RANKING THE LIVEABILITY OF THE WORLD'S MAJOR CITIES

THE GLOBAL LIVABLE CITIES INDEX (GLCI)

AuthorsTan Khee Giap, Woo Wing Thye, Tan Kong Yam, Linda Low, Ee Ling Grace Aw

GLOBAL POLICY JOURNAL

VOL 3, ISSUE 3, SEPTEMBER 2012

GOOD PRACTICES IN URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT: DECODING GOOD PRACTICES FOR A SUCCESSFUL FUTURE

EditorsAnand Chiplunkar, Kallidaikurichi Seetharam, Tan Cheon Kheong

PENSION SYSTEMS IN EAST AND SOUTHEAST ASIA

PROMOTING FAIRNESS AND SUSTAINABILITY

EditorDonghyun Park

This unique volume aims to provide a first comprehensive assessment on attributes, conditions and characters which constitute a liveable city. The book posits that the degree of liveability depends on five themes: satisfaction with the freedom from want; satisfaction with the state of the natural environment and its management; satisfaction with freedom from fear; satisfaction with the socio-cultural conditions; and satisfaction with public governance.

Publisher: World Scientific

http://bit.ly/PIdrlg

The September 2012 issue of Global Policy Journal contains articles on establishing a new global economic council; small arms trafficking; fragile states; economic nationalism and the inclusiveness of global policy. Edited by Tikki Pang and Kelley Lee, the special section focuses on ‘Global Health Governance and the Rise of Asia’.

Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell

http://bit.ly/Q0ZYq1

This report presents case studies on successful Asian water utilities. The case studies provide objective, accurate, and critical analyses of urban water management practices in eight Asian cities over a 10-year period. Other local leaders throughout the developing world can use these cases to help craft their own solutions, taking into account specific local circumstances. What is most important for cities is to find some common base elements for success and then replicate these, albeit with appropriate modifications, to suit their own special conditions.

Publisher: Asia Development Bank

http://bit.ly/SQaL4w

Faced with a rapidly aging population, developing Asia must address two critical challenges: maintaining growth and providing adequate, affordable, sustainable income support for the elderly. This book deals with the second issue by examining the pension systems of eight developing Asian countries—the People's Republic of China, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Viet Nam.

Publisher: Asia Development Bank

http://bit.ly/S2LYXY

Managing EditorClaire Leow, claireleow@nus.edu.sg

Editor and WriterMelanie Chua, melaniechua@nus.edu.sg

DesignerChris Koh, chris.k@nus.edu.sg

IllustratorsPaul Lachine (inclusive of cover)

Editorial AssistantKwan Chang Yee, sppkcy@nus.edu.sg

Editorial OfficeResearch Support Unit (RSU)Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy469C Oei Tiong Ham Building, Singapore 259772

To offer feedback on, or contribute an article to Global-is-Asian, please email GIAlkyschool@nus.edu.sg

Global-is-Asian is available free online at http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/global-is-asian.aspx

No part of this publication may be reproduced in whole or in part without written permission from the Managing Editor. © 2012, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, NUS. Global-is-Asian is published quarterly.

The views and opinions expressed in this publication reflect the authors’ point of view only and not necessarily those of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, NUS.

ISSN 1793-8902

A brave new world economy • 16

Kuo Pao Kun (1939–2002) • 8 The pursuit of happiness • 12

Asian Trends Monitoring Bulletin: he can afford to send only one of his children to school • 44

Dean’s provocations

4 Good politics + good economics = good governance

Spectrum

6 Supporting Asia’s growth: the pillars beneath Asia’s water sector

8 Remembering Kuo Pao Kun: theatre as socio-political commentary

10 Happiness and young Singaporeans

12 Does Bhutan’s Gross National Happiness Index have a role in organisations?

14 What does the future of banking hold?

Focus

16 Asia in the world economy: a leitmotif and three policy challenges

19 EU pivot to Asia

22 Fiscal space and the financing of social pensions

24 Towards greater regional health governance in ASEAN: the potential of civil society

27 Rising to the challenge of the 21st century: the role of futures research

31 Between expressive behaviour and public policy

33 Branding implications for the rise of Asia

In-depth

36 21st century leadership: the tri-sector athlete

41 The new politics of development

Photo essay

44 Urban poverty: Asian Trends Monitoring Bulletin

Executive Education

50 2nd Temasek Foundation Water Leadership Programme

51 Committed to supporting the development of public policy education in Central Asia

52 Senior Management Programme 2012: Leadership & Governance

53 Afghanistan on the road to prosperity

Alma Mater

54 Valedictory dinner for the MPA Class of 2012

Shrink wrap

58 Scholars without borders

59 Accolades

60 On the move

62 The paths to happiness

4 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

GOOD POLITICS GOOD ECONOMICS good governance

Michael Bloomberg is one of the smartest policymakers in the world today. He has

led New York City brilliantly as mayor for 11 years now and running. For his leadership, he was awarded the Lee Kuan Yew World City Prize in March 2012. Yet even he has had his fair share of policy failures.

When Manhattan began to have traffic con-gestion problems, he scoured the world for the best policy solutions. Soon he discovered that Singapore, London, and Stockholm had found the right solution. Since road space was a scarce commodity, the right economics price could allocate road usage efficiently. With the right economics solution, he went to the New York State Assembly to get their support. There he failed. Politics trumped economics. Local vested interests lobbied successfully against his proposal and blocked it; Mayor Bloomberg learned a lesson that all policy-makers have to learn at some time or another. Good economics is not enough. Good politics needs to accompany good economics to get policymaking success.

This failure to connect good economics with good politics is happening at all levels.

In July 2012, former US Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin warned that America was headed straight toward a “fiscal cliff” with a potential contraction of US$600 billion a year—or about 4 percent of America’s GDP—if the US Congress took no action to stop the automatic budget cuts by 2 January 2013. All this could trigger a double dip recession in the US. Rubin warned that this “unsustainable fis-cal outlook undermines business confidence by creating uncertainty about future policy, economic conditions and our ability to govern, which in turn dampens investment and hiring,” as he wrote in “A Budget Grand Bargain Will Follow the Election” in the Wall Street Journal, 28 May 2012.

Most policymakers know what a sensible economic plan would look like to prevent such an economic recession. It would involve a mix of tax increases and cuts in spending, espe-cially in long-term entitlements. The Simpson-Bowles Commission in 2010 offered such a sen-sible plan. Yet it failed to take off for the same reason that Mayor Bloomberg’s road-pricing scheme did not take off: there was no combina-tion of good economics with good politics.

“Failures to connect” undermine many worthy policies. In this, the eighth year of LKY School, Dean Kishore Mahbubani emphasises the necessary multidisciplinary approach to meet an intertwined world.

Good economics is not enough. Good politics needs to accompany good economics to get policymaking success.

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 5

Dean’s provocations

Image: Getty

There are some big lessons that the policy-makers need to learn from all these policy fail-ures. One, it is not enough to find the right eco-nomics solution to a policy problem. Equally importantly, policymakers need to assess how make a good economics solution politi-cally acceptable. Most policy schools include courses on economics and politics in their cur-riculum. However, these courses are delivered as silos with little integration, although inter-national political economy is taught as a sep-arate discipline. But as these examples illus-trate, in the real world, politics and economics are intertwined so what the School plans to do is to integrate politics, economics and man-agement seamlessly so that some of the most pressing policy issues are discussed and ana-lyzed in ways that more accurately reflect the dilemmas faced by policymakers, especially those in Asia.

The Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy is about to undertake some bold innovations in its curriculum. In addition to strengthen-ing the concentration courses in politics and economics, an effort will be made to create a year-long multidisciplinary course that will

integrate the application of the principles of economics and politics (and public manage-ment) to some “wicked” public policy prob-lems. This is something few other public pol-icy schools have attempted.

Success is never guaranteed in such an undertaking. There will be many challenges and risks both in design and implementation. In addition, as Machiavelli wisely warned back in 1513, “There is nothing more diffi-cult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things. For the reformer has enemies in all those who profit by the old order, and only lukewarm defenders in all those who would profit by the new order.”

Yet there are also risks in not carrying out reforms. The School has made impres-sive strides in its first eight years. These have been documented in the book Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy: Building a Global Policy School in Asia, unveiled on 7 September 2012. Indeed, the book received many positive endorsements from many glo-bal leaders, including Indonesian President

Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, former US Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker, and former EU Trade Commissioner Pascal Lamy.

The School cannot afford to rest on its lau-rels. It would be a real mistake to do so, espe-cially in a world and in a region undergoing such rapid transformation. Some of the best practices in good policymaking come from the time when humanity began to organise itself into separate tribes and societies. The impor-tance of ethics has been emphasised by Plato and Aristotle, Confucius and Buddha. Yet, as societies become more complex and become more interdependent, we also have to under-stand why policies succeed or fail in our time. In our effort to do this, we will inevitably have to employ multidisciplinary and interdiscipli-nary approaches. A curriculum that emphasises multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary learn-ing would therefore give the LKY School a competitive edge in the years to come.

Kishore Mabhubani is the Dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy at the National University of Singapore.

6 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

by Andrea Biswas-Tortajada

the pillars beneath Asia’s water sector

This year, on the sidelines of the 13,500-strong Singapore International

Water Week (SIWW) at Marina Bay Sands Convention Centre, 14 carefully selected water experts from all across the world hud-dled to hold an independent, constructive, and blunt discussion about “Water Infrastructure in Asia: What is Needed and What is likely to be the Reality”. The Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, the Third World Centre for Water Management and SIWW sponsored the event to set the agenda on tackling Asia’s pressing issues in the water sector.

The meeting sought to emulate the origi-nal aim the World Economic Forum had set for its meetings in Davos, Switzerland, namely to set a template for luring influential political, government, business, civil and academic per-sonalities to one place and tackle Asia’s most pressing challenges.

The group gathered to apply its intellectual muscle to discuss water infrastructure and the policy, institutional, legal, financial, physical, social and environmental pillars sustaining it. Discussions also centred on how to develop and manage governance frameworks and sys-tems, public policies, physical structures and communication avenues through which water resources can be managed efficiently, effec-tively and sustainably in Asia, one of the world’s most vibrant regions.

Moving beyond conventional engineer-ing and economics, studies from 11 Asian countries showed the extent to which each approach to address water requirements is context-specific and politics-conditioned. Any action requires the strong will and implemen-tation commitment of all stakeholders, size-able investments from conventional and new partners, comprehensive strategies, effective implementation and management and contin-uing technological adaptation and innovation.

More importantly, any future ways of devel-oping infrastructure would entail a profound change in our collective political, economic, environmental and social mindsets.

In Asia, the most populous continent in the world, on current behaviour, water demand would likely double by 2050 due to population growth, urbanisation, change in diets, inten-sifying industrialisation, challenges in rais-ing agricultural productivity to meet food and energy requirements and climate changes, all of which add uncertainty to already highly complex and variable scenarios. Without any doubt, the challenges ahead are formida-ble, but so are the prospects for improvement, growth, and development.

The cost of inertiaAsia is urbanising and industrialising at a his-torically unprecedented speed. With 11 out of 20 mega-cities in the world, defined as cities with populations exceeding 10 million people, it is no surprise that Asian metropolis are also the continent’s economic and industrial pow-erhouses. Harnessing the region’s macroeco-nomic growth, Asian countries can use capi-tal and human resources to approach water and wastewater management challenges as an indispensable step in any effort made to alle-viate poverty and improve the population’s standards of living both in rural and urban areas. It is thus imperative to draw a much more tighter and clearer connection between water, food, energy, and environmental serv-ices and also between development, well-being, happiness and access to water, sanita-tion and wastewater management via more and better planned and managed infrastructure.

Unsurprisingly, Asia’s challenges and potential compel politicians and stakeholders to assign priority to all manner of engineer-ing feats, to implement proactive rather than

reactive approaches, to manage risk more effectively and to develop and strengthen human and institutional capacities and frameworks for improved, rational and equi-table water management. Thus, engaging in this type of problem-solving, pragmatic dialogue could not be any timelier. Certain countries have already developed numer-ous water storage options and multi-pur-pose infrastructural projects, such as China or Turkey, but most of the potential in the region is still untapped. Nonetheless, signifi-cant hydro activity is being witnessed with new plants being developed, constructed and rehabilitated in countries such as India, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia, Bhutan and Malaysia. These advancements have become possible as governments overcome some of the planning, management and governance challenges that have hindered the construction of infrastruc-tures in the past.

Nevertheless, the role politics play in water projects should not be overlooked or underestimated. Initiatives often face polar-ised fierce opposition or enthusiastic support by minorities, political parties and interest groups. Some projects are the whimsical, van-ity or signature initiatives for certain politi-cians and their administrations. Inefficiently planned, built and managed white elephants faintly deliver the promised benefits and deter the construction and improvement of facili-ties needed by making wasteful use of finan-cial and human resources and betraying pub-lic trust. Better institutions and more robust capacities can help avoid profligate projects that serve purely politically or financially opportunistic objectives.

All across Asia, countries are coming up with good examples of how to formulate sen-sible policies and mobilise high approval rates for the construction or expansion of

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 7

Spectrum

infrastructures. Singapore has been long sin-gled out as a case where water is one of the country’s key agenda drivers and where lead-ership, strong political will and coordinated institutional activities have positioned water as a crosscutting issue in the development pol-icies and practices. That is an important first step.

Reservations that have led to loose, if any, policy collaboration and communication among public, private, academic and social stakeholders have been of little use to those still without access to safe and drinkable pota-ble water, proper sanitation and wastewater treatment, a number in excess of 1.64 billion only in South Asia. Unless all relevant players are actively engaged, how can the general pub-lic support the development of infrastructure needed to provide these basic services in the scale that is required?

Engaging stakeholdersAssertive and coherent political guidance can also prove key in bringing about attitu-dinal changes. Awareness raising, keeping a mutually reinforcing relationship with the public and engaging civil actors are increas-ingly important factors in rallying support.

Decision-making processes need to be made sustainable and more socially and environ-mentally responsible and responsive. For this, we need to think about the different avenues and ways in which public opinion, support, feedback and concerns can be brought on board to develop physical, social and political infrastructure. And whilst certain sectors face more barriers in winning support, illustrative examples of sizeable gains from safe water and sanitation are easier to communicate.

In places where information on overall good management practices has been dissem-inated, qualms on previous mistakes, which may have hindered new projects, have been removed. An excellent example is Bhutan, where political will, economic development and civil policy ownership seemed to have met at a comfortable middle ground in mak-ing of the hydropower export sector an engine for domestic socioeconomic growth. This is, while the primary purpose of harnessing water resources is to meet domestic needs, the export of energy greatly enhances revenue generation leading to socio-economic develop-ment, alleviating poverty and closing the gap between the rich and the poor. Bhutan-Indian government-government and public-public

joint ventures are providing the US$15 billion investment needed to harness the 10,000 MW of hydropower resources Bhutan’s govern-ment reckons it will need by 2020. And whilst heavy Indian involvement has raised national questions of ownership, equity, energy secu-rity and fuel alternatives, the aim of seizing energy-generation potential remains primarily to meet domestic needs.

This meeting was a first step towards for-mulating useful policy recommendations and present constructive criticisms around key water infrastructure issues. Public, private, civil and academic actors can all benefit from engaging in targeted, pragmatic and honest assessments of the state of affairs in terms of what is available at present, what is needed in the future and how best the gaps in different Asian countries can be filled in a cost-effec-tive, socially and environmentally acceptable and also timely manner. Tackling water chal-lenges, Davos-style, promises to help direct water stakeholders’ minds, hearts and wilful determination on the right path.

Andrea Biswas-Tortajada is from the Third World Centre for Water Management in Mexico. Her email is a.biswastortajada@gmail.com

Singapore International Water Week (SIWW) 2012, now in its fifth year, achieved a new record of S$13.6 billion in total value for the announcements on projects awarded, tenders, investments and R&D MOUs made at the event.

Image: Singapore International Water Week Pte Ltd

8 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

by Melanie Chua

theatre as socio-political commentary

10 September 2012 marked the tenth anni-versary of Kuo Pao Kun’s passing. The

renowned Singaporean playwright and direc-tor was one of the most important dramatists, arts activists and public intellectuals of con-temporary Singapore. His plays have been translated into Malay, Tamil, Hindi, German, Japanese, and performed around the world from Africa to Australia.

This year also marks a decade since the opening of Esplanade—Theatres by the Bay. Officially declared open on 10 October 2002, the performance arts complex was consid-ered a crucial pinnacle in a grand plan to remake Singapore as a renaissance city. Still, Singapore barely had the credentials for such ambition, and the timing, around the time of the SARS pandemic, would affect travel and the attendance of artists to support the cause.

Fast forward a decade later, a series of com-memorations has taken place to reflect on the man many consider to be the founding father of Singapore theatre, and his contributions to the development of Singapore theatre. Kuo Pao Kun’s plays have paralleled the trajectory of Singapore theatre, not only in its social-cultural changes, but also its socio-political concerns.

Born in Hebei, China in 1939, he grew up in Beijing, and was sent for by his father in Singapore when he was ten—after spending nine months in transition in Hong Kong. Kuo arrived speaking none of the local dialects other than his native-style Cantonese, and knew none of the 26 English alphabets. However, his

fluent Beijing-accented Mandarin gave him a social advantage, especially during his stint as a broadcaster at radio station Rediffusion’s Mandarin play section. (Rediffusion, a staple for over thirty years, finally closed this year on 30 April due to commercial reasons. Its demise reflects the loss of another heritage icon in our changing society.) Nonetheless, his background positioned him well to be a voice of a generation, and a polyglot voice to boot.

During the student unrest in the early 1950s, he was pulled out from his studies by his father, and later further removed when he was shipped off to Hong Kong; The Chinese High School (now known as Hwa Chong Institution) was one of the Chinese politi-cal strongholds. He returned to Singapore after the unrest, this time directly to an English-medium school called Pasir Panjang Secondary School. After graduating in 1959, he left for Melbourne and worked as a trans-lator/announcer at Radio Australia for three and a half years, before taking up an intensive two-year drama programme with the National Institute of Dramatic Art (NIDA) in Sydney. When he returned to Singapore, it was 1965, and the party that had just gained power when he left was now to lead the charge in the newly independent nation-state.

