Pages

Showing posts with label Meritocracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Meritocracy. Show all posts

Monday, December 25, 2023

How Malaysia is finding its way out of the middle-income trap

It has taken the slow but steady route while addressing an ethnic incongruity


. Kuala Lumpur's new landmark, Merdeka 118, is a symbol of the country's growing affluence. (Nikkei montage/Source photos by Hiroki Endo and Reuters) 

Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim vows to focus on achieving faster growth.

KUALA LUMPUR -- Asia's megacities often undergo surprising metamorphoses in short amounts of time. Kuala Lumpur is one such example. When I visited the city in late October, I was amazed at how much it had modernized since I visited nine years ago.

Urban rail lines now crisscross the city, with new shopping malls sprouting everywhere. Particularly eye-catching was Merdeka 118, a 118-story skyscraper completed earlier this year. The 678-meter tower -- the world's second-tallest after the Burj Khalifa in Dubai -- is a symbol of the country's growing affluence. Its spire was designed to evoke the image of Tunku Abdul Rahman, Malaysia's first prime minister, raising his hand as he proclaimed national independence in 1957.

Malaysia over the past few years has experienced a rapid turnover of prime ministers, though the political situation seems to have stabilized. On Dec. 5, about a year after the launch of his government, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim stressed his intention to push for faster economic growth. "It's time to focus on developing the economy," he said in an interview with a local broadcaster.

Anwar's government in July unveiled its 10-year Madani Economy plan and the National Energy Transition Roadmap. These were followed in September by the midterm review of the 12th Malaysia Plan and the New Industrial Master Plan 2030. In October, Anwar's government launched its Hydrogen Economy and Technology Roadmap.

"It is not clear how these relate to one another," a Japanese businessperson said. Still, it seems clear that the government's main goal is to achieve annual growth of over 5.5%, a target specified in the Madani plan.

A view of Kuala Lumpur's skyline. Given Malaysia's relatively young population, domestic demand is expected to keep expanding. © Reuters 

Malaysia's gross domestic product grew 8.7% last year, the highest in 22 years, and growth for this year is estimated at 4%, despite the global slowdown. Given its relatively young population, domestic demand is expected to further expand. The country's semiconductor and other sectors are also attracting foreign direct investment as alternative supply chain bases amid mounting U.S.-China tensions.

The country's per capita gross national income was $11,780 in 2022. If the economy grows 5.5% per year and there is no sharp depreciation of the ringgit against the dollar, it could shed its middle-income status, as defined by the World Bank, in two or three years, joining the ranks of high-income nations.

Graduation has been a long time coming.

Malaysia became an upper-middle-income country in 1996, according to a working paper that Jesus Felipe, a professor at De La Salle University in the Philippines, wrote in 2012, when he was with the Asian Development Bank. Felipe reasons that upper-middle-income nations become ensnared in the middle-income trap if they are unable to move up for more than 15 years. Once trapped, countries suffer stagnant growth, sandwiched between technologically advanced developed nations and developing countries abundant in cheap labor. The description fits Malaysia's situation.

To see why Malaysia could not extricate itself from the trap for so long, one needs to look at its history.

Twelve years after the country gained its independence in 1957, a racial riot engulfed the capital. Malays accounted for nearly 70% of the population, but ethnic Chinese, who made up less than 30%, controlled the economy. The strain of this incongruity led to the clash, resulting in about 200 deaths.

To prevent a recurrence of the tragedy, the government began to address the economic disparity and in 1971 adopted a policy called Bumiputera (sons of the soil) -- a type of affirmative action for ethnic Malays. The policy treats Malays favorably in all aspects of life, including school admissions, employment and even stockholding.

The country's ethnic Chinese are traditionally considered to be strong in commerce and industrial activities. "If we recruit people by ability alone, many could be Chinese," an executive at a Japanese company said.

By trying to fix the racial imbalance artificially, Bumiputera is often cited as a source of inefficiency, but it has its merits.

