Comments, opinions and an occasional ramble
Do we “lack” resources?
We have been told from time to time that Singapore is a small rock with no natural resources of its own. Therefore, we have to invest heavily in our human capital because humans are the only resources that Singapore have. The supposed “lack” of natural resource also provides reasons for the ruling PAP to justify it’s hegemony, such as political and social stability, economic prosperity etc.
I have always taken it for granted that our lack of natural resources is a given and never really thought critically about it. I was just lying in bed this morning and somehow the question popped into my head on whether is Singapore really lacking in natural resources? Perhaps we really are lacking natural resources in the conventional sense, i.e. oil, rubber, iron ore etc. In the past, perhaps the lack of such resources is a hindrance to economic prosperity.
However, does the lack of such resources pose economic problems for Singapore today? Maybe it is still a problem, but it’s not that much of a problem because Singapore is shifting into services and knowledge industries. The conventional resources that our leaders like to remind us that we lack are of relatively little importance in current and future Singapore economy. While we may not have resources that we can extract from the ground, we have, or at least are developing resources that others can’t extract from the ground, and it is not easy for other countries to develop such resources quickly.
Therefore, the whole argument about Singapore having little natural resources and therefore we need a certain government to ensure economic prosperity is really just scaremongering, especially in today’s context. We may lack certain types of resources, but we are not really lacking in all types of resources. There is no country that is completely self-sufficient anyway (and from the economic standpoint, it’s not wise to be self-sufficient because of comparative advantage).
I’m not going to buy the argument that Singapore is “poor” in terms of resources and only a certain party is our salvation. Of course, we are not invulnerable but we are not that vulnerable either. Singaporeans perhaps should think about whether the rhetoric regarding our lack of “resources” is indeed as big a problem in today’s context as the government likes to make it out to be, and not just accept the rhetoric blindly.
| Print article | This entry was posted by Aaron Ng on 03/05/2007 at 3:39 pm, and is filed under Perspective. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
about 4 years ago
we are right in the middle of a major shipping route.
that is more than all the resources we need. And we have made use of it very well, even before a certain party came into power.
about 4 years ago
the “underdog”, “vulnerable”, “seige mentality” is always reinforced. there’s nothing else to keep us diverse identities and groups together.
the PAP has done a good job and uses its achievements as a benchmark for success, a justification/mandate to rule. singaporeans are shackled and enslaved by this neatly engineered piece of history.
about 4 years ago
I concur. If we actually had to rely on “conventional resources” as our main source of economic prosperity, then it could actually be more of a liability than an advantage.
Anyway, it was just a couple of decades ago that the “communist threat” was frivolously exploited to achieve similar means.
And what about the “freak election” scenario that was used rather frequently during GE? I believed that lead to the Chiam See Tong’s well-known “By-Election Effect” which quelled that inane baseless argument.
That said, it’s realistic to note that no country in the world is completely invulnerable, especially Singapore. Therefore, we should be even more impelled to subject our government to the utmost scrutiny, regardless of its political affiliation.
Presuming that a single political party will chart the best path of our nation is simply naive and tomfoolery to me.
about 4 years ago
Yh,
shipping routes, air routes all are subject to change. just because Singapore is right smack at present, means that it will continue?. No such luck, unfortunately,eg new technology eg Dreamliner or the oil pipelines project proposal.
or if possible due to perceived failings at that point in time by commercial organisations, eg PSA losing 2 major clients initially.
Does this mean continued dominance by single party, well thats the $1M question depending on individuals .
about 4 years ago
I want to say something I have repeated millions of times.
There is no such thing as “natural resources”. The only true resource is human ingenuity, and that requires human beings.
Furthermore, there is such a thing as the “resource curse”. Why are majority of resource rich countries so rife with corruption and poverty?
For references, read Julian Simon and Paul Romer.
about 4 years ago
WANG you have a point there, but it will take a phenomenal shift in the global economy to negate Singapore’s port resource. Even though Singapore’s position as a transshipment port is threatened by the emergence of China, it would be very surprising if no ships wanted to call at Singapore. Approximately 20% of the world’s sea trade passes through the Straits of Malacca, but even it dropped by half, it’s still a lot of money unless they manage to cut a lane through Thailand.
The other idea I’m skeptical of is the insistence that Singapore lacks land. If you’ve been to the Army and have trained in what’s left of the jungles in the western and northern parts of Singapore, you might realize that this is a most nonsensical idea that we’ve been made to believe in school.
We could probably triple our population if we built high-rise apartments in all the SAF training grounds. Also, Shenton Way is nowhere as cramp as Manhattan in New York City. Sure, we don’t have vast rolling hills, but land-scarce? Hardly. And given Singapore’s vast overseas investments, one wonders whether we need much land in the first place.
about 4 years ago
chrischoo:
The ‘unused’ land is needed for water catchment. If the land was available for development, why on earth would Singapore need to reclaim land?
about 4 years ago
As a neutral party, would like to link up Han’s previous writing on resources (no he’s not paying me for the link =p ) : http://www.singaporeangle.com/2006/07/myth-of-singapores-lack-of-resources.html
about 4 years ago
Latest yahoo news is that we might be facing a natural gas shortage for our increasing petrochemical activities due to drop in supply from Malaysia and Indonesia, as they want it for themselves. Are we in trouble?
about 4 years ago
It’s beginning of lack of resources. Really world will face water shortages soon. And undoubtedly we can’t without water….we’ll die….. we are waited for death….
about 2 years ago
man power is the giant in universe so we should use it for a better way
about 3 weeks ago
It was a excitement locating your site this morning. I came here today hoping to come across something new. And I was not upset. Your ideas about new tactics on this topic were helpful and a terrific help to me. Thank you for making time to write down these things plus for sharing your thoughts.
about 3 weeks ago
I just now wanted to inform you how much my spouse and i appreciate all you’ve provided to help improve lives of individuals in this theme. Through your own articles, we’ve gone via just a newbie to a pro in the area. It can be truly a gratitude to your good work. Thanks
about 2 weeks ago
The suggestions you provided here are rather priceless. It turned out such a fun surprise to see that looking forward to me immediately i woke up this very day. They are generally to the point plus easy to interpret. Thank you for the useful ideas you have shared right here.