Early turbulenceWhen asked why he returned when Sydney represented more artistic opportunities, not least, the glamour of a rare opportunity over-seas, Kuo said he was drawn back by the

nationalist movement of the 1960s. Indeed the turbulence provided ripe material for his work.

Kuo’s early plays focused on politicised social issues, reflecting its turbulent times both in Singapore, as well as an increasingly fractional revolutionary environment interna-tionally. His first full-length Mandarin play was Hey, Wake Up! (1968). Next, The Struggle (1969) is about a family who lose their plot of land to a property developer. The play was banned by the authorities, which was actively acquiring land on the cheap to found a mod-ern city-state.

In 1965, the year of Singapore’s independ-ence, he founded the Practice Performing Arts School (PPAS) with his wife, dancer and cho-reographer Goh Lay Kuan. He imagined the pioneer independent performing arts institu-tion to be a symbiosis of school and profes-sional company linked together to lay the ground for a vibrant theatre scene. One prob-lem was the lack of interest in actually practic-ing drama professionally. To boot, “to teach by charging a fee was rejected even by many in the theatre world, because Chinese theatre had always been part of cultural movements since the May 4th Movement of 1919.” Kuo, how-ever, believes this was not simply a ‘Chinese model’ but reflection of the times.

Chinese drama was then the most active, and between 1965 and 1975, commanded an audience with as many as 20,000 people per production. Kuo has said, “Some of our origi-nal plays could sell out a season of 15 or even 20 performances two weeks before opening at

One of Singapore’s most important dramatists, arts activists and public intellectuals, Kuo Pao Kun’s life spanned all of local theatre’s own burgeoning developments.

“It is easy to fall into elegy

when examining Kuo’s

contribution, but ultimately,

re-membering entails

bringing together the

various aspects of his work

and life to understand his

value in our society.”

—Alvin Tan, founder

director of The Necessary

Stage, Kuo Pao Kun

International Conference,

September 2012

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 9

Spectrum

the Singapore Victoria Theatre, which seats 900. The market was not really the problem when you have mass movements, and if the drama is entrenched in those movements.”

In 1976, Kuo was detained under the Internal Security Act by the Singapore Government for four years and seven months on communist conspiracy charges, among hun-dreds of others. Of that period, he has offered,

“You see, how you draw the line is difficult. It depends on who draws the line... He (Bertolt Brecht, who was one of the most important theatre makers of the 20th century) is a self-declared Marxist.” In 1966, The Caucasian Chalk Circle, the first Brecht play presented to Singapore audiences, had been produced and translated into Mandarin by Kuo.

Post-1980s experimentationsBy the 1980s, the political landscape had evolved. It was the decade of rapid develop-ment, and to a great degree, the years that redrew the economic, social, political and psy-chological landscape of Singapore.

After his release from prison, The Coffin Is Too Big For The Hole (1984) marked a new direction. While much of his writing was con-sidered social-political criticism, Kuo said, “it was no longer my interest” from the 1980s. Regardless, many tend to read his plays as political, partly because of his background, partly because they comment on the social issues that affect every strata of society.

He dropped the use of perfect Mandarin dic-tion to employ localised, everyday language. As his first English piece, Coffin is also con-sidered a seminal work. That it was translated to other languages such as Tamil and Hindi, and produced by Malays and Indonesians, even though the Muslims among them do not bury their dead, was testament to its power-ful grasp of everyman’s struggle in a modern society run by bureaucrats, and the resonance of the message across other societies.

The 1980s marked an upswing in English theatre, led by three key theatre companies: The Necessary Stage (TNS), TheatreWorks, and The Theatre Practice (TTP), which was Singapore’s first local bilingual theatre group with Kuo as its major enabling figure. The emerging affluence of Singapore grew a big-ger market for drama. English being elevated to the national first language in the late 1970s was one change that aided this shift.

Local English theatre started to express local sentiments only from the 1960s, but Kuo noted “they were spearheaded by intellectuals

who were detached from the mass move-ments”. They were university lecturers, stu-dents and teachers; never part of the popular culture or popular movement, and the theatre reflected the myriad levels of a nation reor-ganising itself: political struggle over identity, displacement of people, the reorganisation of the economy, rewriting of the labour laws, suppression of dissenting political, student, and labour movements.

The polyglot and the humanistKuo broke the mould of single-language thea-tre when he began writing in two languages. He usually translated his own work at least partly to reach a larger local audience. Popular among both artists and intellectuals, his net-works bridged the gulf between Chinese-speaking and the English-speaking and also that between East Asian and Southeast Asian communities. His own plays reflect the multi-lingual realities of Singapore life. Unlike the powers that be, he did not see it as Babel, a cacophony of voices. He heard instead an orchestra.

Mama Looking for Her Cat (1984) is now regarded as a classic of Singapore’s national theatre. Using seven languages and the regional languages commonly used in Singapore, loosely known as dialects, the play reflects the increasing marginalisation of dia-lects in Singapore in the 1980s, which were censured from print and media broadcasts by the 1990s. Mama speaks Hokkien, and the tale

of an old woman alienated from her English and Mandarin educated children allude to the disjunctures between languages and traditions, as well as authority and people.

It pre-dates the Speak Proper English cam-paign in 2000, which sought to overcome a hybrid of tongues that had come to characterise the Singapore language. Then-Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong said, “Singaporeans should not take the attitude that...speaking Singlish makes them more ‘Singaporean’. If they speak Singlish when they can speak good English, they are doing a disservice to Singapore!” (Straits Times, 29 April 2000). This was a key part of a plan to develop Singapore into a ‘ren-aissance city’, which involved creating inter-national ties, and crucially, the investment towards economy, and bench-marking with cities such as Melbourne, Hong Kong, and Glasgow, and aspirationally, New York and London. This drive outwards in building the arts’ marks an interesting contrast with Kuo’s examination of within.

Mama also marks Kuo’s essential human-ism in his vision of theatre. By seeking a thea-tre that ‘remembers’, ‘recreates’, and ‘acti-vates’, Kuo believes “to consolidate the unity of pluralistic people, it is necessary to explore the complexity of life in greater depth, and with greater vigour”.

Melanie Chua is a Writer/Editor for Global-is-Asian. Her email is melaniechua@nus.edu.sg

Kuo Pao Kun (1939-2002).

10 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

Singaporeans

Of late, happiness has been the subject of con-versation for many young Singaporeans.

Most recently, it figured as part of the on-going “Our Singapore Conversation”, a government-led initiative on the future of Singapore involv-ing Singaporeans and gathers their “aspira-tions, hopes and ideas of a Singapore that Singaporeans want in the future.” Last year, the local media reported that younger Singaporeans were not as happy as their older counterparts based on a survey report released by a market-ing communications agency. Early this year, the United Nations released the first World Happiness Report edited by John Helliwell, Richard Layard, and Jeffrey Sachs. In that report, Singapore was ranked among the hap-piest countries in East Asia.

These research findings present seemingly contradictory observations. While Singapore does not rank poorly on happiness on the global stage, it would appear that young Singaporeans are not as happy compared with older Singaporeans. This, however, is not unusual when we consider the relationship between age and happiness. Utilising data from Germany, Australia, and Britain, this was characterised as a “late wave” by economists Paul Frijters

and Tony Beatton in the Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, where many more people are reported to be happier at the later stages of their lives.

The recent interest in happiness is not sur-prising when seen in the wider context of global interest on happiness research. Bhutan’s Gross National Happiness Index is an oft-cited example (see next article) and indicates a movement away from primarily focusing on traditional economic measures of household income to encompass other indicators—for example, from the other spheres of society, work and social relation-ships—that has been presented in great detail by psychologists Ed Diener and Martin Seligman in their article in Psychological Science in the Public Interest published in 2004. More recently, a number of surveys have also measured differ-ent dimensions of happiness, the more prominent of which were included in the United Nations’ World Happiness Report cited earlier, the Gallup World Poll, and the World Values Survey.

Research into the area of happiness is not new, and from the myriad of research one clear message that resonates is that while money con-tributes to one’s happiness, it is but a small part of the happiness puzzle. Economist Richard

Easterlin, in his article published in Daedalus in 2004 entitled “The Economics of Happiness”, observed that most people could be happier if they paid more attention to family life and their health as opposed to the endless pursuit of money. Easterlin also suggests that marriage is far more important in determining one’s happiness, and this is best illustrated in his example where pre-viously divorced individuals who remarry are more likely to report greater happiness levels comparable to those who remain married.

In Singapore, the latest marriage and par-enthood trends, released earlier this year by the National Population and Talent Division under the Prime Minister’s Office, reported increasing singlehood rates among those aged between 30 and 34. Taking into account the earlier findings on young Singaporeans being an unhappy lot in the country and positive effects to individual happiness by being mar-ried, it does make us pause to think if the very delays in transitioning to a married state for some may have contributed to this.

Aside from this, there is also evidence to show that social interactions between family members, friends, and neighbours have a sig-nificant influence on an individual’s happiness.

The recent interest in happiness is not surprising when seen in the wider context of global interest on happiness research. How do young Singaporeans fare, and what challenges lie ahead? Kang Soon Hock reports.

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 11

Spectrum

In terms of dollars and cents, increases in such interactions are valued up to an addi-tional £85,000 in terms of life satisfaction based on research carried out by Nattavudh Powdthavee employing data from the British Household Panel Survey. Bruno Frey, a behav-ioural economist, has also offered other condi-tions—for example, marriage, unemployment and volunteer work—which are hypothesised to have an effect on individual happiness.

Happiness and creativityFor one, there is evidence to suggest that areas such as volunteerism in the community can help to build one’s social capital as well as possibly increase one’s sense of well-being in the process. However, in a fast-paced society such as Singapore, it may be a challenge for many young Singaporeans.

The environment we live in also has an effect on the level of happiness, as noted in Happiness, Economics and Politics: Towards a Multi-Disciplinary Approach, edited by Amitava Krishna Dutt and Benjamin Radcliff. In the local context, it is a pertinent issue especially in land-scarce Singapore, where the acquiring of land for development has

also brought to the forefront tensions between development and heritage. These factors will also have further influence on the happiness of young Singaporeans, which in turn influences the level of creativity among the younger pop-ulation as there is evidence to link creativity with happiness based on research conducted by Harvard Business School’s Teresa Amabile. With scant natural resources apart from its human capital, an unhappy populace devoid of creative energy would be detrimental to enter-prises and businesses here that thrive on it.

In view of these underlying issues, the theme for the Young Singaporeans Conference (YSC) held by the Institute of Policy Studies on 26 September 2012 focused on happiness—“Are

Young Singaporeans Happy?” The conference covered the overarching questions: (1) if young Singaporeans are happy, what are the areas that they identify with that make them happy; (2) if they are not, what can be done to give rise to happiness among them, and to a larger extent, the nation as a whole; and (3) aside from gov-ernment, how can other sectors of society help to build or improve upon the foundations for a happy society?

Kang Soon Hock is a Research Fellow at the LKY School, and also a member of the Housing Development Board (HDB) Research Advisory Panel. His email is

kang.soonhock@nus.edu.sg

Image: Thinkstock

The YSC series is a programme designed and organised by the Institute of

Policy Studies to reach out to outstanding young Singaporeans, from the ages of

25 to 35, for a national dialogue on issues of importance. This year’s participants

were primarily from leadership levels in government, business, civil society,

and the arts, and the conference concluded with a dialogue session with Mr

Heng Swee Keat, Minister for Education.

Volunteerism builds up social capital and sense of well-being, research shows.

12 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

have a role in organisations?

Bhutan’s concept of Gross National Happiness Index was presented to the

Young Global Leaders of the World Economic Forum at a recent session held in Singapore. Participants were challenged to consider how their organisations might be the catalysts to incorporate the GNH Index as their employee happiness barometer.

The Fourth King of Bhutan first conceived of an index of Gross National Happiness when he ascended the throne in 1972. He deemed it critical that Bhutan’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) goals include the happiness of the collective society and that physical, emotional, spiritual and cultural well-being had to be considered alongside material well-being. Over time, the four key pillars of gross national happiness—Sustainable & Equitable Socio-Economic Development, Preservation of Culture, Conservation of Environment,

and Good Governance—have evolved into nine domains for deeper consideration and more precise ways of development:

• living standards• health• psychological well being• education• time use• community vitality• cultural diversity and resilience• ecological diversity and resilience; and• good governancePolicies defined and programmes iden-

tified now seek to measure the indicators within the nine domains to evaluate if the actions support the GNH values defined.

Few might have expected that four dec-ades later, this concept of measuring hap-piness has spread around the world. While

the reactions by the young leaders at the forum were diverse, from a willingness to hear of the GNH concept, to rejection, it remains remarkable that happiness can now be debated seriously as a policy driver at the highest levels.

As a start, some participants expressed their resistance to the word “happiness” and how it can be defined. I recall a TED talk—where individuals spread ideas in 18 min-utes or less—where Matthieu Ricard, the French molecular biologist-turned-monk, said,

“Happiness is a dirty word for us French.”This begs the question, “Why do organi-

sations shudder at the word, happiness?” Do organisations fear that a happy employee may be too distracted to be a productive employee? Do organisations fear that hap-piness might negatively impact their brand? Is happiness too subjective a value to be

Can happiness be calibrated and incorporated as a policy driver with distinct processes to reach a desired outcome?

by Khatiza Van Savage

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 13

Spectrum

measured and calibrated into policies? Yet, post-Great Financial Crisis, one would be hard put to argue that individual and collec-tive well-being can be sacrificed on the altar of key performance indices.

Most in the audience considered the BSC (Balanced Scorecard), a widely-accepted strategic planning and performance man-agement framework, more tangible that the GNH. If an organisation were to measure its Gross National Happiness in the context of the BSC, what would be the Four Pillars and Nine Domains within the BSC?

Is it time to add an additional compo-nent to the Balanced Scorecard as a means of measuring happiness and defining actions and values to support it? And if Financials and Customers are the outcomes, then which drivers within the Processes and Capabilities Lens could incorporate the Happiness Index?

Could an Organisational Happiness Index fit in as an internal process measuring employee engagement and capability?

Organisations can be the catalysts to explore the GNH Index by adapting it within the Balanced Scorecard, creating the frame-work for leaders at every level to be assessed on their role within the Employee Happiness Index. Vineet Nayar, CEO of HCL, India’s leading IT and Technology company says,

“Employees first, customers second.” His 360-feedback process, where employees assess their superiors, not just the other way around as is conventionally the case, is avail-able to all its 90,000 employees.

If all countries had GDP and the GNH Index as a means of measuring its leaders, what would election debates look like? How would potential leaders woo voters?

In the words of the Fifth King of Bhutan,

“Today, GNH has come to mean so many things to so many people but to me it signi-fies simply development guided by human values.”

Bhutan sees its role as “providing the can-vas for Individuals and Organisations to paint their own and their communities’ pic-ture of happiness”. The challenge is finding the right tools to translate vision to reality, and to devise processes and policies to achieve the desired and defined outcome.

Khatiza Van Savage is the Founder and Chief Happiness Architect of Insightful Learning Journeys in Bhutan. As a social enterprise, 10 percent of net proceeds are directed towards outreach programmes selected by the peer group with the intent of creating Communities of Practice to Multiply Happiness. Her email is

khatiza@insightfullearningjourneys.com

Image: Getty

14 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

of banking hold?

Can banks regain the people’s trust? And what exactly is the Basel III response?

Dr. Philipp Hildebrand, former governor of the Swiss national bank until January 2012, attempted to answer these questions in the S.T. Lee Distinguished Annual Lecture organised by the LKY School.

Hildebrand’s lecture was one in a series of lectures on banking and banking reforms, tackling the challenges surrounding the cur-rent global financial crisis. The former gov-ernor is also set to start lecturing this year at Oxford’s Blavatnik School of Government as a senior visiting fellow.

Regaining trustWith trust in banks severely damaged across the European continent and North America, Hildebrand emphasised the impor-tance of having confidence in banks to bring

prosperity to the world economy. Deploring the workings of the banking system before the crisis, Hildebrand said senior manage-ment in the banking sector must accept the logic of having risk-adjusted returns while also focus on activities where profitability is not the number one priority. Though this may not appeal to those within the banking sec-tor, shareholders are beginning to accept the logic behind it, as they have realised that the previous paradigm simply did not work in the long term.

Hildebrand went on to state that regulatory change is essential as a lever that will change incentives for management and alter behav-iour. Quoting the CEO of Citigroup, Vikram Pandit, he agreed that there are three essential questions before embarking on any business proceedings: whether it is in the client’s inter-est; has economic value, and is systemically

responsible. Answered well, these questions probe leaders to initiate profound changes in the business world, he argued.

A paradigm shift is key to banks regaining the trust of the people. Following the Basel III accords, and enforcing regulatory measures, would be a start, he said. While not perfect, departing from the Basel III agreements would be what he called “a grave mistake”. What the banking sector now needs is augmented trans-parency, especially in the area of financial infrastructure. Also needed, he stated, is a change in culture. Though difficult to achieve, a change in culture is vital for the changes in the thought processes that are needed to move forward from the financial crisis.

A look at Basel IIIIn a more intimate lecture at the LKY School, chaired by Professor Charles Adams,

Former governor of the Swiss national bank, Philip Hildebrand, talks about the future of banking, and the necessity of the Basel III.

by Meryl Haddad

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 15

Spectrum

Hildebrand addressed the issues of the Basel III regulatory standards that have been set up. The technicalities of it may be complicated, but they are important for the future of the banking system. Without regulatory meas-ures that can aid the system to become less pro-cyclical, the world can expect to witness another financial crisis more devastating than the current one.

Reckless lending and excessive leverage in the financial system were factors in the crash that we are witnessing today. Basel III, the international accord amongst some of the most important financial centres of the world, aims to amend the wrongs entrenched in the prior banking system. The reforms were framed quickly to prevent another financial crisis.

The fundamental problem in Europe was that the banking and sovereign crises, while

different, are deeply intertwined, Hildebrand observed. “The European crisis will be solved,” he said, “once the bond between sov-ereign funds and banks is broken”. What is needed however is to restore trust in the bank-ing system.

According to Hildebrand, Central Banks face a threefold challenge: economic, intel-lectual, and institutional. It is important that banks receive more capital of better quality instead of relying on risky ventures; future capital must be more loss-absorbing than what was witnessed during the crisis. Systemic risks in the current banking system need to be addressed so that capital can act as a buffer in bad times.