"If the government had not provided elementary and secondary education to Malay villagers and helped them migrate to cities and find jobs in the commercial and industrial sectors, the country would have suffered a serious labor shortage in the early stage of economic development," said Satoru Kumagai, director of the economic geography studies group at the Institute of Developing Economies of the Japan External Trade Organization. It can be said that Bumiputera's goal is to strike an optimal balance between distribution and growth.

A shopping mall in Kuala Lumpur. Malaysia's Bumiputera policy has helped educate young Malay villagers and bring them to cities hungry for workers. (Photo by Toru Takahashi)

Mahathir Mohamad, who in 1981 became Malaysia's fourth prime minister, shifted the national focus to growth by adopting the Look East policy, which sought to emulate Japan's economic success. The country also began to actively attract more foreign capital. In 1991, Mahathir launched Vision 2020, the goal of which was to become a high-income country in 30 years.

"His greatest achievement was to set a goal of becoming a high-income country," said Abdul Razak Ahmad, founding director of Bait Al Amanah, a private think tank. He "thus changed the people's mindset, encouraging them to have a can-do attitude."

Malaysia enjoyed annual growth of nearly 10% for 10 years before the Asian financial crisis hit it hard in 1997. Afterward, its growth slowed to around 5% to 6%. Anwar, then the deputy prime minister and finance minister, clashed with Mahathir over how to cope with the crisis and was dismissed.

When Anwar this year announced the Madani plan, he said the country had been "caught in a vicious cycle of high costs, low wages, low profits and a lack of competitiveness" since the 1997 crisis. Anwar clearly sees the plan as a roadmap to push the country into the high-income category during his tenure -- something his old enemy could not achieve.

The reason for Malaysia's inability to pull itself out of the middle-income trap becomes clear when looking at the economic development of Taiwan and South Korea.

In terms of population, Taiwan and South Korea are not much different from Malaysia. Taiwan is home to 23 million, South Korea to 51 million and Malaysia to 33 million.

In 1981, when Mahathir became prime minister, the three were not far apart in per capita GDP. Taiwan's was at $2,691, South Korea's at $1,883 and Malaysia's at $1,920.

Taiwan became an upper-middle-income economy in 1986, followed by South Korea two years later, according to Felipe. Taiwan stepped up to high-income status in 1993, with South Korea following in 1995. It took just seven years for the two to move from upper-middle-income to high-income status.



Unlike Malaysia, they did not fall into the trap. Last year, Malaysia's per capita GDP was $12,465, far below Taiwan's $32,687 and South Korea's $32,418. Several factors were at play here.

First, Taiwan and South Korea do not have complex ethnic problems that cause them to pursue difficult socioeconomic policies. Second, the two had no choice but to industrialize as they are not blessed with natural resources like Malaysia, which is rich in petroleum, natural gas and palm oil.

Third, democratization in Taiwan and South Korea began shortly before the end of the Cold War in 1989, allowing them to catch the waves of globalization and information technology. Taiwan democratized in 1986 and South Korea in 1987.

Malaysia has held democratic elections since it gained independence, but the country was under a "developmental dictatorship" that prioritized economic development while restricting political freedom. Malaysians had to wait until 2018 for their government to hand power to another party for the first time.

Fourth, internationally competitive businesses like Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., Hyundai Motor and Samsung Electronics have driven growth in Taiwan and South Korea. Malaysia, meanwhile, has failed to nurture such companies with an economy that instead has been led by government-affiliated entities. Its automobile, electrical and electronics industries have depended on foreign businesses.

Grab Holdings, whose ride-hailing superapp is now ubiquitous across Southeast Asia, was founded in Malaysia but quickly relocated its head office to Singapore to facilitate fund-raising and other benefits.

On the whole, Malaysia's lack of economic dynamism was to blame for its lower growth curve.

Still, it should be noted that Malaysia has avoided the so-called resource trap, in which the presence of abundant resources holds back a country's industrialization. Malaysia's leading exports are electrical and electronic products, which account for 40% of its total exports. It tops the U.S. and Japan in terms of exports of semiconductor-related products by value.

