#11. Reform Southeast Asia!

There are occasions one would think too much. It is a state one can easily to succumb to when facing immense challenges in life that one has never before faced. The next thing is he finds himself waking up from a lucid dream that has been recurring for the past few weeks, feeling slightly disorientated, questioning his larger purpose in this world. Maybe, feeling a little drained, and a little lost. Next thing we know is, he is questioning why there are regions where productivity and ideas can translate into big money and why there are regions which don’t really appreciate innovative thinking, not even compensating 3Ds work (dirty, dangerous & difficult) well. Instead, they prefer conservative approach to problem solving. They are resting on laurels, at ease in their own comfort zone. Before long, he asked himself some really thought-provoking questions.

This person was in reality – me. I was having this wonderfully weird thought about my own nationality. For all this while, I have been viewing Southeast Asia from a Malaysian perspective. “How would I view Southeast Asia if I’m from a bigger country which is outside this region?” another thought flashed through my mind. This internal reflection was, of course, triggered by my personal evaluation on the average dreams and political aspirations of Southeast Asians. This idea was also a direct result from my recent discussion with industry players, colleagues and friends of the stark reality between what a talent expects and how much the talent gets financially.

Growth vs Development

It cannot be denied that Southeast Asia has been growing rapidly for the past few decades, both qualitatively and quantitatively. However, whether or not this growth can be sustained and be translated into meaningful development for the benefits of all begs scrutiny. Recent rainy seasons have impacted many ‘developed regions’ in Malaysia, including Penang and parts of Kuala Lumpur. If this were to happen in Singapore, a national state of emergency would have been declared already. Therefore, it is perfectly logical for the civil society to criticize the way the Malaysian authority currently manages natural disasters. I do not suffer from political amnesia, I remember there have been promises made over the past few decades on flood mitigation, landslides and safety management. However, these measures bring few positive changes because of poor management of financial resources and negligible town planning efforts. On one hand, the rescue work continues in full action and flood victims have been sent to flood evacuation centres. On the other hand, hillslope developments still march ahead relentlessly and the rainforest is diminishing at a staggering pace. How do we make sense of development? After all, is this the outcome of economic growth we want to see in Southeast Asia?

For a long time, town planning in most parts of Southeast Asia has been overridden by kleptocratic development, however being disguised as ‘public-private partnership’. Politicians in Southeast Asia prefer to cherry-pick the developers they favour in order to secure votes from certain communities. Meanwhile, the developers get the development projects they want by fulfilling the aspirations of certain political agenda which don’t really bring meaningful benefits to the mass. If the developers execute the projects with citizens in mind, the well-beings of the citizens would be guaranteed. However, it is sad to see they pay more attention to their own financial balance sheets rather than focusing more on better urban outcomes.

Narrow interpretations of development by the policy-makers as well as the implementors have brought immense cost to the citizens in this region. They have to live in the shadows of social segregation, income inequality, poor town planning outcomes, exacerbated consequences of natural disasters as well as a less resilient ecosystem.

Poor Management from the Ruling Elites

The lack of capabilities in managing natural and human resources has always been a pressing issue in the Southeast Asian nations. This is a region that is blessed by natural wealth such as agro-forestry, minerals and abundant water resources. Yet, this is also a region that productivity hasn’t seen much improvement in recent years. This region also suffers from industrial and creativity bottlenecks, unable to compete and collaborate meaningfully with the scientific communities in more advanced economies elsewhere. All these indicate a lack of capable experts in resources management in this region. Most politicians or leaders of the various societies in Southeast Asia lack the capabilities to discover niche industries and develop them effectively.

The other problem of Southeast Asia is that there isn’t a long and strong tradition of strategic thinking. The accumulation of experience from past trials and errors is not enough to give a well-balanced picture of the decisions made. To make matter worse, Southeast Asian countries don’t seem to collaborate enough in the decision making of politics, economics and the social realm. Failure of governments to manage resources skillfully have resulted in a shallow and narrow view in terms of strategic thinking. Disability in strategize well calls the national security of Southeast Asia into question.

Is Southeast Asia Lost in Translation?

There have been many promises made to the general public of the nations in this region but many of them remain unfulfilled. Indonesia has made great stride in socio-economic development in the past 2 decades through thorough reforms. Singapore remains the economic and financial hub for Southeast Asia due to the highly pro-business environment and almost zero government red-tape. For the mass majority of Southeast Asia, other than some industrial policies for mass production, the economic stance in this region has always been to emulate the economic model of the Four Asian Tigers. This means Southeast Asian cities are planned in a way that are pro-production, export-led, service-oriented and encourages savings. Many Southeast Asian cities have been designed as indispensable components of the global trading system.

Southeast Asia from space.

Beyond the basic requirements of constructing cities for economic growth and ensuring food security, the policy-makers in this region have not dedicated enough resources in discovering and charting the inherent identities and directions of Southeast Asian cities. Singapore, on the other hand, is a rare example of how a Southeast Asian city can overcome fuzzy mediocrity and achieve good town planning outcomes.

Singapore has decided in early days that it will be developed into a modern city replete with thick tropical foliage while the financiers and businessmen hurry in a well-designed tropical utopia unpretentiously. Today, Singapore boasts the standards of living in this region while the environment is being well preserved. If we turn our attentions to Melbourne, the city focuses a lot on repopulating the Central Business District (CBD) by encouraging more cultural amenities to flourish in the city centre, thus attracting many international talents migrating to the CBD. Last but not least, if we look at Amsterdam, the Dutch authority choose to develop their city sustainably by encouraging more active transport (walking and cycling), integrating their city with the canals in mind and encouraging more activities in the open space. Businesses thrive in these cities, the travel patterns of people change for the better, the people are happier than before and they all carry a strong identity in town planning.

Now, whether or not other cities in Southeast Asia are lost in translation, this is a question we must beg to differ. Whether or not the policy-makers can hire the right talents to steer our cities into the right development path, the talents will have to be compensated with the right financial amount. To manage the development of Southeast Asian cities effectively, our education system needs a thorough reform to produce capable leaders in decision-making.

#Reformation #Productivity #Retainingtalents