Where do we go from here?The internal risks built within meant the banks were unable to withstand the financial crisis of

2008. Hildebrand states it is in the world’s interest to ensure that trust does become reclaimed because economic prosperity is dependent upon it. Basel III reforms must be taken seriously, as without these, the world can expect to see dire consequences in terms of more crashes occurring. What is needed is systemic change and more transparency from our banking sectors. The world cannot move forward, then, without some immediate reforms on the part of our leading financial institutions, he said.

Meryl Haddad is a first-year MPP student studying at the LKY School. She graduated from the American University of Beirut in 2009 with a B.A in Political Science and worked as a freelance journalist before coming to Singapore to pursue a master's degree. Her email is merylhaddad@gmail.com

Dr. Philipp M. Hildebrand delivered a public talk titled “Can Banks Regain Public Trust?” at the LKY School on 17 September 2012.

16 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

Image: Paul Lachine

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 17

Focus

When I joined the Lee Kuan Yew School in January, I put on a new course on

Asia in the World Economy. It covers East and South Asia—their historical and contem-porary evolution in the global economy, the main countries and sub-regions, and key pol-icy issues. Given such a wide sweep, this is a mightily challenging course to teach, espe-cially in eliciting comparisons and generalisa-tions from such a diverse region. Here I offer readers of this magazine my main conclusions from the course.

The aftermath of the recent global eco-nomic crisis has reinforced a sense that the world is “shifting east”—to Asia. But habitu-ally overlooked is the essential story of Asia today—its unprecedented expansion of eco-nomic freedom. Market liberalisation is its crucial enabler. Removing restrictions that repress economic activity has unleashed the animal spirits of ordinary people, and they are transforming Asia and the world in the proc-ess. But there is much unfinished business, for economic freedom remains substantially repressed across Asia. Expanding it should be the leitmotif for public policy.

Take three key planks of contemporary policy.

First, let's focus on financial-market poli-cies. In most of Asia, financial systems remain backward. Command-economy controls restrict opportunities for all but the politically well-con-nected and do a bad job in turning savings into productive investments. They restrict the tran-sition from catch-up growth to more advanced, sustainable growth based on productivity gains. Enabling the transition to a more prosperous, sophisticated economy demands more finan-cial freedom. That requires liberalisation—removal of interest-rate controls, opening to new entrants, including foreigners, broadening capital markets, and, ultimately, capital-account liberalisation—though this has to be balanced with prudential controls to reduce vulnerability to extreme external shocks.

Furthermore, “financial repression” is at the core of “unbalanced growth” in sev-eral Asian economies—notably in China. It promotes over-saving and over-investment, while repressing private consumption, real wages and employment growth. China’s finan-cial system channels—and wastes—massive amounts of capital through state-owned banks to state-owned enterprises while more effi-cient, labour-intensive private-sector firms are starved of funds. Carefully managed financial

liberalisation would liberate domestic private-sector growth, especially in services.

Second, trade and foreign-investment poli-cies need revisiting. In Asia, trade and invest-ment liberalisation has created dynamic, globally-integrated, world-class sectors, espe-cially in manufacturing in East Asia. But there are still large pockets of protectionism, with huge variation across Asia. Tariff barriers are still a problem, but a plethora of non-tariff barriers obstructs trade and foreign invest-ment much more. Most of these are embedded in complex domestic regulation. Domestic red tape—on property rights, contracts, licens-ing arrangements, paying taxes, opening and closing businesses, labour laws and customs procedures—continues to stifle the business climate much more than in the West. This is reflected in the World Bank’s Doing Business Index. OECD countries occupy eight of the top 10 places (Singapore and Hong Kong are in first and second place). Malaysia, Thailand and Japan are in the top 20. But China is 91st, India 132nd and Indonesia 129th.

Let us not forget that these regulations restrict economic freedom at the same time. The Fraser Institute’s Economic Freedom of the World Index has only two Asian

ASIA IN THE WORLD ECONOMY: A LEITMOTIF AND THREE POLICY CHALLENGES

by Razeen Sally

18 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

societies—Hong Kong and Singapore—in the top ranks; the others are way behind. Generally, Asian economic institutions—pub-lic administration, enforcement of property rights, domestic regulatory authorities—are relatively weak and keep business and trade costs high, repressing entrepreneurship, inno-vation and consumption. They also result in badly integrated regional markets, beset by high intra-regional barriers to trade, invest-ment and the movement of workers—a far cry from the EU and NAFTA.

Third, energy and environmental policies are out-dated. Energy consumption in devel-oping Asia is expected to double over the next two decades. That translates into much more demand for fossil fuels—oil, natural gas and coal. China and India will import much more of all three, especially oil and natural gas, for which they will become even more reli-ant on the Middle East. But energy markets are throttled by government intervention and state-owned enterprises. Price controls, sub-sidies, export restrictions and inward-invest-ment restrictions are the norm. Energy is hardly covered by World Trade Organisation rules. China and India are attempting to secure energy supplies through command-economy rather than market instruments—sending out highly subsidised national oil companies, striking long-term contracts with foreign governments, and pledging loans for oil. These measures make energy markets pricier and more volatile, and they exacerbate geopolitical tensions.

More energy freedom is required to make energy supplies more stable, secure and cost-effective, and to preserve peaceful inter-national relations. That means liberalisa-tion—removing price controls and subsidies, encouraging private-sector and foreign invest-ment, “unbundling” generation, transmission and distribution in the power sector, and free-ing international trade.

Recipe for reformNow for some concluding observations.

First, Asia’s poorer economies—those in the low-income and least-developed brack-ets—should concentrate on “first-generation” reforms for catch-up growth. This involves a combination of macroeconomic stabilisation and market liberalisation. That will provide the right environment for mobilising savings and investment, labour and capital, for growth. Asia’s middle and high-income economies should focus on “second-generation” reforms—more complex structural reforms in the thickets of domestic regulation—to boost competition, innovation and productivity gains.

Both first and second-generation reforms entail the expansion of economic freedom. But structural reforms demand deeper institu-tional reforms in order to deliver productivity-led growth.

Will Asian institutions adapt? Are liberal political reforms necessary for second-gener-ation economic reforms? Will political sclero-sis keep countries stuck in a middle-income trap—or worse? How does all this relate to Asia’s geopolitical environment? These are mighty Asian questions and challenges—not least for China.

Finally, my message is a classical-liberal one in the spirit of Adam Smith and David Hume. Limited government—a “strong but small” state that performs its core functions well but does not intervene left, right and cen-tre—free markets at home and free trade abroad: that is the “system of economic liber-alism”, as Joseph Schumpeter called it, to which Asians should aspire.

Razeen Sally is a Visiting Associate Professor at the LKY School. He is also Director of the European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE), a global-economy think tank in Brussels, which he co-founded in 2006. His email is sppmrs@nus.edu.sg

Generally, Asian economic institutions—public administration, enforcement of property rights, domestic regulatory authorities—are relatively weak and keep business and trade costs high, repressing entrepreneurship, innovation and consumption. They also result in badly integrated regional markets, beset by high intra-regional barriers to trade, investment and the movement of workers—a far cry from the EU and NAFTA.

Focus

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 19

pivot to Asia

Recently, much attention has been paid to a US pivot to Asia. When it comes to

Europe, the “Euro crisis” is what comes to the minds of many. While this crisis dominates the headlines, Europe’s increasing attention and policy shift towards Asia is getting little atten-tion. The European Union is active and present in Asia—in many areas—and increasingly so. In fact, we are witnessing a EU pivot to Asia in 2012, with a large number of multilateral and bilateral summits as well as visits to Asia. Also this year the EU acceded to the ASEAN Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia, thereby becoming the only regional body to be part of it. And in parallel with Free Trade Agreements, the EU’s comprehensive engagement with Asian countries are being upgraded through Partnership and Cooperation Agreements. These various forums provide a space for a comprehensive dialogue between Europeans and Asians to address global chal-lenges and further strengthen economic and political ties between the world’s two biggest trading regions.

The Lisbon Treaty and EU engagement in AsiaFollowing the latest constitutional reform of the EU (the entry into force of the ‘Lisbon Treaty’ in late 2009) there is now more conti-nuity in EU representation towards the rest of the world. There is also more coherence in EU

policies. This should and will be appreciated in Asia as well as among the EU’s other glo-bal partners. Key institutional interlocutors in the EU, responsible for various policies, stay in office for many years. With his re-election in March 2012 the first President of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy, will be in office for a total of five years. The President of the European Commission, Jose Manuel Barroso, who was re-elected in 2009, is in his second five-year term. The mandate of Catherine Ashton, the High Representative for foreign affairs and security policy, and Vice President of the Commission, is for five years (and before taking up that post, she was European Commissioner for Trade for one year). Under

her authority is the European External Action Service (EEAS), which coordinates EU policy vis-à-vis Asia and the rest of world. The net-work of 140 EU Delegations worldwide, includ-ing in almost all Asian countries, is part of the EEAS and represents the EU in their respec-tive host countries, almost like national embas-sies. So in a year with presidential elections in the US and leadership change in China, there is continuity at the top of the EU.

The EU has regular summits with its four strategic partners in Asia (China, India, Japan and South Korea) (see table 1). This is more than with any other region of the world and illustrates the importance the EU attaches to its relations with Asia. So far this year the EU

According to a recent study by the Asia-Europe Foundation (ASEF), which tracked the perception of the EU in seven Asian countries, the EU is close to invisible. Michael Matthiessen explains that Asia is not invisible to the EU and it’s time to address this imbalance.

Table 1: Bilateral and multilateral EU/Asia Summits in 2012

Country Date Location EU Participants

China February Beijing van Rompuy, Barroso

India February New Delhi van Rompuy, Barroso

South Korea March Seoul van Rompuy, Barroso

China September Brussels van Rompuy, Barroso, Ashton

ASEM 9 November Vientiane van Rompuy, Barroso and EU HoG/HoS

20 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

has had summits with China, India and Korea, all taking place in Asia. In fact two summits have taken place with China within seven months—one in China, one in the EU. And more is to come. In November the 9th sum-mit of the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) will take place in Laos. Together with Presidents van Rompuy and Barroso, most heads of gov-ernment or state of the 27 Member States will attend the summit. Its 48 (soon 51) members represent around 60 percent of the world’s population, half of global gross domestic product and more than 60 percent of world trade. On the trip, Presidents van Rompuy and Barroso will also make bilateral visits to other countries in the region (Cambodia, Indonesia, Burma/Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam). By the end of the year, the Presidents of the two key EU institutions will have spent a signifi-cant amount of time in Asia, despite the press-ing agenda in Brussels.

Foreign policy High Representative Ashton has also been a frequent visitor to Asia this year (see table 2). Besides bilateral visits, she attended the EU-ASEAN Foreign Minister’s meeting in Brunei in April, which saw the highest number of EU Foreign Ministers present ever. She represented the EU at the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) in Cambodia in July. In the margins she signed the proto-col whereby the EU acceded to the ASEAN Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia (TAC). Furthermore, a number of

European Commissioners, including Trade Commissioner de Gucht, have travelled to Asia in recent months.

More than trade relationsTrade and investment continue to be areas of high interest for both Asians and Europeans. The EU’s trade agenda is very much focused on

agreements with Asian partners. While await-ing a region-to-region free trade agreement, the EU and interested ASEAN partners turned to bilateral agreements—FTAs (see table 3). After the first successful new generation FTA with South Korea entered into force in 2011, similar FTAs are under negotiation with a number of Asian countries (Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam and India). In July, the European Commission further recommended starting negotiations on an FTA with Japan; FTAs with Indonesia and Thailand are under consideration.

But there is more than that: in paral-lel with the FTAs, bilateral Partnership and Cooperation Agreements (PCAs) or Framework Agreements are being negotiated and agreed (see table 4). These new genera-tion agreements cover a wide range of fields, which shows the comprehensive area of coop-eration between the EU and countries in Asia. Furthermore, at the EU-ASEAN Ministerial meeting in April a comprehensive Plan of Action for the next five years was adopted. The Plan includes areas such as crisis response, mediation and reconciliation, transnational crime, and maritime security.

It takes two to tangoCompare the EU approach with the US: a pivot is also about high-level personal contacts, trade, mutual foreign investments, political coopera-tion, people-to-people contacts, etc. Despite the challenges imposed by the most severe

Focus

Table 2: Visits of HR/VP Ashton to Asia in 2012

Country/Forum Date

India January

Burma/Myanmar April

EU-ASEAN Foreign Ministers, Brunei April

Brunei April

Thailand May

Pakistan June

ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF),

CambodiaJuly

China (strategic dialogue) July

Table 3: EU next generation Free Trade Agreements (FTAs)

Partner Status Timeframe

South Korea In force Since 2011

Singapore Under negotiation To be finalised in 2012 (final phase)

Malaysia Under negotiation Since 2010 (mid way)

Vietnam Under negotiation Since 2012 (first round October 2012)

India Under negotiation Since 2008

Japan European Commission has suggested opening negotiations

Council to decide on opening of negotiations and mandate

Indonesia In preparation Pre-negotiation stage (scoping)

Thailand In preparation Pre-negotiation stage (scoping)

China (Investment agreement) Negotiations to be launched soon

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 21

economic crisis and the societal upheavals reflected in the Arab Spring, the EU and its Asian partners are strengthening their ties. The EU is in fact pivoting to Asia, which is in the interest of both the EU and Asia. The EU—with a populace of more than half a billion peo-ple—is the world’s largest trading bloc and sin-gle market as well as the largest trading partner of many Asian countries. Europe continues to be the largest development donor in many Asian countries. Trade, mutual investments and assistance to ensure growth, employment and innovation are in both Asia’s and Europe’s interest. There are so many areas where the two sides can benefit and learn from each other.

But is Asia ready to work with the EU? According to a recent study by the Asia-Europe Foundation (ASEF), which tracked the percep-tion of the EU in seven Asian countries, the EU is close to invisible. By the end of 2012 this should no longer be the case, as this year has been marked by a massive EU engagement in Asia. This engagement should also be the occasion in Asia to reflect upon why the European Union received the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize. According to Dean Mahbubani of the LKY School, the prize to the EU is well deserved as there is no longer prospect for war in Europe. Hopefully the same can soon be said about Asia.

Michael Matthiessen is the EU Visiting Fellow at the LKY School, National University of Singapore. His email is

michael.matthiessen@nus.edu.sg

Table 4: EU Partnership and Cooperation (Framework) Agreements (PCAs)

Partner Status

Indonesia Concluded

Mongolia Concluded

Philippines Concluded

South Korea Concluded

Vietnam Concluded

China Under negotiation

MalaysiaUnder negotiation.

Planned to be signed by end-2012

SingaporeUnder negotiation.

Planned to be signed by end-2012

Thailand Under negotiation

JapanCommission/EEAS

proposed opening of negotiations

Afghanistan Announced

Brunei Announced

...in a year with presidential elections in the US and leadership change in China, there is continuity at the top of the EU.

The European Union (EU)-China summit on 14 February 2012 in Beijing, China focused on the Eurozone financial crisis, with Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (C) stating that China is ready to increase 'its participation in resolving the EU debt problems'. Beside him are European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso (R), and European Council President Herman Van Rompuy.

Image: Getty

Focus

22 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

Social pensions refer to the monetary trans-fers from the public sector to a subset of

society (generally the elderly) to ensure that the targeted group has some income support through the rest of their lives. The evidence suggests that what is currently provided is insufficient, and an expansion of the scheme may be necessary to meet basic needs.

As financing of social pensions entail no contributions from the beneficiaries, they are typically undertaken fully as part of fiscal expenditure. Therefore, how this is financed is pertinent to the health of a government’s budget. This is what the chapter, ‘Social Pensions for the Elderly in Asia: Fiscal Costs and Financing Methods’, by Professor Mukul Asher in Social Protection for Older Persons: Social Pensions in Asia (2012) focuses on.

Early in the chapter, Professor Asher sur-veys and concludes that Asian countries have, in general, individually instituted variants of the scheme. However, the total costs of social pensions in general are low. Figure 1 is adapted from the chapter and illustrates this point.

It is evident that total fiscal costs are cur-rently manageable. This is true even for Nepal, which is the only country to provide a pension level at greater than 10 percent of the average per capita income, and has the highest take-up rate of 80 percent. Total costs as a percentage of GDP (the solid line) is a mere 0.23 percent. Thus, pensions remain affordable at current cost and benefit levels.

However, changing population demograph-ics over the next few decades are likely to increase future fiscal burden. Also, if Asian countries follow closely to the aim of poverty reduction, pensions per person will need to be higher than the present provision. Assuming an increase to 25 percent of the average per capita income, projected costs may rise several times, to above the 2 percent of GDP mark (the dashed line).

Therefore, governments will require an enhanced fiscal space in the range of 1 percent to 2.5 percent of GDP to meet the larger pen-sion expenditure. And this is not yet including other more ‘conventional’ fiscal needs such as for health, education and infrastructure.

Meeting fiscal requirementsThere are two broad avenues by which the requirements for a larger fiscal space could be met. One is to adjust benefit levels and the eli-gibility requirements. The other is to consider alternative sources of financing, away from the traditional reliance on taxes. But these are by no means the only ways the government budget can be ‘stretched’.

More subtly, Professor Asher points to the potential of savings possible from improv-ing management and administrative practices. Firstly, if governments are going to migrate towards full implementation of a social pen-sion, they need to take stock if existing agen-cies can be adapted for the system. Typically, establishing the administrative structure incurs a minimum level of fixed costs, with the variable component rising with the admin-istrative size.

The literature estimates such costs as 5 per-cent of benefits paid out by each implemented programme. Thus, if this set of costs can be reduced, it undoubtedly enhances the expendi-ture capability of the government budget. This

FISCAL SPACE AND THE FINANCING OF SOCIAL PENSIONS

Prof Mukul Asher’s chapter in the new book, Social Protection for Older Persons: Social Pensions in Asia, published by the Asian Development Bank, argues that lowering the costs of delivering pensions would enhance distributions, Kwan Chang Yee reports.

Focus

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 23

falls under the purview of compliance and public financial management.

A well-functioning public sector is syn-onymous with good financial management capabilities. Public sector departments that are judged by the quality and quantity of out-put instead of levels of expenditure are more likely able to get better results for less. In the present context, this would include having higher compliance for less, which is ultimately beneficial towards implementing a compre-hensive social pension system.