A worker inspects chips at Unisem's semiconductor packaging plant in Ipoh, Malaysia, in October 2021. It is becoming imperative for Malaysia to boost investments in higher value-added upstream industries. © Reuters 

This trap can be seen in Saudi Arabia, which in 2016 drafted its Vision 2030 strategy to reduce its dependence on natural resources. Malaysia achieved 40 years ago the industrialization Saudi Arabia is now pursuing.

Said Kumagai: "Malaysia is different from East Asia's elite economies like Japan, Taiwan and South Korea, and from countries with unique strengths such as Singapore, Hong Kong and oil-producing Gulf states. If it achieves high-income status, it will be the first 'normal' country to do so."

Still, challenges abound. In chip manufacturing, Vietnam and India are catching up fast, making it imperative for Malaysia to boost investments in higher value-added upstream industries. Given the accelerating trend toward carbon neutrality, demand for its fossil fuels will likely decline.

Yet, while balancing growth and stability, the multiethnic country with an average age of 30 has succeeded in making slow but steady progress toward overcoming the middle-income trap. Its industrial success will certainly serve as a beacon for other emerging and developing countries in the Global South.


Related posts:










Malaysia's education policy must champion Meritocracy instead of Mediocrity system



How Malaysia is finding its way out of the middle-income trap

It has taken the slow but steady route while addressing an ethnic incongruity


. Kuala Lumpur's new landmark, Merdeka 118, is a symbol of the country's growing affluence. (Nikkei montage/Source photos by Hiroki Endo and Reuters) 

Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim vows to focus on achieving faster growth.

KUALA LUMPUR -- Asia's megacities often undergo surprising metamorphoses in short amounts of time. Kuala Lumpur is one such example. When I visited the city in late October, I was amazed at how much it had modernized since I visited nine years ago.

Urban rail lines now crisscross the city, with new shopping malls sprouting everywhere. Particularly eye-catching was Merdeka 118, a 118-story skyscraper completed earlier this year. The 678-meter tower -- the world's second-tallest after the Burj Khalifa in Dubai -- is a symbol of the country's growing affluence. Its spire was designed to evoke the image of Tunku Abdul Rahman, Malaysia's first prime minister, raising his hand as he proclaimed national independence in 1957.

Malaysia over the past few years has experienced a rapid turnover of prime ministers, though the political situation seems to have stabilized. On Dec. 5, about a year after the launch of his government, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim stressed his intention to push for faster economic growth. "It's time to focus on developing the economy," he said in an interview with a local broadcaster.

Anwar's government in July unveiled its 10-year Madani Economy plan and the National Energy Transition Roadmap. These were followed in September by the midterm review of the 12th Malaysia Plan and the New Industrial Master Plan 2030. In October, Anwar's government launched its Hydrogen Economy and Technology Roadmap.

"It is not clear how these relate to one another," a Japanese businessperson said. Still, it seems clear that the government's main goal is to achieve annual growth of over 5.5%, a target specified in the Madani plan.

A view of Kuala Lumpur's skyline. Given Malaysia's relatively young population, domestic demand is expected to keep expanding. © Reuters 

Malaysia's gross domestic product grew 8.7% last year, the highest in 22 years, and growth for this year is estimated at 4%, despite the global slowdown. Given its relatively young population, domestic demand is expected to further expand. The country's semiconductor and other sectors are also attracting foreign direct investment as alternative supply chain bases amid mounting U.S.-China tensions.

The country's per capita gross national income was $11,780 in 2022. If the economy grows 5.5% per year and there is no sharp depreciation of the ringgit against the dollar, it could shed its middle-income status, as defined by the World Bank, in two or three years, joining the ranks of high-income nations.

Graduation has been a long time coming.

