommendations focus on how the "Government can help to catalyse economic restructuring" through a multitude of schemes, signals and programmes.

And it's indeed true that financing schemes for overseas expansion, increased adult training and other infrastructure developments are areas where Government support can be beneficial.

Yet, it may also well be that companies should take the initiative on their own to increase productivity, expand overseas and develop talent in order to grow faster.

When companies embrace productivity and innovation to improve their bottom line or expand overseas by themselves to grow their business rather than simply following Government programmes, for example, success may be longer-lasting.

Nearly a quarter century ago an earlier economic committee recognised the importance of private sector initiatives. Then, as now, the economy was coming out of a recession.

That committee also saw the need to upgrade workers "through adult education programmes", "become a major exporter of services" and have foreign companies "do product development work". Yet, it also said that "new investments, and with them the impetus for growth, have to be the responsibility of the private sector".

The ESC has indeed come up with good recommendations and the strategy will be beneficial. Initiatives to encourage continuing education, R&D, specialist financing institutions, better public transport and more can benefit from Government support.

Making the leap to become "Asia's Innovation Capital" and "the most open and multicultural city in Asia", though, may require deeper changes.

Fundamental changes in education and tolerance could power Singapore towards innovation and vibrancy in the longer term. And initiatives led by the private sector rather than relying on the Government may best increase growth and overseas expansion.

Beyond just Government programmes, then, it may be shifts in mindset about tolerance, education and who actually has to drive innovative business practices that can make the biggest difference in ensuring continuing economic growth. ¢



The writer is a consultant who has lived in Singapore since 1992.