In concluding the chapter, Professor Asher makes the following observations. First, social pension systems are a necessary, though insuf-ficient, component of an integrated social pro-tection system given both high informal sector employment and increasing life expectancy. Second, fiscal costs are likely to rise as demo-graphics change,and there is a need to explore methods by which to finance this increase, with institutional design and delivery systems key to ensuring the sustainability of social pensions.

The subtler message to policymakers is enhancing the reach of the fiscal budget lies in

improved administration and public financial management. For some reason, this appears to be a far less heralded feature of pension sys-tems, and very often overlooked.

Mukul Asher is a Professor at the LKY School. He is also on the Editorial Board of International Social Security Review, a leading journal in the field. His email is

sppasher@nus.edu.sg

Public sector departments that are

judged by the quality and quantity of output

instead of levels of expenditure are more

likely able to get better results for less. In the present context, this

would include having higher compliance

for less, which is ultimately beneficial

towards implementing a comprehensive social

pension system.

The book Social Protection for

Older Persons: Social Pensions

in Asia was published in July

2012 by the Asian Development

Bank. It is available for sale,

and the e-book for free

download, at the Bank’s

website http://www.adb.org/

publications/social-protection-

older-persons-social-pensions-

asia.

Figure 1: The state's pension burden in chart form (Source: Asher 2012)

Focus

24 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

In the wake of globalisation, new health threats have emerged which are trans-

boundary in nature and which can no longer be dealt with by states alone. Definitions of health now encompass cross-sectoral determi-nants of health (such as access to education, housing, work condition, etc), which are tran-snational. Addressing health issues therefore encompasses various actors and stakehold-ers. A new governance structure for health is needed.

Tremendous potential exists for regional organisations in the wider Global Health Governance framework, acting as bridge organisations between global initiatives and national health policy implementation.

The Southeast Asian region, home to about 600 million people, is particularly vulner-able to health threats. The populace repre-sents almost 9 per cent of the world’s popula-tion, and yet lives on 3 percent of the planet’s land surface. The trauma of the SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) outbreak of 2003 and influenza A (H1N1) of 2009 is fresh in peoples’ minds. It is of particular interest to look into the potential of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to sup-port an inclusive framework for Global Health Governance by building on its existing mech-anisms for health cooperation. Yet imple-menting such highly institutionalised mecha-nisms is hampered by its founding principle

of non-interference and conservative inter-pretations of what constitutes violating state sovereignty.

As such principles still impede on the effec-tive implementation of regional health policies at the national level, it may be more pragmatic to look at the potential of civil society to over-come such constraints and to improve regional health governance in ASEAN.

The ultimate objective is to identify the optimum combination of actors and processes to translate regional policy into local action and change, as Marie Lamy and Dr. Phua dis-cuss in “Regional Health Governance: A com-parative perspective on EU and ASEAN”, (EU Centre Policy Brief No 4, June 2012).

TOWARDS GREATER REGIONAL HEALTH GOVERNANCE IN ASEAN: THE POTENTIAL OF CIVIL SOCIETY

ASEAN’s member states’ reluctance to adhere to a highly institutionalised regional entity has hampered regional health governance. Civil society can and must step in to meet oppressing needs, writes Marie Nodzenski.

Focus

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 25

ASEAN does not yet benefit from a high degree of integration and has not reached a sta-ble institutional profile. It might therefore be useful to draw comparisons between ASEAN and the EU to scrutinise which mechanisms and legal instruments can further regional health governance.

Regional health governance in the EUThe EU benefits from a high degree of integra-tion, and a large number of institutions work-ing on health and financial resources, enabling it to develop an inclusive framework for health governance.

Regional health governance in the EU is supported by a European Health Strategy which provides member-states with a common approach to health issues. The Statement on Fundamental Health Values and the Together for Health Strategy 2008-2013 which contains

a “Health in All Policies” principle as well as the Lisbon Treaty’s Article 9 (TEU 2009) are proof of the EU’s commitment to develop a coherent policy framework for health.

To support such a strategy, the EU operates within a wide framework of cooperation. The EUC’s specific body for health, the Directorate General Health and Consumers (DG SANCO), works in close collaboration with both the World Health Organisation (WHO) EURO and World Health Organisation (WHO) Headquarters in Geneva. Such collaboration limits cases of duplication of health policies and programmes.

Finally, the EU benefits from a support-ive network of Civil Society Organisations (CSOs), which are fully integrated in the gov-ernance framework for health (through the European Public Health Alliance and the Civil Society Contact Group).

The EU provides a fully inclusive frame-work for regional health governance by adopt-ing a cross-sectoral approach to health issues and by fostering cooperation between various actors and stakeholders. Can ASEAN adopt and develop such mechanisms pertaining to health to be relevant to our regional context?

Regional health governance in ASEANAs opposed to the EU, ASEAN holds a low degree of political integration mainly due to political diversity and economic disparities within the region, and longstanding regional conflicts. ASEAN is characterised by a very slow and complex decision-making process, known as “The ASEAN Way”, which works by consensus. Critics call it an ineffective way of governance in a modern world. This is espe-cially so in the area of health governance, in a densely populated area of a populous world,

Figure 1: The Role of Civil Society in Regional Health Policymaking and Implementation

Focus

26 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

where pandemics would thrive. More crucially, longstanding diseases with known cures and preventions can be better constrained with improved governance.

ASEAN’s potential as a global health actor expanded in 2007 with the adoption of an ASEAN Charter and the birth of an ASEAN Health Division which establishes a Strategic Framework on Health and Development (2010-2015). Under the same Charter was established the ASEAN Socio Cultural Community Pillar and its ASCC Blueprint which paved the way towards more social integration within ASEAN.

Beyond form, ASEAN is unable to deliver on the substance as it faces numerous struc-tural challenges that limit institutionalised cooperation and which impede on the crea-tion of a fully integrated health governance framework. ASEAN needs both an integrated health strategy that would approach health as a cross-sectoral priority and a wider matrix of cooperation both with WHO and with CSOs to more efficiently bridge global, regional and governmental bodies.

With growing complexity and transnational nature of health threats in the region, there is a crucial need for the nations of Southeast Asia to transcend this inertia and look beyond the state to overcome deficiencies in dealing with such issues. What processes can therefore be used to overcome structural constraints within ASEAN and to translate regional health policy into local action?

The potential of civil societyConsidering ASEAN’s member states’ reluc-tance to adhere to a highly institutional-ised regional entity, the adoption of mecha-nisms and legal instruments such as the ones designed in the EU is a non-starter. One could instead look to the involvement of civil society as essential to a fully inclusive Global Health Governance framework.

Civil society is often defined as a ‘third sector’, distinct from government and busi-ness. In this view, civil society is defined by Civil Society International as so-called ‘inter-mediary institutions’ such as professional association, religious groups, labour unions, citizen advocacy organisations.

Civil society therefore encompasses vari-ous actors, institutions and networks rang-ing from NGOs and academia to the media. Antonio Gramsci, the 20th Century Marxist political theorist often considered a highly original thinker within modern European

thought, understood civil society as the realm of culture, ideology and political debate. Association in civil society is voluntary and is characterised by individuals coalescing around common ideas, needs or causes to pro-mote collective gain.

Since the 1990’s, International Governmental Organisations (IGOs) have come to recognise the important role of CSOs in health including in governance.

Regional entities should consider too the potential of civil society actors in bridging regional policies and their implementation at the national level. In Southeast Asia, non-state actors are increasingly recognised as partici-pants in the creation of a regional community and identity although their participation to the ASEAN’s processes remains limited.

Traditionally, civil society steps in where the state or markets are failing, and are typ-ically viewed as non-threatening because of limited access to power or finances rela-tive to the other two pillars. With the grow-ing complexity of health issues and the emer-gence of IGOs and regional organisations, the role of civil society in health has considerably expanded. Civil society actors, through advo-cacy, are now able to influence policy-mak-ing and priority-setting on the global health agenda. They have made global and interna-tional processes more publicly accessible by disseminating information, therefore raising public awareness on health issues. Civil soci-ety can also greatly contribute to health pol-icy-making by sharing information, exchang-ing data, technical expertise and through fund mobilisation. Civil society plays a major role in implementing and monitoring global or regional health policies at the national and local levels.

Given that the paralysis within ASEAN has created a gap, civil society has a crucial role—and crucially, room—to play. Indeed, ASEAN’s exclusive nature limits the inter-action between the Association and the cit-izens of member-states. Civil society can act as a bridge between the various levels of health policy-making. Furthermore, civil society actors may become ideal partners for ASEAN member-states both in the arena of health policy formulation, implementation and monitoring. Indeed, the consequences of ASEAN’s reluctance to design enforcing mechanisms for national implementation of health policies might partially be alleviated with the implication of civil society in policy implementation.

Effective participation of civil societyFor civil society actors to achieve their poten-tial fully within a regional health govern-ance framework, their legitimacy needs to be legally recognised by states. Enabling factors at the national level are also crucial (such as tax and financial incentives, legal protection, mechanisms for their involvement in deci-sion-making). At the regional level, the scope of civil society actors’ involvement through improved consultation, granting of observer status and the provision of resources to par-ticipate in specific functions must be broad-ened, as Kelley Lee noted in her article, “Civil Society Organisations and the Functions of Global Health Governance: What Role within Intergovernmental Organisations?” (Global Health Governance, Volume 3, No.2, Spring 2010)

Closer collaboration between states and civil society has become necessary to sustain health initiatives.

The pressing needs in the health arena has spawned Public Private Partnerships (PPPs), which can be defined as collaborative rela-tionships that transcends national bounda-ries and which brings together three or more parties to achieve a shared health goal on the basis of a mutually agreed division of labour. PPPs are based on mutual benefice: public agencies often lack expertise and experience and the private sector brings product devel-opment, manufacturing, marketing and dis-tribution. Various forms of partnerships in addition to PPPs, such as collaborative net-works (research, knowledge, etc) are emerg-ing, signifying the growing involvement and impact of civil society on regional health governance.

The multitude of actors in health demands new ways of health governance to arrive at the most optimum combination of actors and proc-esses to translate regional or global health pol-icy into local action. Working closely with civil society and designing new processes that fully integrate its components within a regional health governance framework might be a relevant approach to the ASEAN context. Assessing the impact of civil society regional networks within ASEAN will be crucial to the creation of a sustainable regional health gov-ernance framework.

Marie Nodzenski is a Research Associate for Professor Phua Kai Hong at the LKY School. Her email is

marie.nodzenski@gmail.com

Focus

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 27

RISING TO THE CHALLENGE OF THE 21ST CENTURY: THE ROLE OF FUTURES RESEARCHby José Maria Ramos

Focus

More than ever, futures research is needed to support people’s critical understanding of the challenges we face in the 21st century, and support the development of actionable responses through public policy and social innovation.

The field of futures research has evolved since the 1950s through different stages:

a linear / predictive modality, systems think-ing and the birth of alternative futures, critical futures studies, and participatory and action oriented approaches. The key issues in apply-ing futures studies include the need for depth exploration, links with effective communica-tions strategies, and the actionability of fore-sight through policy development and social innovation.

The age of ad hoc and naïve long-term thinking is over. While humanity stumbled through the 20th century, through two cata-strophic World Wars and a Cold War that led us to the brink of annihilation, and experienced unbridled industrialisation with profound eco-logical impacts, we will not have such wrig-gle room in the 21st century. The megacrises we face now require us to proactively identify

and address a myriad of emerging issues using rigourous futures research, empowering and inspiring proactive anticipatory policy devel-opment at every level.

The need for rigour and credibility arises from the inherent slipperiness of the future as a domain of inquiry, too often exploited by quacks with either grandiose claims which pander to bias or predictions that leave peo-ple with a false sense of certainty. Credible futures research does not carry the pretences of iron-clad certainty, but through analysis reveals the potential implications of social and ecological change, and what public policy responses (and flexibility) this demands from us in the present.

By anticipating emerging issues, we can proactively address emerging issues rather than become the proverbial “boiled frog”. Arguably, a host of “frogs” is already in the pot, either

The megacrises we face now require us to proactively identify and address a myriad of emerging issues using rigourous futures research, empowering and inspiring proactive anticipatory policy development at every level.

28 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

simmering away or already at full boil. We are tackling a host of issues such as climate change, sustainable food production, water manage-ment and equity, peak oil, and population growth, to digital surveillance / souveilance, nano-medicine, life extension, neuro-enhance-ment and designer-human technologies, robot-ics, alternative currencies, peer to peer produc-tion, augmented reality and intelligent cities, runaway financialisation, globalisation driven social strategification, urbanisation and slums, threats to indigenous cultures, virtual educa-tion, potential technological singularities (e.g. artificial intelligence), militarisation of space, super-power re-alignment and regionalisa-tion, shifting expectations for political expres-sion and finally, the urgent need to understand and care for the many aspects of our global commons.

Futures research can help. People need grounded yet inspiring visions of sustainable and empowering futures in every aspect of life, to motivate and empower change, and counter the paralysis and escapism caused by fatalism. Futures research can help us to leap creatively

toward proactively addressing our challenges. If our guiding visions in the 20th century revolved around industrial and technological advancement, 21st century visions must also include and emphasise ecological, cultural, aesthetic and spiritual / moral development.

A futures research synopsisVisionaries, prophets and Cassandras have been with us from the beginning. Systematic futures research, however, is only approxi-mately 60 years old.

In the post WWII context, the emphasis on planned development in both Western, ex-colonial and socialist states drove the devel-opment of new research tools, for example trend extrapolation and statistical modeling. Future-oriented research began through the disciplines of planning, statistics, economet-rics and the policy sciences. Generally speak-ing, futures research in this period assumed the future could be predicted based on exist-ing trends and the application of institutional policy mechanisms.

The next stage in futures research, based

on systems thinking, emerged in the early 1970s. The limitations of forecasting-as-pred-ication, and an appreciation of the complex interactions between multiple trends / vari-ables in a system began to emerge. Trends could no longer be naively extrapolated into the future, what about their interactions? Drawing on pioneers in systems dynamics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) such as Jay Forrester, the Club of Rome produced their groundbreaking study, the Limits to Growth, which was followed by a host of other systems modeling efforts, which revealed alternative development paths. New distinctions emerged, for example the differ-ence between probable, possible and norma-tive (preferred) futures, wildcard (low prob-ability but high impact) events, and a new acknowledgement of the human capacity to envision and create change. With scenario building as an important new tool “the future” became the plural “futures”.

The next stage in futures research, termed “critical futures studies” emerged in the mid 1980s. This incorporated how perspectives

Image: Paul Lachine

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 29

condition and frame futures research. Futures research is fundamentally skewed if it ignores how language and discourse frame an issue. Research on global futures by the RAND cor-poration differs from the Tellus Institute, not by a matter of degees but by a matter of dis-course. What is rational and valuable from one vantage point may be insane (or inane) from another. And, power permeates our visions, images and articulations of the future. The vision for large scale industrial modernisation had led development efforts, but who or what have been left out of this image of the future? Critical futures encourages us to ask: ‘Who is written out of the future?’ Women, children, community, the poor, indigenous people? And how can they be written back in?

Ivana Milojevic, for examples, argues that because futures research is dominated by men (as has been the history of the field of plan-ning), futures research outcomes and strate-gies have reflected broadly what are consid-ered men’s interests: technology, economic growth, innovation. A feminised futures research would be more broadly geared

toward community, child care, education and relationships. As futures research may be gen-der-biased, it may also have cultural, ideologi-cal and discursive blind spots. How then do we reflect on and break out of the limitations of our perspectives? Sohail Inayatullah created the tool, Causal Layered Analysis, to explore how unexamined discourses, worldviews, ide-ologies, myths and metaphors underpin con-ceptions of we hold about the future, and to provide a way to discover alternative vantage points that lead to alternative futures.

Finally and most recently, from the mid 1990s, the field has developed participatory and action-oriented approaches, strengthening its capacity to engage a wide variety of stake-holders from across various parts of a social system to create common ground and com-mon vision, and enable actionable outcomes for policy development. Many call this action-able and organisationally embedded style of futures research ‘strategic foresight’.

These four levels in the development of futures studies and research are not mutually exclusive, but rather integral to the continuing

maturation of the field. A holistic approach incorporates each of them depending on the contextual requirements of the research and public policy development requirements.

Using futures research for empowermentThere are a variety of ways to employ futures research. However I’d like to highlight three key aspects: exploration, communication and action, all of which require well developed strategies.

Exploration in futures studies means expanding our awareness in relation to an issue. This requires environmental scanning to explore signs of change and innovation (via emerging issues analysis). As William Gibson’s infamously quipped, “The future is already here—it’s just not very evenly distrib-uted.” Exploration implies both breadth and depth, deepening our awareness of how our perspectives shape our research, and develop-ing alternative futures via scenarios.

Communication in futures studies is crit-ical. In a classic sense this means knowing how to frame futures research for a particular

30 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

audience to have maximum impact, for exam-ple drawing on Lakoff’s cognitive linguistics. In an educational setting it can mean giving students the tools of critical media literacy, to enable our youth to critically examine popu-lar images or narratives of the future which may be fatalistic and energy-sapping; or like futurist David Wright, to teach students to create media about the future, using the tools of the social media revolution. It also means developing communications platforms that allow groups to harness their collective intel-ligence in thinking about futures, an example being the Institute for the Future’s “Foresight Engine”, a massive, multiplayer online sce-nario gaming system.

Action in futures studies means linking an organisation’s or community’s vision with its

strategies and day-to-day work. Re-freshed visions for inspiring futures need to be linked with viable strategies, social innovation and action. Futures research needs to be con-cretely linked with policy development and social innovation, such that deepened strategic understanding and envigorated vision become resources for how we live in the present. Finally, action also means embodying our pre-ferred futures by following Gandhi’s dictum to “be the change we want to see”.

Today, more than ever, we need empower-ing approaches to our global and local futures. Futures research offers some approaches that, in tandem with other disciplines and perspec-tives, help us address our world’s challenges. Futures research forms an important ingredi-ent in the recipe for empowering people in

the present to create inspiring futures in many aspects of life. We are fortunate that there are many graduate programmes and a wide variety of talent at work across the globe working in this field. As a futures researcher, I would like to express my gratitude to the National University of Singapore and the Singapore Government (National Security Coordination Secretariat) for this opportu-nity to bring futures research into the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy. It is not a promise or guarantee, but with a bit of love and care, from little seeds come the alterna-tive futures we seek.

José Maria Ramos is a Visiting Professor at the LKY School. His email is jose@actionforesight.net

Focus

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 31

Professor Arye L. Hillman, the William Gittes Chair of the Department of

Economics at Bar-Ilan University, gave a public lecture in August entitled “Expressive Behaviour and Public Policy” at the School of Public Policy, to highlight the rationale behind the need for public policy: efficiency, social justice or income distribution, and macroeco-nomic concerns. Prof Chen Kang of the LKY School chaired the lecture.

He emphasised that his lecture should not be viewed as arguments against democracy.

Despite what failings one may find with it, including those he flagged, democracy remains a more ideal operative system of gov-ernment than centralised planning, he argued.

Voting offers individuals a choice on what they prefer relative to alternative sets of other available options. Subsequently, the need for public accountability ensures that what individ-uals vote for collectively is implemented. The fundamentals to this lie with the Condorcet’s Jury theorem that says (simply), when voters know the ‘better’ policy with a greater than 50

percent probability, it is always better to have more, rather than fewer, voters. A group is a better truth-tracker than an individual.

However, voting does not necessarily lead to the most efficient outcomes. Drawing on numerical examples from his book, he dem-onstrates how it may be possible for the market mechanism to deliver a more socially efficient outcome. Furthermore, majority rule implies that it could be possible for a large section of society to vote for its own benefit at the expense of the minority.

BETWEEN EXPRESSIVE BEHAVIOUR AND PUBLIC POLICY

Majority rules, but adverse social consequences can result when expressive behaviour dictate voting, resulting in unwanted public policies, says Arye L. Hillman.

Focus

by Kwan Chang Yee

32 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

Hillman then points out another problem of voting—expressive behaviour. Expressive behaviour is “the self-interested quest for util-ity through acts and declarations that con-firm a person’s identity”. Examples of identity include a green-peace activist or a feminist. The costs of taking on a particular identity can be very low, and it is possible for one to behave differently from what he/she would like to see himself/herself as, when his/her actual welfare is affected.

Expressive behaviour can take on many forms, but Hillman focused particularly on expressive voting. When vote choices are tem-pered by expressive behaviour, this leads to what he terms as an ‘expressive policy trap’. Typically, a voter might believe that his vote is not decisive in determining policy outcomes and therefore has little bearing on his individ-ual material wellbeing.

When faced with a ‘feel good’ but socially inefficient choice among a plethora of alterna-tives, voters would choose the ‘feel good’ pol-icy to generate “expressive utility”. It is there-fore possible to have majority support for a bad policy that is personally harmful when imple-mented. Examples of such policies include unconditional welfare support, and a toler-ance towards extremist behaviour, e.g. terror-ists. Subsequently, society becomes worse off because it was in each individual’s personal interest to veto such policies.

Yet, this could have been avoided simply if every voter had vetoed the policy by not exhibiting expressive behaviour.

Expressive voting is an example about how individuals’ expressive behaviour can affect others. Expressive rhetoric is another such example. Expressive rhetoric in the media and by expressive political decision-makers, can

be socially inappropriate and costly.Can expressive policy traps be avoided?

Unlike ‘conventional’ externalities such as pollution where governments can impose laws or other forms of control, there are no such means to curbing one’s behaviour. Conventional methods we are often used to are not applicable in this case.

However, Hillman explains that expres-sive behaviour is often curbed when faced by salient events. Simple acts such as informing that the individual is being expressive is likely sufficient to refrain one from going further. In essence, policy traps can be miti-gated if people support policies they would implement.

Kwan Chang Yee is a Research Fellow at the LKY School, and can be reached at

sppkcy@nus.edu.sg

Arye L. Hillman at the Lee Kuan Yew School in August 2012.

Focus

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 33

Focus

The stark reality that Asia is a rising eco-nomic power is a foregone conclusion.

What is perhaps of greater interest is what more is there to come? A glimpse of this may be discerned from the rising population and rising affluence. The world’s population stood at around 1.65 billion in 1990. Today, it is 7 billion, and in another 15 years or so, it is projected to grow to 8 billion. Asia may have about 400 million more people by that time, suggesting that Asia itself may account for around 40 percent of this growth in population.

At current rates of growth, India’s population will overtake China’s in the not-too-distant future, and both countries may account for almost a third of the global population in the next half-century.

China may no longer be the world’s second largest economy—its growth trajectory sug-gests it will only be a matter of time when it will take the pole position, with India a close second. The World Tourism Organisation pre-dicts that the number of overseas trips made by Chinese people will surge from 70 million last

year to 100 million by the end of the decade, from just 5 million 15 years ago, according to a Guardian report on 17 August 2012. Those 70 million Chinese travellers spent US$72 bil-lion, the report said. This testifies to the spend-ing power of the rising Chinese middle class, and what such a transformation of the econ-omy brings to culture and society.

And besides the giants, China and India, rising in the ranks is Indonesia, already the fourth most populous country in the world and Southeast Asia’s largest economy. It joins

BRANDING IMPLICATIONS FOR THE RISE OF ASIA

by Hermawan Kartajaya and Den Huan Hooi

Asia has seen, is seeing, and will see a tidal wave of economic and social/cultural changes, if not political. Where Asia lags significantly behind their Western counterparts is in the area of branding.

34 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

Image: Paul Lachine

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 35

stalwarts Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, and with Vietnam, the Philippines, Thailand, presents another wave of Asia rising.

Without doubt, Asia has seen, is seeing, and will see a tidal wave of economic and social/cultural changes, if not political. Today, many acknowledge that this is the Asian century. Where Asia lags significantly behind their Western counterparts is in the area of brand-ing. In Interbrand’s 2011 Ranking of the Top 100 Brands in the world, no Asian brand made it to the top 10. Only 10 Asian brands were listed of which 7 were Japanese, 2 Korean and 1 Taiwanese. This is not to say there are no other strong Asian brands, only that they are not making a mark on the global scene—yet. The top brands are still dominated by the United States and Europe. This suggests a rich oppor-tunity for Asian brands to grow. Whilst there is no one perfect strategy, let us to put forward a conceptual framework that is practical—the Sustainable Market-ing Enterprise model. This organisation development strategy model com-prises three sub-models—(a) Sustainability; (b) Market-ing; and (c) Enterprise.

The Sustainability component requires every organisation to be willing to change and transform where the circumstances so require. An ability to adapt through a willingness to creatively destroy and productively create new rules, new ways of working, new products or services will help the enterprise control its destiny and remain sustainable. An example is Samsung of South Korea, founded in 1938 as a small trading company. In the wake of a dynamically changing environment in the glo-bal business and technology space, Samsung has transformed itself to become one of the

world’s largest conglomerates. With its inno-vative products and processes, it is a world major player in fields such as digital appli-ances and media, semiconductors, memory and systems integration.

The sustainability spirit must be backed up by Market-ing that is continuously sensing and responding to changes in the market place. There are three components in Market-ing—‘Strategy’ to capture the Mind Share; ‘Tactic’ to capture the Market Share; and ‘Value’ to capture the Heart Share. No market leader in any industry conscientiously attempts to serve the whole world. Instead they segment the market by mapping its needs and aspirations, target the market by selecting suitable seg-ments that are sufficiently big, with potential for growth, complement their competencies and allow them to exploit competitive advan-tages; and develop their market by clever posi-tioning to shape how their customers perceive them. This positioning is supported by differ-entiation, backed by one or more of the 4Ps in the Marketing mix concept—product, price, place and promotion. Selling tactics merely close the sale. To achieve sustainable success the enterprise needs to build a strong brand as a value indicator to customers. Such a brand value can be enhanced by good service, and in order for any enterprise to deliver an appro-priate value to its customers; strong processes need to be in place.

In today’s digital world and with the prolif-eration of social media, the rules and ways of engagement have changed more rapidly than in the past. The code words have morphed; Segmentation is now communitisation, Targeting is confirming by the community;

Positioning is Clarifying; Differentiation is Coding; Product is Co-creation; Price is Currency; Place is Communal Activation; Promotion is Conversation; Selling is Commercialisation; Brand is Character; Service is Caring and Process is Collaboration. Enterprises need to move from being Exclusive to Inclusive, Vertical to Horizontal and One-way to Social. There is constant delineation and re-alignment of processes to cater for more differentiated markets.

Marketing requires a firm or organisation to continuously assess the outlook (taking into account that IT is now a connector amongst customers, competitors, changes in the envi-ronment and the company), adopt an appropri-ate marketing architecture whilst balancing the various needs of the different stakeholder groups. The global landscape (business, social, political, etc) is transforming rapidly and the world is changing.

The question is—are we changing in step? As Jack Welch, who helmed General Electric for 20 years from 1981, says, if we are not one step ahead, we are two steps behind.

Hermawan Kartajaya was named by the Chartered Institute of Marketing as one of the top 50 thinkers in Marketing. Den Huan Hooi is Director of the Nanyang Technopreneurship Center and Associate Professor in the Nanyang Business School, Nanyang Technological University. They co-wrote Rethinking Marketing: Sustaining Marketing Enterprise in Asia, with Philip Kotler and Sandra S. Liu and Think ASEAN! with Philip Kotler.

The global landscape (business, social, political, etc) is transforming rapidly and the world is changing.

The question is—are we changing in step?

Focus

36 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

21ST CENTURY LEADERSHIP:THE TRI-SECTOR ATHLETE

Image: Paul Lachine

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 37

In-depth

In the spring of 2010, David J. Hayes faced the worst crisis that had ever confronted

somebody in his position—U.S. Deputy Secretary of the Interior. An explosion aboard BP plc’s Deepwater Horizon oil drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico had killed 11 crewmen and ignited a seemingly inextinguishable fire. The oilrig sank and caused the largest offshore oil spill in U.S. history.

Hayes was a natural choice to help lead the federal government’s response to the unfold-ing crisis. As “Chief Operating Officer” of the Interior Department, he oversaw 70,000 employees in 23 agencies, including the National Park Service, the Fish & Wildlife Service and the Minerals Management Service, the agency responsible for regulat-ing offshore drilling. But his task was much broader—he had to work with his counterparts in other agencies and orchestrate the work of countless organisations across the public, private and social sectors, including the US Coast Guard and Department of Energy; BP and its suppliers Transocean and Halliburton; Greenpeace and dozens of citizens’ and envi-ronmental groups representing those directly affected by the spill.

A long summer ensued for Hayes. “For 86 consecutive days, the Deepwater Horizon story led the television evening news,’’ he said to us. “It was the most complex situation that I had ever had to deal with—but I did have an advantage. I had worked in the business sec-tor and the non-profit sector. I knew many of the people in those organisations, and those

I didn’t know I could quickly understand. I could stand in their shoes, which gave me a head start as we grappled to solve the cri-sis.” Eventually the concerted efforts to cap the spill were successful, and work began to restore the Gulf to something like its previ-ous state.

Hayes’ CV reflects the depth and breadth of his experience in government, business and the non-profit sectors. He had already served one term in the Clinton Administration as Deputy Secretary of the Interior (1999–2001); he had chaired the environment department of an international law firm, representing major cor-porations on issues of environment, land and resources; and he had held several part-time posts in the non-profit sector—as Chairman of the Environment Law Institute, Senior Fellow for the World Wildlife Fund, and a professor in Stanford University’s Woods Institute for the Environment.

Why we need “tri-sector athletes”Hayes is what Professor Joseph Nye of the Harvard Kennedy School calls a “tri-sector athlete”—which he defines as leaders able to engage and collaborate across the business, government and social sectors. From his own experience, Hayes can appreciate the needs, aspirations and incentives of his counterparts in the other sectors, and he can speak a com-mon language with them.

Deepwater Horizon demonstrated why these attributes are so valuable in a crisis. Another prolonged crisis—the financial and

economic crisis triggered in 2008—illustrates the divide between sectors more starkly. It has elicited little collaboration between the sec-tors, and engendered a triangular blame game, with each “side” accusing the other of causing, and exacerbating the crisis.

This persistent sense of crisis and under-lying trust deficit has stimulated fresh and challenging ideas about the very system of capitalism. Underlying this discussion is the realisation that we live in an increasingly inter-connected tri-sector world. We face tri-sector challenges, and we need tri-sector solu-tions in areas such as educational access and standards; energy security and resource pro-ductivity; climate change and environmental protection; national security and civil liber-ties; financial inclusion and social innovation; smart urbanisation and sustainable agricul-ture; and most fundamentally, sustainable eco-nomic growth and employment.

Sustainable outcomes to these issues require the sectors to collaborate in a more integrated way, but a collaborative approach to governance depends upon the people who lead our institutions, people whose perspectives and biases tend to reflect their past careers and future aspirations. If the mindset and profes-sional experience of most leaders are confined to a single sector, it is much harder to generate tri-sector solutions to modern challenges.

Hence the governance of our market econ-omy needs to focus considerably more atten-tion on the individual people who lead our institutions—and specifically on the necessary

by Nick Lovegrove and Matthew Thomas

Leaders must be nimble “tri-sector athletes”, to borrow a phrase from Harvard political scientist Joseph Nye: able to engage and collaborate across the private, public, and social sectors.

– Dominic Barton, Worldwide Managing Director, McKinsey & Company

38 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

experiences, mindsets and aspirations our lead-ers should have. More of our leaders should be tri-sector athletes such as Hayes, Paul Martin from Canada, and Rosanna Wong and Bernard Chan from Hong Kong.

What distinguishes tri-sector athletes?Tri-sector athletes come in many forms—some started in business, others in govern-ment; some operate at the highest of organisa-tions, others in their local communities; and some are building tri-sector careers at a much younger age than previous generations.

We have identified in these leaders of tomorrow a set of common characteristics with six unique and important attributes.

Balanced motivationsProfessor Nye told us in an interview that a tri-sector athlete is not a leader who “needed to have worked in each of the three sectors—and certainly not to the same extent”. Instead,

“they would need an appreciation of each sec-tor, and of the interdependencies between them," he said. "I also meant that they could contribute to public value whatever sector they were working in.”

Our research has confirmed most tri-sector athletes not only value public purpose in their careers, but also that it’s often what draws them into government and/or the non-profit sector. But most seek to reconcile that sense of mission with other important motivations—notably to meet their financial needs, as well as the desire to have influence and even power over important events. Tri-sector athletes also factor in important secondary motivations—such as lifestyle, interesting work and com-patible colleagues.

These aspirations can often seem in conflict with each other, notably on financial compen-sation. The most typical path of tri-sector ath-letes has been to start and stay in business until they can ‘afford’ to move into government or the non-profit sector. There are rare cases of leaders who started out in the non-profit sec-tor, even in Hong Kong where the ‘business-first’ model is particularly acute. Notably, this model is becoming more and more prevalent.

Dr. Rosanna Wong serves as a great exam-ple of a non-profit leader who has crossed sec-tors. Her primary focus and entire working life has been with The Hong Kong Federation of Youth Groups. Due to her outstanding leader-ship, she was then appointed to the Legislative and Executive Councils of the Hong Kong Government and subsequently appointed to

different corporate boards, including HSBC Asia Pacific and Mars Inc. as Global Advisor. As she reflects, “I am a very rare animal. In the 1990s, the government usually would not appoint people from NGOs to very senior posi-tions. Even when I was appointed to the board of HSBC Asia Pacific, I was the only person not from the business sector. But now there are more people in other corporate boards with a vbackground like me.”

Finding the right balance of motivations, and the most appropriate path to pursue them, is crucial for any tri-sector athlete to build a successful and fulfilling career and make the most public impact.

Contextual intelligenceProfessors Anthony Mayo and Nitin Nohria of Harvard Business School defined the term “contextual intelligence” in their 2005 book, The Greatest Business Leaders of the 20th Century, as “the ability to understand an evolving environment and to capitalise on trends”. This attribute is not only a touchstone for successful business leaders but also a vital skill of tri-sector athletes.

Diana Farrell, former Director of the McKinsey Global Institute, drew upon her ability to adapt to a different context when she joined the Obama Administration as Deputy Director of the National Economic Council. She found it especially important to “under-stand the structural and temporal elements of context, and to assess how they differ within and between sectors” as “this gives rise to some skills and capabilities being more appro-priate than others”.

It is clear that successful tri-sector athletes place special emphasis on accurately assess-ing the differences—whether fundamental or nuanced—within and between sectors, and on navigating these differences as fluently as possible.

Transferrable skillsWhile the first two attributes of successful tri-sector athletes might be described as “soft skills”, the third is more akin to the “hard skills” that form the basis of most professional education programmes. Each of the three sec-tors has fostered a distinctive skill set that rep-resents the standard focus for that sector.

Public sector leaders create legal and pub-lic policy frameworks to govern and direct society. Private sector executives allocate scarce resources to the most attractive and strategic opportunities, and apply appropriate

Where tri-sector athletes excel is to

transcend the inertia that comes from being

successfully entrenched in one sector.

In-depth

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 39

vtechniques to drive financial and operational efficiency. Non-profit leaders typically focus on generating innovative service models for social good—with typically more limited resources than the public or private sectors, but more freedom to operate than either.

Former Prime Minster of Canada, Paul Martin, agrees that skills he learned in one sector were transferrable to the others.

“Having been in business, did that give me a different insight when in government? And having been in government, did that give me additional insight while being a social activ-ist? The answer is absolutely.”

As Finance Minister in the mid-1990s, Martin’s transferrable skills came to bear as he had to tame Canada’s deficit—the highest of the G7 countries at the time. Moody’s had just lowered its rating on Canada’s foreign cur-rency debt and the Wall Street Journal called Canada “an honorary member of the Third World”.

In response, Martin unveiled an ambitious multi-year plan to cut deficits that engaged stakeholders across business, government, and social programmes. The success of his plan required stakeholders to understand its long-term benefit, and to buy into necessary but dif-ficult sacrifices. By 1998, Martin introduced a balanced budget, an event that only occurred twice in the previous 36 years, and by 2002, Moody’s restored Canada’s domestic and for-eign currency debt ratings.

Martin largely attributes his success to creating an inclusive national consultation process and in particular, credits his private sector experience with deepening his engage-ment and credibility with the business com-munity—a key constituent in the process.

Likewise, Joshua Gotbaum has built a set of skills that has served him well in all three sectors. He has served in each of the last three Democratic Presidential administrations (Carter, Clinton and Obama) and is currently serving as Director of the Pension Benefits Guaranty Corporation. In between (i.e. during the Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush 43 years), he built a private sector career as an investment banker with Lazard, a non-profit leader with the September 11 Fund, as a manager & con-sultant in business turnarounds; and as a pri-vate equity investor.

He points out that each of his government roles has required him to work extensively with counterparts in the private sector, espe-cially his current role overseeing the pensions of actual or potential bankrupt companies.

“First, having an understanding and comfort with the language of business, the language of strategic planning, the language of finance and accounting, are essential when you are work-ing at the interface between government and business—including procurement, regulation, a whole variety of things.”

“Second, familiarity with the practices of business is often useful when you’re think-ing about reforms to the internal manage-ment practices of government. That gives you a set of analogous practices that can gener-ally be adapted, rather than just adopted, in government.”

Integrated networksBuilding a tri-sector career often starts with a nudge or a suggestion by people close to you who work in different sectors—so per-sonal and professional networks are crucial to career progression. But we also find that tri-sector athletes leverage their networks to build their top teams; and that they con-vene from within their networks to address complex tri-sector issues. Nonetheless, while cross-sector relationships help tri-sector athletes expand and renew their knowledge, diversify their perspectives, and take crea-tive approaches to problem solving, leaders should be careful to have objective and trans-parent hiring processes to avoid nepotism and patronage.

Michael Bloomberg, a notably successful tri-sector athlete, has made use of his inte-grated network during his time as Mayor of New York. Many within his business network have taken positions in City Hall—playing full or part-time roles in reforming education, economic development and infrastructure—such as former Justice Department official and corporate lawyer Joel I. Klein. Bloomberg has drawn others into more or less formal task-forces and working groups as well.

Prepared for the road less travelledWhere tri-sector athletes excel is to transcend the inertia that comes from being successfully entrenched in one sector. The majority of peo-ple are risk-adverse when it comes to careers. Tri-sector athletes are willing to take major and sometimes counter-intuitive deviations in the standard career path.

John Berry, who currently runs the U.S. Government Office of Personnel Management, did not set out to be a tri-sector athlete but illustrated the typical response of one when he said, “It was definitely not conscious, not

Tri-sector athletes are willing to take major and sometimes counter-intuitive deviations in the standard career path.

In-depth

40 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

deliberate but I think I was always open to it.”Bob Hormats, a long-time Goldman Sachs

executive and current U.S. Under-Secretary of State, added a crucial observation—“I’m a believer in Louis Pasteur’s famous saying—

‘In the fields of observation, chance favours a prepared mind’.”

Bernard Chan, Hong Kong-based President of Asia Financial Holdings, member of the Executive Council of the Hong Kong govern-ment and Vice Chairman of the Hong Kong Council for Social Services, reflects that his involvement in the public and social sectors was driven by need, not a pre-determined plan. “It wasn’t until 1998 after Hong Kong returned to China and the size of parliament grew, that a new seat in the Legislative Council opened up for the insurance sector. I didn’t know any-thing about politics, but my local peers asked me to run for the seat—and while I hesitated at first, I decided to try and ended up winning the election.”

Such openness to take the “road less traveled” enables an attitude that embraces, rather than resists, the opportunities and accompanying risks that extend experiences and skills across sectors.

Intellectual threadDavid G. Bradley, chairman and owner of Washington, DC-based Atlantic Media Company, helped us identify the pinnacle characteristic unique to the best tri-sector ath-letes. Based upon decades of observing suc-cessful people in government, business and non-profits, he noted, “There is nothing more exciting in life than to see somebody who is a real subject-matter expert, building a move-ment for change.” A significant proportion of our tri-sector athletes are indeed subject-matter experts, having focused on a particular issue across all three sectors—what we call an

“intellectual thread”.Hormats reflected, “I have worked on the

international economics and financial system across all three sectors for the last 40 years.”

Lael Brainard, the U.S. Under Secretary of

the Treasury for International Affairs, worked in both the private and public sectors, and ties those experiences together in her current role. She told us, “In my work developing policy proposals and undertaking financial diplo-macy, I find it to be particularly helpful to be grounded in a model of how fiscal and mon-etary policy interacts with financial markets and the real economy.”

Another tri-sector athlete with an intellec-tual thread is Carol M. Browner, a pioneer of the environmental movement for nearly 30 years. “I went to law school in the late 1970s, straight out of college, because I thought I would do something in civil rights to repre-sent people.”

Her work with a mid-80s citizen action group focused her attention on environmental legislation—and she found something about herself: “I liked working with people to affect change in Congress. It was a very exciting time. Environmental and citizen groups had great leverage to affect debate at that time.”

She translated that passion into a career in Congress where she became then-Senator Al Gore’s Legislative Director (1988–1991), and then as President Clinton’s Environmental Protection Agency Administrator (1993–2001). Before working as President Obama’s Assistant for Energy and Climate Change, she partnered with her former colleagues to build a private business now known as the Albright Stonebridge Group.

“I have this interesting experience of having affected legislation, having developed legisla-tion as congressional staff, and then I moved over to the executive branch to help implement the laws that I had worked on. I have been for-tunate to have been able to see things from the activist side, the legislative side, the adminis-trative side, and the business side.”

An uncertain futureOur initial inquiry into the condition of tri-sector leadership has been both inspiring and worrying. While there exists remarkable peo-ple who have built, or are building, brilliant

careers that centre on resolving some of socie-ty’s most pressing concerns, these role models are the exceptions that prove the rule.

The tri-sector athlete concept is clearly not the prevailing leadership model in our society. This is worrying because the challenges we face are most definitely tri-sector issues. The risk remains that if we continue our unstruc-tured, silo-ed and disconnected approach to leadership development, we will fail to address our most fundamental challenges in modern society.

For practical purposes, we cannot expect that most leaders in our society would have played full-time roles in each sector, as Professor Nye noted. It is key, however, that more leaders have a substantive appreciation for, and an ability to tap into, each of the sec-tors. There are practical ways to nurture such an appreciation—for instance through cross-sector leadership education and training and

“bite-sized” cross-sector work opportunities.Finally, to see a rapid and sustained

increase in the number of tri-sector athletes in decision-making positions, we need a move-ment in society—one where every citizen demands and expects more from their public sector representatives, private sector execu-tives, and non-profit sector leaders.

There are reasons to hope as leaders of organisations are increasingly under pressure to make longer-term decisions, engage all their stakeholders and act more responsibly. This will require a new leadership model for the 21st century—one where tri-sector ath-letes thrive.

Nick Lovegrove is the Executive Chairman of Tri-Sector Forum and a Senior Director of Albright Stonebridge Group. Matthew Thomas is the Executive Director of Tri-Sector Forum and member of the World Economic Forum Global Shapers community. They can be reached at

nlovegrove@albrightstonebridge.com and matthew.thomas@tri-sector.com

Where tri-sector athletes excel is to transcend the inertia that comes from being successfully

entrenched in one sector.

In-depth

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 41

In public policy circles there is often an unfortunate tendency to talk of policy in

technocratic terms. Bureaucrats and academ-ics, ever eager to confidently present them-selves as solution providers, regularly describe the problems of particular policies and the sup-posed benefits of alternative policies in ways disconnected from understanding the social forces, and struggles between, those social forces, that actually significantly advance and condition particular policy agendas.

To be sure, discussions over ‘implementa-tion issues’ and ‘good governance’—promi-nent over the last decade or so within devel-opment policy—have increasingly led to the tentative recognition by public servants and scholars that politics matters, both in terms of understanding why certain patterns of govern-ance exist in the first place and why efforts to change extant forms of governance often yield unexpected (for some) and unimpressive outcomes.

However, even this recognition is often used for technocratic ends as an entry point for policymakers to finesse and tweak modes of implementation without really taking into

account a policy’s relation to and impact upon social forces, such as factions of capital and labour. The key point here is that public policy never emerges out of the ether. Even when they don’t know it, public policy practitioners are articulating agendas that rarely stem simply from dispassionate pondering in superb iso-lation from interests and ideology. Moreover, the agendas promoted are seen by constituen-cies in political terms and generate political responses, whether from lobby groups, pow-erful private interests, activists and or social movements).

Development policy—policy ostensi-bly promoted towards improving material and social conditions in the underdeveloped world—demonstrates the politics of public policy well. Since World War II, development policy has clearly been informed and shaped by particular ideologies (bundles of ideas) and interests (both public and private).

Indeed, the recent and large-scale push into private sector support by organisations such as the World Bank’s private sector arm, the International Finance Corporation (IFC), bears this out clearly. The last of three phases

of liberal market-oriented development policy, this new policy agenda is the product of per-sistent legitimacy challenges to liberal devel-opment policy and, more recently, a new poli-tics of development.

The politics of contemporary development policy in historical contextFor the last three decades, development policy, as with public policy generally, has been under-pinned by neoliberalism—a bundle of ideas associated with extending market discipline into the realms of state and society. This said, neoliberal development policy has remained far from static, subjected as it has been to pressure from activists and non-governmental organisa-tions (NGOs), and the reality that these policy prescriptions have often yielded unintended results. These factors, along with the increased prominence of heterodox development stories, have challenged the credibility of the agenda more generally and prompted change from within neoliberal circles.

The so-called Washington consensus dur-ing the 1980s and early 1990s—which pushed privatisation, liberalisation, fiscal austerity

THE NEW POLITICS OF DEVELOPMENT

Contemporary development policy is now moving into a new phase: the large-scale support of the private sector by multilateral organisations such as the World Bank’s International Finance Corporation. This is a qualitative shift for multilateral development policy from working on and through the state to significantly working around it. Toby Carroll details how this new agenda has emerged out of a legitimacy crisis for development policy generally and the limited, though important, increase in the leverage of underdeveloped countries.

In-depth

42 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

and deregulation as development policy, and which was promoted by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund—stemmed from the post-Keynesian ascendancy of ortho-dox economics and the identification of the state by neoliberals as a key impediment to national development.

Now well-known, the results of these prescriptions in sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America and the former communist states in Europe and Central Asia often met with stern resistance from activists and NGOs at both the domestic and international levels, with groups particularly critical of the results of fiscal aus-terity, indebtedness to multilateral organisa-tions, lacklustre (and worse) development out-comes and the capture of privatised assets by interests less than concerned with realising the ostensible social benefits of market forces.

These outcomes of neoliberal development policy’s first phase, combined with much

critical attention over the impact of large-scale infrastructure projects, led to an impor-tant, though not paradigmatic, rethink within development policy circles during the 1990s and early noughties, with the World Bank and the IMF the targets of high profile campaigns such as the 50 Years is Enough campaign and perennial attention at various multilateral and intergovernmental meetings.

Championed by figures such as James Wolfensohn (World Bank President, 1995-2005) and Joseph Stiglitz (World Bank Chief Economist, 1997-2000, and later Nobel lau-reate), a new policy set came into focus as a response from within development organisa-tions to the legitimacy crisis that they faced. Stiglitz dubbed this policy agenda the post-Washington consensus (PWC), clearly demar-cating it against what he and others derided as the ‘market fundamentalism’ of the Washington consensus.

This new agenda remained neoliberal inso-far as it was predicated on extending com-petitive liberal market social relations as an approach to development. However, drawing upon new institutional economics—an area of economics in which Stiglitz had played an important role—emphasis was now placed upon building the right institutions, often within the state, to ‘make markets work’. Moreover, concern over implementation of development policy agendas (in particular reform rejection and distortion) led to the pro-motion of participation, partnership and own-ership in the policy push.

This said, in classic technocratic fashion, the policy set that stakeholders were to par-ticipate in implementing and ‘owning’ had already been decided. Increasingly, the World Bank and others detailed that there were cer-tain very specific roles that states should and should not play. For example, states were

In-depth

Turkish workers build the BTC's (Baku, Tbilisi, Ceyhan) final terminal of the pipeline in September 2003 near Yumurtalik, Turkey.

Image: Yoray Liberman/Getty

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 43

deemed crucial in performing critical regu-latory functions but inappropriate players (largely) in service provision, where ‘ideally regulated’ market forces were to be prioritised.

Here, the fundamental conflict between technocratic policy agendas and politics was brought, once again, into sharp relief. Were parliaments the world over meant to simply be rubber stamps to endorse a uniform set of prescriptions (implying a massive shift in both state form and state-society relations) recommended in the Bank’s signature World Development Report series? And setting this technocratic challenge to notions of represent-ative citizenship aside, how long would it be until the disconnect between the implementa-tion of particular policy sets and the interests of citizens became apparent?

Unsurprisingly, the institution-building agenda of the PWC somewhat withered on the vine. Questions have been increasingly raised over the utility of institution-building agendas that are incredibly difficult to implement in the face of governments that have been forced to respond, however imperfectly, to the pres-sures of representation.

More importantly, the PWC has met with several large-scale trends that have reshaped the development landscape and marginal-ised the institution building agenda even further. The first of these has been the emer-gence, which should generally be recast in a less hubris-coated light, of many underdevel-oped countries—of which the BRICS of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa are but the most prominent—as new high-growth poles in a multipolar world.

The second has been slowing (or worse) growth in Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) coun-tries, which has meant greater incentives for both capital in the developed world to find returns elsewhere and for states to find sav-ings (aid budgets, often the target of conserva-tives, have been notably scrutinised of late in OECD countries).

Both these developments mean that the lev-erage of organisations such as the World Bank has been significantly diminished, with high-growth countries increasingly able to access deeper capital markets rather than simply rely-ing on conditional lending traditionally bun-dled with policy prescriptions from the likes of the Bank. Indeed, considerable evidence exists to suggest that the Bank no longer has significant leverage in many of its most impor-tant client countries.

However, despite the consolidated emer-gence of these high-growth poles, underdevel-opment—characterised by poor infrastructure, low-skilled and erratic employment, large informal sectors and high rates of vulnerabil-ity—of course persists in abundance.

Private sector support as a response to the new politics of developmentIt is precisely this confluence of factors and interests that the pro-private sector push of the IFC and others such as the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), both of which operate on a commercial basis, takes as its starting point. The promotion of

‘access to finance’ by capitalising financial intermediaries (such as microfinance whole-salers and retailers and banks) to cultivate and expand spheres of private sector activity has grown spectacularly in recent times. On this front alone, IFC now works with 750 finan-cial institutions worldwide and counts more than 10 million loans to micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) as attached to its portfolio.

Yet more than this, the public support of the private sector manifests through the embold-ened promotion of public-private partnerships (PPPs), where organisations such as the IFC not only relentlessly recommend PPPs as a policy solution to service and infrastructure provision, but indeed also take equity in PPP companies to mitigate the risks of other private investors and, subsequently, make the promo-tion of PPPs—at least in the short-term—more viable. This approach shares many similarities with the investment by private sector oriented multilateral organisations in large scale infra-structure in frontier and emerging markets more broadly, with organisations such as the IFC behind some of the world’s biggest mega projects (for example, the IFC was key in mak-ing the US$3.2 billion Baku to Ceyhan pipe-line go forward). Notably, this has been an important part of IFC’s portfolio expansion, which has grown from around US$10 billion to nearly US$50 billion in just a decade.

Returning to the politics of public policy, this pro-private sector push resonates strongly with key interests. Multilateral organisations such as the IFC and EBRD operate on com-mercial terms, which means they attract less scrutiny from member states. The investors in IFC bonds and projects are eager to attain returns that aren’t as easily found in OECD countries anymore, with their risks miti-gated by multilateral organisations. States in

the underdeveloped world, regularly fiscally constrained, need to respond to the demands their constituents, with the policy solutions presented by the likes of IFC appearing con-genial to this task. Moreover, individuals and companies looking to make a go of things are rationally eager to access new sources of capi-tal through MSME targeted lending.

Yet, that a policy prescription meshes with particular patterns of politics should not be simply celebrated. US banking deregulation provides a striking example where policy that meshed with the interests of numerous stakeholders in the short-term was actually extremely problematic in the medium-to-long term.

In a similar way, there are serious concerns over the pro-private sector approach intro-duced above. For one, there is plenty of evi-dence to suggest that the separation between the state and the private sector in the pub-lic interest is anything but a technical issue when it comes to regulating a PPP, for exam-ple. Moreover, despite the deployment of safe-guards, the multilateral support of mega-projects has in some prominent cases assisted in entrenching less than desirable patterns of politics, with little development outcomes for populations. Second, the utility and sustain-ability of promoting access to finance as a key development modality is open to significant question, with the potential for subprime-like and other types of crisis afflicting already vulnerable populations very real. Put more broadly, there is the very real possibility that this new mode of development policy will not only fail to deliver substantive and sustainable development outcomes but also detract from considering alternative approaches.

Confronting the limitations of technocratic development policy has its own politics, with those interested in advocating and deploying technocratic solutions obviously resistant to change. This said, with a world immersed in crisis and massive underdevelopment persist-ent (often despite growth), it is about time we concentrated more on how particular forms of politics generate and shape policy and what the implications are in terms of developing policies that deliver better outcomes for more people.

Toby Carroll is Senior Research Fellow at the Centre on Asia and Globalisation, where he runs the Centre’s large ‘New Approaches to Building Markets in Asia’ research project.His email is tcarroll@nus.edu.sg

In-depth

44 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

As a project that focuses on emerging development trends and poverty alleviation efforts in Southeast Asia, the Asian Trends Monitoring team has seen its share of public policy successes and failures. Our recent urban poverty research has revealed many major problems in service provision for the poor, even in Southeast Asia’s largest cities. We share some of these stories within.

These photographs were taken by the Asian Trend Monitoring team during field visits to Jakarta, Manila, Hanoi, and Vientiane between February and September 2012. We have recently published bulletins on urban poverty trends in those cities, which can all be downloaded at www.asiantrendsmonitoring.com.

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 45

A riverside slum in Jakarta. Overcrowding and lack of sanitation are major issues.

Failure to enforce housing regulations lead to the poor

settling in very unsafe locations.

A seaside slum in Manila. Its unsafe building materials are a hazard during floods and storms.

46 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

A settlement of temporary shacks located next to a dump site in East Jakarta.

Manila’s largest dump site in the port district of Tondo also houses a large slum population.

Every major city we visited had populations of trash collectors who lived

dangerously close to their work.

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 47

A failed public housing project in Manila; residents say it’s worse than the slums around it.

A rare success story of slum upgrading carried out by the NGO Gawad Kalinga in Manila.

Slum upgrading projects have a slim margin of error. If done wrong, it only serves to relocate the slum without

improving conditions within the community.

48 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

A trash collector in Jakarta must work 14 hours per day to feed his five children, only one of which can go to school.

A family in Vientiane lives in an old shack on the outskirts of town, with the closest hospital over 30 minutes away.

The failure of governments in providing sufficient services for the poor leaves several families with

very bleak prospects for the future.

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 49

A rice stall in Vientiane, located at the side of an unpaved road.

A street vendor in search of the next client.

Work opportunities for the poor are very limited in these cities. The only real options are low-paid and uninsured hard labour or

“micro-entrepreneurship” in the informal sector.

50 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

The second run of the Temasek Foundation Water Leadership Programme (TFWLP)

trained thirty-three mid and senior level pro-fessionals from the water industry on best practices in water utilities governance, effec-tive management of water utilities, as well as potential strategies to deal with existing and

future challenges. Aimed at building capacity in developing countries in Asia, the initiative is the result of a partnership between Temasek Foundation, the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy at the National University of Singapore, and PUB (Public Utilities Board), Singapore’s national water agency.

This second run was delivered in Singapore from 23 April to 4 May 2012, and included par-ticipants from six countries, the Philippines, India, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Kazakhstan and Indonesia. Besides learning, the programme is an opportunity for water industry leaders to develop networks with their peers in neigh-bouring countries.

In preparation for the programme, the teams identified a specific water manage-ment challenge that their city or country faces, and an action plan that could address the challenge within the year after the pro-gramme ends. During the two-week course, participants refined their proposals after several consultations with faculty and practitioners.

“The TFWLP has been an enriching expe-rience enhancing my capacity and confidence as a water sector professional,” said Rajesh Jethwa, Executive Engineer at the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board in India, adding that the exchange of views and shar-ing of experiences by participants was highly rewarding.

Participants highly value the interactive classroom discussions, case studies, panel discussions, and site visits to PUB facilities such as the Marina Barrage, Keppel Seghers NEWater Plant and “Active Beautiful Clean” water projects like the Kallang River-Bishan Park and Alexandra Canal. Classes were con-ducted by world-renowned faculty including Professor Peter Rogers of Harvard University and Professor Dale Whittington from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and students participated actively in one-on-one discussions with field staff and world-class policymakers.

To facilitate a continuous flow of ideas and research between participants, faculty and practitioners, as well as to improve water management in various communities, the par-ticipants conducted training workshops upon returning to their countries for their counter-parts in other ministries, statutory boards and local governments.

There will be a total of four runs for the TFWLP. The third run is set to take place in November 2012 and the fourth in the first quarter of 2013.

Luana Chow is an Assistant Manager at Executive Education. For more information on the next run and an application form, contact Luana Chow Luana Chow at

luanac@nus.edu.sg.

by Luana Chow

Executive Education

Participants listen attentively to the Keppel Seghers NEWater Plant staff, as he explains the technologies applied in NEWater production.

Image: Ngiam Tee Woh, LCMS Consulting

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 51

The Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (LKY School), National

University of Singapore signed a significant long-term partnership agreement with the Nazarbayev University (NU), Kazakhstan to support NU’s efforts to promote pub-lic policy education across Central Asia. The partnership agreement signed is the result of LKY School’s outstanding track record in public policy education in Asia and beyond. Through the partnership agreement the LKY School will provide consultancy serv-ices over five years to 2017 to facilitate the establishment of an international Graduate

School of Public Policy (GSPP) at NU. The signing ceremony took place at the LKY School and the agreement was signed by Professor Tan Chorh Chuan, President of NUS, Dean Mahbubani and Dr. Shigeo Katsu, President of Nazarbayev University. His Excellency Yerlan Baudarbek-Kozhatayev, Ambassador of Kazakhstan in Singapore, Australia and New Zealand and faculty of the LKY School also attended the signing ceremony.

President Shigeo Katsu and Dean Kishore Mahbubani both said that they hoped that the agreement would contribute to the

transformation of Kazakhstan’s public policy education in the next five years. Dr. Shigeo Katsu also noted that the initiative of establish-ing a world-class research-centreed univer-sity arose from President N. N. Nazarbayev’s vision. He reflected that the reason the The LKY School was chosen to be a central part of this initiative due to the School’s famili-arity with Kazakhstan, and its experience in educating the next generation of policymakers under the Academy of Public Administration. On 19 and 20 August 2012, NU and the LKY School celebrated the long-term partnership by hosting international partners of NU in Astana. The partnership celebration marked the cooperation and commitment of the two universities in working together to advance the public policy education in Kazakhstan and beyond. Dean Mahbubani, together with his fellow Vice-Deans Stavros Yiannouka and Professor Jeffrey Straussman, and Aigerim Bolat, Head of Central Asia Programmes at the LKY School were present for the occa-sion. Dean Mahbubani also met with the Deputy Prime Ministers of the country, Yerbol Orynbaev and Kairat Kelimbetov, to discuss the partnership plans.

During the visit to Astana, Professor Mahbubani also met with the Alumni of LKY School’s graduate and NU joint executive programmes, which included H.E Gulshara Abdykalykova, Minister of Social Security and Labour of Kazakhstan, over an Alumni lunch gathering.

The privilege of being part of the Kazakh Government’s historical initiative to set up the first research-centreed university to lead in Central Asia and beyond is the result of years of collaboration and trust gained by the LKY School in educating the next generation of leaders of Kazakhstan. Since 2008, the School has provided executive education programmes to more than 400 government officials includ-ing the Prime Minister and his cabinet. In partnering NU, the LKY School joins a select group of leading international institu-tions including Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business, the University of Pennsylvania, University College London, Cambridge University, iCarnegie (the interna-tional arm of Carnegie-Mellon University) and the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

More information on the partnership with NU can be found in GIA issues #13 and #14. You may also contact Aigerim (Aika) Bolat at sppaika@nus.edu.sg

by Aigerim (Aika) Bolat

Executive Education

Dean and Dr. Katsu at the LTA signing ceremony at the LKY School with H.E Yerlan Baudarbek-Kozhatayev (far-left), Ambassador of Kazakhstan in Singapore, Australia and New Zealand.

Image: Ngiam Tee Woh, LCMS Consulting

52 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

The world in the fast-evolving 21st century has grown more complex, in many forms and across many fields. At the same time, econo-mies in Asia and around the world are strug-gling to maintain their growth and devel-opment. In parallel to these developments, cultural sensitivity and the motivational man-agement of people has become a vital com-ponent of business activity. The task of mod-ern senior management is now more complex, challenging and multi-faceted.

To help meet these challenges, the 7th Senior Management Programme (SMP) was designed and developed to provide govern-ment and business leaders the opportunity to step back from their day-to-day respon-sibilities, and embark on a journey of intel-lectual and personal renewal to improve

their performance as leaders in their respec-tive organisations. The four-week flagship programme was jointly organised with the School of International and Public Affairs at Columbia University, New York.

A very accomplished and diverse group of 27 senior executives from six different coun-tries and territories that include Australia, Botswana, China, Hong Kong, Nigeria and Singapore were brought together between 4 and 29 June for the 2012 SMP. The pro-gramme is anchored in the premise that the individual leader has the potential to exercise positive influence in guiding organisations. As such the programme emphasises enhanc-ing participants’ awareness of their strengths and weaknesses as leaders when interacting with others. And in addition to understanding

one’s leadership style and approach, it is also important to accurately assess the context and environment in which a leader operates. This is why the programme is equally focused on organisational dynamics and understanding the global forces affecting organisations and the world today. Coupled with the expertise of trainers and leadership experts, the var-ied experience of fellow participants helped to deliver highly interactive and innovative training modules.

One of the SMP participants, Godfrey Mudanga, CEO of Water Utilities Corporation of Botswana, had this to say about the pro-gramme, “SMP has given me so much insight into organisational transformational and gov-ernment policy formulation that I cannot wait to go back and implement them.”

As part of the SMP, participants also took part in the Integrative Management Exercise an innovative overseas learning component based on experiential leadership development. For SMP 2012, the group travelled to Libon, Albay, Philippines for one week to work on a project to strengthen the core local governance processes, with special emphasis in the area of child welfare and services. Participants rated this intensive reach-out experience as among the highlights of SMP, catalysing both learn-ing and friendships while creating lasting value for the partner communities.

Sunny Lim is Manager at Executive Education. His email is sunnyl@nus.edu.sg

by Sunny Lim

Executive Education

Overseas Action Learning in Libon, Philippines.

Image: Ngiam Tee Woh, LCMS Consulting

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 53

The international news on Afghanistan often give us a picture that the country

is hopeless—poor, unsafe and disadvantaged without security and with an unknown future. However, in reality it may not be so. At least 16 officials from the Ministry of Finance (MoF) of Islamic Republic of Afghanistan who attended a five-day executive programme at the LKY School told us a different story—one of a hopeful nation. They say while Afghanis might have gotten used to the explosions that could take their neighbour’s or relative’s lives in a second, theyeremain passionate and opti-mistic about Afghanistan’s future.

The 16 officials from MoF arrived at Changi airport on 26 August in high spir-its with the goal to promote their resource-rich country that welcomes foreign invest-ment to develop their economy. This batch of young officials, who manage the govern-ment’s finance, budgets and funds, spoke flu-ent English, and most of them have degrees from overseas universities.

The head of the delegation Zia-Ur-Rahman Haleemi Abdul Halim Bursat, Director of Budget Policy and Reform Unit of MOF said:

“We chose to be trained at the LKY School not just to learn from Singapore’s strategic develop-ment practices but also from the region. We are aware that countries in South East Asia or Asia have experienced economic transition and devel-opment stages that Afghanistan is going through currently. There are many lessons for us to learn from this region. We specifically chose the LKY School as it has an Asian taste that cannot be found elsewhere. Although after attending this type of short programme, we will not be able to transform our country right away, we do learn ways and new methods of managing budgeting and efficient planning that we expect will offer effective outcomes in the long term. Lectures

with both practical and theoretical components on Fiscal Policy and Budgeting, Tax Policy and Administration, Financial Reform for a Transition Economy and Controlling Corruption and site visits to the Ministry of Finance and Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) during the programme were especially useful for us to learn from the experiences of other countries such as Vietnam, Taiwan, Singapore and Malaysia. Using our new knowledge from this week’s lectures we will be able to more efficiently manage the legislative changes cur-rently taking place, create a more investment and business-friendly environment, and design more effective public policies.”

He also stated that the Government of Afghanistan places a great importance on edu-cation and this includes granting scholarships for overseas training. “Seeing is better than hearing,” said Zia, and is one of the reasons for exposing officials to the advanced devel-opment of Singapore. Since 2011, the govern-ment has spent US$10 million on scholarships and each year about 1,500 undergraduate and graduate level students are sent to universities in the USA, UK, Europe, Russia and Central Asia.

I asked Zia what wish he had for his coun-try, if he had but one. He replied, “Stability. As soon as there is security and peace then the economy, political system and the society will stabilise and the government will be able to focus on socio-economic development rather than providing basic security for our people. We do have resources available and policies in place to prosper in the long-term and people are optimistic about the changes currently tak-ing place in the country.”

Naveed Ahmad Niaz Lal Mohammad, Budget Reform Manager, also shared these views and hopes:

“I am one of the optimistic men in my coun-try, who will take back many useful lessons after analyzing advantages and disadvantages the countries in this region had in their devel-opment path. One policy our government is implementing intensively is developing com-petitive human resources, which is a crucial factor in development. Currently, our govern-ment lacks skills needed in implementing the changes and is challenged by the private sec-tor in keeping the talents due to uncompeti-tive salary levels. Therefore the government is training public sector officials by sending them to programmes and study tours overseas. Depending on the sector, government chooses different destinations such as Turkey, South Africa, India or Malaysia. Singapore is one of the destinations where we can learn about budgeting and fiscal planning and anti-corrup-tion measures. This programme also provides an opportunity for us to network and maybe involve the LKY School’s lecturers and prac-titioners as advisors to our government to help us reform our system and transform the country.”

Naveed told me about his wish that through education and training, he hopes to be part of Afghanistan’s transformation to a peaceful and prosperous country. “Hope” was heard often during the week. Professor Eduardo Araral, Faculty Lead of the programme, was also struck to hear the word “hope” during every presentation by the participants at the end of the week and they concluded that there is always hope in everything to be done in Afghanistan.

Aika Bolat is Assistant Manager and heads Central Asia programmes of Executive Education. Her email is

sppaika@nus.edu.sg

by Aigerim (Aika) Bolat

Executive Education

54 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

On 6 July 2012, the Lee Kuan Yew School held a valedictory dinner for the Master in Public Administration (MPA) Class of 2012. There were 79 students graduating from the class of 2012, comprising both full-time and part-time students on MPA. Held at the Carlton Hotel Singapore, the Masters of Ceremonies were Carl Edward McIntyre and Jane Donaldson, and Hoo Munn Ye gave a farewell toast at the end of the night. It celebrated the culmination of an intensive journey for the School’s newest MPA graduates. It was a night of remembering friendships and memories forged—and of course, good food and plenty of laughter.

The one-year Master in Public Administration (MPA) programme provides an intensive, interdisciplinary course of study for experienced professionals who wish to work on increasingly complex issues shaping national, regional and global policies and projects. Students graduating with an MPA degree acquire new knowledge and skills to enhance their leadership and managerial capabilities to work in the public, private and non-profit sectors.

Follow Alumni news and other updates on Twitter @LKYSch.

MPA Class of 2012

Alma Mater

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 55

Group shot.

Dean with Carl McIntyre (Class President) and Jane

Donaldson (Vice Class President, Semester 2).

56 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

Carl McIntyre and Jane Donaldson presenting a gift to Associate Professor Ashish Lall.

Valedictorian toast by Hoo Munn Ye (Best MPA Student).

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 57

Nazia Malik, Pamela’s partner, Tan Lai Yong,

Pamela Beltran Manuel

One for the memory: class photo

58 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

a Kishore MahbubaniDean

Participated in the 2012 World Leadership Forum, Foreign Policy Association with Strategic Review panel session titled "How emerging powers are reshaping the world”. [New York, USA, 26 Sep]

b Kishore MahbubaniDean

Delivered a speech at the Canadian Council of Chief Executives 2012 Conference Keynote, “Lessons Canadians should learn from Asia”. [Ottawa, Canada, 23 Sep]

c Kishore MahbubaniDean

Delivered a speech at the European Leadership Platform Annual Conference Keynote, “Rise of Asia”. [Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 27 Sep]

d Tikki Pang (Pangestu)Visiting Professor

Invited to convene and chair a session on “The Global Strategy and Plan of Action for Public Health,

Innovation and Intellectual Property” at the World Health Summit. [Berlin, Germany, 22 Oct]

e Razeen SallyVisiting Associate Professor

Delivered a lecture at the Gamani Corea Foundation, “Asia in the World Economy: three policy challenges”. [Colombo, Sri Lanka, 27 Sep]

Delivered a keynote address on “Lessons for South Asia from East Asia” at the Eisenhower Fellowships South Asia Conference. [Colombo, Sri Lanka, 29 Sep]

f Phua Khai HongAssociate Professor of Health Policy & Management

Spoke at the “New Trends in Public Policy Training in Asia”, Sabah State Public Service Department, Institut Latihan Sektor Awam Negeri (INSAN). [Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, 15 May]

Spoke at the “Public Policy Training for Future Leaders of Asia”, Human Resource Management Unit, Chief Minister’s Department. [Kuching, Sarawak, 25 Sep]

g Heng Yee KuangAssociate Professor & Assistant Dean (Research)

Delivered a lecture titled “The non-kinetic role of the military in Japan's soft power projection” at the East Asia Institute. [Singapore, 24 Aug]

h Tikki Pang (Pangestu)Visiting Professor

Invited speaker and workshop facilitator at the First Regional Workshop of the ASEAN Member States Dengue Vaccination Advocacy Steering Committee (ADVASC). [Bangkok, Thailand, 22 Sep]

i Razeen SallyVisiting Associate Professor

Chaired two panels at the World Economic Forum (the "Summer Davos"). [Tianjin, China, 11–13 Sep]

j Phua Khai HongAssociate Professor of Health Policy & Management

Invited to speak at the “Trends in Pricing and Reimbursement” at the Pricing and Reimbursement

ba

cd

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 59

Accolades

FACULTY ACHIEVEMENTSAsit K. BiswasDistinguished Visiting Professor

Wrote an op ed ‘Give water its due importance’ with Leong Ching which appeared in Business Times on 21 August 2012.

Referred to as the “world’s water advisor” in Reuters Foundation selection of “Top 10 Water Trailblazers of the World”. This is the first time any NUS staff member has been included in a “Top 10” list (a few NUS professors have been listed as the top 100 persons in the world in their fields).

Boyd Fuller and Khuong Minh VuongAssistant Professors

Received the Best Journal Article 2011 award in Public & Nonprofit Division from the Academy of Management.

Tikki Pang (Pangestu)Visiting Professor

Invited as participant to Nobel Week Dialogue on the theme of The Genetic Revolution and its Impact on Society. The Nobel Week Dialogue is a brand new element in the traditional Nobel Week programme, and takes place the day before this year's Nobel Prize award ceremony and banquet (Stockholm, Sweden, 9 Dec, 2012).

Phua Kai HongAssociate Professor

Won an award from Asia-Europe Foundation (ASEF) for a six-month study on Health and Migration in Asia (Singapore and Hong Kong) and Europe (Austria and Italy). The small research grant of $50,000 is a 50-50 split between the Centre for Health & Migration in Europe and LKY School. ASEF will transfer $25,000 to LKY School to pay for two country consultants in Asia, research assistance and travel.

Delivered the ST Lee Lecture 2012 at the Menzies Centre for Health Policy, University of Sydney and the Australian National University. His lecture was on the topic “Health Systems and Population Ageing in the Asia-Pacific: Policy Implications and Options for the Future”.

Awarded a joint research grant from the Asia-Europe Foundation to conduct a comparative study of “Health and Migration in Asia and Europe”, in collaboration with the Centre for Health and Migration, Vienna, Austria.

Toby CarrollSenior Research Fellow

His article in the Journal of Contemporary Asia won the journal's runner-up prize for best article of 2012. Toby also edited the special issue, which was entitled ‘Neo-liberal Development, Risk and Marketising Asia’. The paper an important new push by international financial institutions towards broadening and deepening capitalist social relations in the underdeveloped world in ways well beyond Washington Consensus structural adjustment or even post-Washington Consensus forms of institutionally-oriented ‘‘participatory neo-liberalism’’.

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENTSAlex He JingweiPhD Candidate

Presented oral presentation at coming panel session organised by Phua Kai Hong at the coming Second Global Symposium on Health Systems Research (HSR) to be held in Beijing, China, 31 Oct to 3 Nov, 2012. His topic will be on ‘Comparative Health Systems in Asia: Public-Private Participation’.

Michael RaskaPhD Candidate

Recently awarded a PhD from the LKY School.

e

n

k

j

l

i

Future Trends Workshop. [Taiwan, 31 Aug-1 Sep]

k Kishore MahbubaniDean

Attended a ADB KBE Study high-level panel meeting. [Manila, Philippines, 3–4 Sep]

l Heng Yee KuangAssociate Professor & Assistant Dean (Research)

Delivered a lecture titled “Urban Order, Global Risks” at the Aoyama Gakuin University. [Tokyo, Japan, 14 Sep]

m Phua Khai HongAssociate Professor of Health Policy & Management

Spoke at a roundtable discussion on “Health Systems and Population Ageing in the Asia-Pacific” at the Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University. [Canberra, Australia, 10 Sep]

n Kishore MahbubaniDean

Delivered the 2012 APPA / NZPF Trans-Tasman Conference Keynote, “Globalising Current Educational Thinking”. [Melbourne, Australia, 19 Sep]

m

h

gf

60 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

On the move

Yu Min Joo (Assistant Professor, 2 July 2012) holds a PhD in urban and regional planning from MIT and a Master’s degree in urban planning from Harvard University. At MIT, she was with the International Development

Group, which focuses on the development issues and policy challenges in non-Western countries. Originally from South Korea, she is particularly interested in studying the political and social dynamics of development policymaking in Asia, with an emphasis on exploring them across various spatial scales from urban to national in the global economy.

Yvonne Jie Chen’s (Assistant Professor, 2 July 2012) research interest lies in health econom-ics, applied econometrics and development economics. Her past research primarily focuses on applying econometric tools

in analyzing policy effects on health inequality and other issues. She has also worked on a variety of development economics projects on fertility and saving behaviours in China.

Yvonne holds an undergraduate degree in Computer Science and Economics from Washington University in St. Louis. She received her master and doctoral degree in economics from Yale University. In addition to her academic career, she also worked as a senior associate at a Philadelphia-based health care consulting firm, offering strategic advice for pharmaceutical companies around the world.

Krzysztof Piech (Academic Visitor, 7 Sep 2012) is a Reader (Adjunct) at the Economic Policy Department of Warsaw School of Economics (SGH). He holds a Doctorate from the same uni-versity. He is a member of the

Centre for Comparative Economics at University College London. He is also a representative of eco-nomic sciences in the Council of Young Scientists by the Minister of Science and Higher Education in Poland. He established and leads the Knowledge

& Innovation Institute in Warsaw. He is also the author, editor or co-editor of almost 40 scientific books.

Namrata Chindarkar (Assistant Professor, 2 July 2012) received her PhD from the School of Public Policy, University of Maryland concen-trating in international develop-ment policy. She holds a M.A.

in Development Studies from the University of Manchester, U.K., and a M.Phil. in Social Sciences from the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai. Her doctoral dissertation was a quantitative analy-sis of survey data to empirically test subjective well-being theories and answer questions pertaining to international migration decisions, participation in poverty alleviation programmes, and equality of opportunity.

Namrata has worked as an analyst at McKinsey & Company, as an executive at the Indian NGO Concern India Foundation, and as an intern at two international organisations, the Global Development Network and the Asian Development Bank. Her research interests are in empirical policy analysis using household and country-level survey data; and policy areas of interest are well-being, poverty and inequality; gender and development; and demography.

Henry Yee Wai Hang (Assistant Professor, 4 July 2012) received his Bachelor and Master degrees from the University of Hong Kong. He examined China’s recent environmental reform for his PhD degree at the University

of Southern California (USC). Since 2006, he has been collaborating with an international network of scholars, studying how political-institutional environments shape structures and performances of public agencies among OECD countries. In another research project, he has also been researching on the social movement of Home Owner Associations (HOAs) in China, with colleagues from the Civic Engagement Initiative at USC since 2011.

Irvin Studin (Visiting Senior Fellow, 6 July 2012) is Programme Director and Assistant Professor in the School of Public Policy and Governance, University of Toronto, and Editor-in-Chief and Publisher of

Global Brief magazine. He worked for a number of years in the Privy Council Office (Prime Minister’s department) in Ottawa, as well as in the Australian Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet in Canberra. The first ever recruit of the Canadian government’s Recruitment of Policy Leaders pro-gramme, he co-authored Canada’s 2004 national security policy, and principal-authored Australia’s 2006 national counter-terrorism policy. He is the editor of What is a Canadian? Forty-Three Thought-Provoking Responses (McClelland & Stewart, 2006).

Erin Kim Hye Won (Assistant Professor, 4 July 2012) earned her master’s and doctoral degrees in Public Policy from Duke University. She received her B.S. and M.S. in Management from the Korea Advanced Institute

of Science and Technology. Her research focuses on the interplay between family and social policy, particularly in the context of population ageing. In other projects, she examines the effect of Medicaid asset transfer rules on inter-generational transfers, how long-term care subsidies affect elders’ living arrangements, to what extent women achieve their intended fertility, and the impact of the number of hours worked on fertility. Kim taught “Population Aging, Family, and Policy in the East and West” at Duke University, and teaches “Statistical Techniques for Public Policy” at NUS in fall 2012.

Zeger van der Wal (Assistant Professor, 4 July 2012) has published in the areas of public and private management, public values, organisational ethics, public service motivation (PSM) and public professionalism. His

work appeared in leading academic journals as well as professional journals, books and book chapters,

The Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy continues to attract leading scholars from around the world.

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 61

research reports, and newspapers and magazines. His main publications have been translated into Russian and Chinese.

Before he joined the LKY School, he was Assistant Professor at the Department of Governance Studies at the VU University Amsterdam, The Netherlands, from 2008 to 2012. In 2008, he obtained his PhD (cum laude, with distinction) from that same institu-tion. Before he became an academic Van der Wal worked as a policy advisor for the Municipality of Amsterdam and the Provincial Government of Southern Holland, between 2001 and 2003.

Michael Matthiessen (EU Visiting Fellow 2012-2013, 16 August 2012) is a senior official from the newly created European External Action Service (EEAS) in Brussels. The EEAS, which started in 2011 as an important

element of the implementation of the EU’s Lisbon Treaty, is a merger of the parts of the European Commission and the Council Secretariat deal-ing with external relations—with the addition of seconded diplomats from the EU Member States. Michael Matthiessen has a professional career of 30 years, first as a Danish diplomat for 17 years and then as a senior EU official for 13 years. As a Danish diplomat he worked both in Copenhagen and Brussels and was mostly involved in NATO and European affairs. He was the Deputy Director of the Private Office of the Secretary General of NATO (Lord Carrington) 1985-1987 and the Private Secretary to the Danish Prime Minister.

José Ramos (Visiting Senior Research Fellow, 10 August 2012) will be with the School for Semester 1, AY2012-13, co-teaching a module on Foresight Analysis for Public Policy Professionals with T S Gopi

Rethinaraj (Assistant Professor). The module is a new initiative supported by the National Security Coordination Secretariat (NSCS), PMO, Singapore. He holds a Doctorate from Queensland University of Technology in Global Studies and Strategic Foresight. He has taught and lectured on futures

research, methods and analysis at Swinburne University of Technology and the University of the Sunshine Coast. He is Senior Consulting Editor for the Journal of Futures Studies, and is on the edito-rial board of the journal Futures. Through Action Foresight he has over ten years experience facili-tating workshops, applied research, multi-media production, the art of strategic conversation and dialogue, presenting and designing educational curricula.

Dennis Wichelns (Visiting Professor and Director, Institute of Water Policy, 8 Aug 2012) is an agricultural and natural resource economist. Dennis obtained his undergraduate degree in Horticulture from the

University of Maryland, where he served later as Manager of the University’s Plant Research Farm. After obtaining a Master’s Degree in Agricultural Economics from the Univ. of Maryland, Dennis undertook his doctoral research at the University of California, Davis, where he received his PhD in Agricultural Economics. Dennis has served in teaching and research positions at the University of Rhode Island, California State University in Fresno, and Hanover College in southern Indiana. He has served also as Chief Economist with the California Water Institute, as Executive Director of the Rivers Institute at Hanover College, and as Dean of the School of Public and Environmental Affairs at Indiana University Northwest. Most recently, Dennis has served as Principal Economist and Senior Fellow with the International Water Management Institute, based in Colombo, Sri Lanka. While in that position, he has worked closely with many international colleagues on a wide range of research projects involving water resources, agriculture, poverty, and livelihoods in several countries across Africa and Asia. He has served for many years as one of the Editors-in-Chief of Agricultural Water Management, and he will serve as the found-ing Editor in Chief of the new journal, Water Resources and Rural Development, which will be launched by Elsevier during the 2012 edition of the Stockholm International Water Week.

NEW ROLES ASSUMED

Scott Fritzen (Associate Professor, 16 August 2004) is on leave-of-absence for two years to serve as Associate Dean of Academic Affairs, and Visiting Professor at the Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service, New York University. He was formerly Vice Dean (Academic Affairs) for the LKY School from 2008-2011.

Jeffrey Straussman (Visiting Professor & Vice Dean (Executive Education), 25 July 2011) takes over the leadership of the School’s Executive Education as Vice Dean (Executive Education) with effect from 1 September 2012. He was for-merly Dean, Rockefeller College of Public Affairs & Policy, University at Albany, State University of New York.

Kenneth Paul Tan (Associate Professor & Vice-Dean (Academic Affairs), 1 March 2007) takes on the responsibility of Vice Dean, Academic Affairs.

Kanti Bajpai (Professor & Vice-Dean (Research), 2011) takes on the responsibility of Vice-Dean (Research) from 1 September.

Justyn Olby (Head, Curriculum & Teaching, 15 August 2012) comes to the School from Republic Polytechnic (RP) where he worked as a Senior Academic Manager for four years with the School of Technology for the Arts focusing on facilita-tion and curriculum design. In 2009, Justyn moved to the Centre for Educational Development, where he specialised in curriculum design, and problem-based learning in particular. One of his major roles was helping senior faculty members design and develop comprehensive academic programmes. In 2011, Justyn attained his Master of Education from University of Western Australia. He has also had extensive experience in adult education running workshops and consultancies for curriculum designers for various areas of education in Sydney, Australia, and for tertiary educators in Singapore. At the LKY School, Justyn’s role will be to work with faculty to develop and implement curriculum of all types and to explore teaching styles, strategies, and innovations that best suit our educational objectives and strengths.

On the move

The Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy continues to attract leading scholars from around the world.

62 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·

The pursuit of happiness is high on most people’s life agenda. In fact, it is writ large in political manifestos—in the Singapore pledge of allegiance, the U.S. Declaration of Independence, and in Bhutan’s case, even as a measurement of progress: “Gross National Happiness”. So what actually contributes to happiness?

Clearly, wealth has something to do with it but it is only a fraction of the equation. Researchers, including Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman, have shown that on aver-age the more wealthy a nation, the greater the well-being of its citizens. Denmark is at the top of the curve; the USA, a wealthier nation as measured by purchasing power, is not far behind—but it is on the same level as Venezuela—a very much poorer nation. As for Singapore, despite its wealth per capita (11th in the world according to Gallup’s research-ers), ranks poorly. Singaporeans described themselves as “struggling” significantly more than the citizens of other countries. Money, it seems, is like hygiene: it can protect peo-ple from the lows of disease and discontent-ment, but it cannot take a person or a popula-tion to the highs of thriving and well-being. So once we have met the basic factors of life (food, shelter, and health), what are the causes of happiness?

The self-help section in your local book-store is likely to shed some light of the issue, but it is unlikely to describe more than one of the three paths researchers have found that actually increase well-being. The strat-egies you will read reflect the ideals and goals of a society oriented to commercial success. Motivational can-do guru Anthony Robins, life coaches, sport psychologists, and

empowerment groups teach us to identify, visualise, plan, and attain our heart’s desires. This might mean acquiring more fame, own-ing a new BMW, getting that tight body, find-ing Prince Charming, or improving your immune function. The methods are powerful. In fact, if you do not describe using some of these psychological methods in your applica-tion to elite military forces, e.g., the US Navy SEALs, you will be rejected simply because you lack the psychological skills that lead to resilience. While these “go get what you want” methods may help you achieve, gain, and acquire, will they bring you to really high well-being? Apparently not.

Many people follow this path with great success only to find their rich and famous selves sitting on top of their careers and ask-ing, “What is this all for?” Saint Paul, the pri-mary author of the New Testament, described this ennui as a “groaning” for God that cannot be satisfied this side of heaven. The Buddha explained that pain as an inherent dissatisfac-tion with the unenlightened life. And clinical psychologists call it a mid-life crisis—I had my first one at age 11.

Many people respond by borrowing one of the 19 million copies of the self-help book The Secret by Australian television writer and producer Rhonda Byrne, and adopting a minor modification to the same ineffective grind. A few, however, move on.

Profound and pervasive well-beingThe second, more mature stage of seeking well-being, is characterised by accepting one’s mental and emotional states. People focus on accepting what they have, and changing previously unrealistic expecta-tions. They start to see that discontentment exists in the space between what is, and what they think should be. Many atheists, agnos-tics, and spiritual practitioners seek progress along this path. Its essence is described well by Reinhold Neibuhr’s prayer: “Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, Courage to change the things I can, And the wisdom to know the difference.”

According to well-being researcher Dr. Jeffery Martin, director of the Centre for the Study of Non-Symbolic Consciousness, 99 percent of the population is able to improve well-being incrementally using a variation of the standard techniques alluded to above. But, sadly, they rarely arrive at their goal—perma-nent well-being.

Dr. Martin has interviewed 1,200 people

who perceive themselves to have “arrived”. They experience a profound and pervasive state of extraordinary well-being typically brought on by a sudden, dramatic shift. These people report that no matter what situation may arise, they are able to return to a high baseline of wellness very quickly. They do not experience any void or gnawing dissatisfac-tion with life. As one participant described it,

“I now live in a state of sweet stillness, and I would never want to go back.”

Neuroscientists at New York University and Yale have scanned the brains of some people in this population and believe their findings substantiate these claims. While describing the most unusual brain examined, one researcher (whom I should not name here as yet) described areas of blue to indicate

“silence,” ergo, “there are areas of his brain that show ‘blue’ on our scans. That means silence. He lives in a world of incredible peace, with a feeling of being connected to all things, and in a continuous sense of flow or presence. It’s truly remarkable.”

This state is characterised by “positive surrender”. Unlike the previously described stage, where people are actively trying to let go of the need to control, in this stage, sur-render is a natural state of being. One might be excused for thinking this “blue”-brained lot would be lazy, un-achieving, and impractical. In fact many have demanding executive level jobs. They describe conducting their lives as a natural expression of who they are rather than with the goal to achieve something in partic-ular. Jeffrey Walker, ex-Chairman and CEO of CCMP Capital, explained to me that this population makes exceptionally good bankers. One reason may be because their emotions do not interfere with their clarity of thought.

So how can any of us get to this stage? While some people claim they achieved it through spiritual practice, many others describe it suddenly happening to them despite having no particular practice. One person became obsessed with mirrors, the reflection of mirrors within mirrors, and the question of

“What is reality if everything can be a seen as a reflection?” He found himself question-ing the nature of reality and then suddenly…pop! He claims his baseline of well-being pro-foundly changed forever.

Electric awakeningIn an attempt to harness technology to effect this change, Dr. Martin’s research privately funded group has created a “happiness hat”.

to happinessSkip the hardwork, and opt for a transcranial magnetic stimulation—could happiness really be that straightforward? Jonathan Marshall chews on a disturbing simplicity.

· Oct–Dec 2012 · 63

Shrinkwrap

In 2010, more than 90 percent of the world’s youth, aged 15 to 24, lived in developing countries, and more than half (55 percent) lived in Asia, according to the International Labour Office, Geneva. The realities of ageing societies in developed countries and predominantly youthful societies in developing countries present opportunities and challenges, demanding a mindset change. Post-crisis, the greatest challenge may be to create employment but the issues are myriad. The next issue of Global-is-Asian features young leaders, experts and young minds, who will address the issues facing the generation in the wings.

It uses transcranial direct current stimulation to invoke a prolonged state of well-being by sending an electrical signal to the relevant parts of participants’ brains. I interviewed one of the first participants, Sally.

She described profound and increasing amounts of joy for the three to four hours fol-lowing her treatment. “It wasn’t giddy. It was deep. I felt an immense, imperturbable peace and joy throughout my body.” She went on to explain having a very tricky and potentially painful discussion with her romantic partner during that period. “It was the kind of discus-sion that might have made me afraid that we were heading toward separation. But I felt such well-being inside, I just wanted to communi-cate with him in a straightforward way, com-pletely uncensored. It’s the kind of thing you would never normally do, but everything just felt so right. I was in a place where what was being said to me could not affect me emotion-ally or decrease the well-being I was feeling.”

Since then a number of people have expe-rienced this electrical impulse with varying degrees of success. According to Dr. Martin, it is likely that sometime between tomorrow and 20 years from now, well-being is going to be available in the zap of a happiness hat. If he is right, the impact on our society will, liter-ally, be mind-boggling. But it may not be the kind of “surrender” one envisioned.

If the job of our governments is to increase the well-being of its populations, should they start investing in electrode-filled hats rather than roads or schools? And if this hat were to be very successful, would we all use it? Some part of me wonders if in fact a cheap road to well-being would be a good thing. It does not seem natural but perhaps that does not matter. The last time I saw Sally I asked for her thoughts. She beamed as she described her experience. She also explained that she and her partner had just bought a home and regard-less of the impact on society, she wants another shot at the machine. As I watched her glow with joy as she talked, I could not help but wonder how much had been caused by her experience in the happiness hat and… I wanted to give it a try myself.

All confidential identifying information has been anonymised. Jonathan Marshall is Assistant Professor of Leadership Studies at the LKY School. A psychologist and executive coach, he teaches leadership and maintains a consulting, coaching and counselling practice. His email is jmarshall@nus.edu.sg

64 · Oct–Dec 2012 ·