Malaysia became an upper-middle-income country in 1996, according to a working paper that Jesus Felipe, a professor at De La Salle University in the Philippines, wrote in 2012, when he was with the Asian Development Bank. Felipe reasons that upper-middle-income nations become ensnared in the middle-income trap if they are unable to move up for more than 15 years. Once trapped, countries suffer stagnant growth, sandwiched between technologically advanced developed nations and developing countries abundant in cheap labor. The description fits Malaysia's situation.

To see why Malaysia could not extricate itself from the trap for so long, one needs to look at its history.

Twelve years after the country gained its independence in 1957, a racial riot engulfed the capital. Malays accounted for nearly 70% of the population, but ethnic Chinese, who made up less than 30%, controlled the economy. The strain of this incongruity led to the clash, resulting in about 200 deaths.

To prevent a recurrence of the tragedy, the government began to address the economic disparity and in 1971 adopted a policy called Bumiputera (sons of the soil) -- a type of affirmative action for ethnic Malays. The policy treats Malays favorably in all aspects of life, including school admissions, employment and even stockholding.

The country's ethnic Chinese are traditionally considered to be strong in commerce and industrial activities. "If we recruit people by ability alone, many could be Chinese," an executive at a Japanese company said.

By trying to fix the racial imbalance artificially, Bumiputera is often cited as a source of inefficiency, but it has its merits.

"If the government had not provided elementary and secondary education to Malay villagers and helped them migrate to cities and find jobs in the commercial and industrial sectors, the country would have suffered a serious labor shortage in the early stage of economic development," said Satoru Kumagai, director of the economic geography studies group at the Institute of Developing Economies of the Japan External Trade Organization. It can be said that Bumiputera's goal is to strike an optimal balance between distribution and growth.

A shopping mall in Kuala Lumpur. Malaysia's Bumiputera policy has helped educate young Malay villagers and bring them to cities hungry for workers. (Photo by Toru Takahashi)

Mahathir Mohamad, who in 1981 became Malaysia's fourth prime minister, shifted the national focus to growth by adopting the Look East policy, which sought to emulate Japan's economic success. The country also began to actively attract more foreign capital. In 1991, Mahathir launched Vision 2020, the goal of which was to become a high-income country in 30 years.

"His greatest achievement was to set a goal of becoming a high-income country," said Abdul Razak Ahmad, founding director of Bait Al Amanah, a private think tank. He "thus changed the people's mindset, encouraging them to have a can-do attitude."

Malaysia enjoyed annual growth of nearly 10% for 10 years before the Asian financial crisis hit it hard in 1997. Afterward, its growth slowed to around 5% to 6%. Anwar, then the deputy prime minister and finance minister, clashed with Mahathir over how to cope with the crisis and was dismissed.

When Anwar this year announced the Madani plan, he said the country had been "caught in a vicious cycle of high costs, low wages, low profits and a lack of competitiveness" since the 1997 crisis. Anwar clearly sees the plan as a roadmap to push the country into the high-income category during his tenure -- something his old enemy could not achieve.

The reason for Malaysia's inability to pull itself out of the middle-income trap becomes clear when looking at the economic development of Taiwan and South Korea.

In terms of population, Taiwan and South Korea are not much different from Malaysia. Taiwan is home to 23 million, South Korea to 51 million and Malaysia to 33 million.

In 1981, when Mahathir became prime minister, the three were not far apart in per capita GDP. Taiwan's was at $2,691, South Korea's at $1,883 and Malaysia's at $1,920.

Taiwan became an upper-middle-income economy in 1986, followed by South Korea two years later, according to Felipe. Taiwan stepped up to high-income status in 1993, with South Korea following in 1995. It took just seven years for the two to move from upper-middle-income to high-income status.



Unlike Malaysia, they did not fall into the trap. Last year, Malaysia's per capita GDP was $12,465, far below Taiwan's $32,687 and South Korea's $32,418. Several factors were at play here.

First, Taiwan and South Korea do not have complex ethnic problems that cause them to pursue difficult socioeconomic policies. Second, the two had no choice but to industrialize as they are not blessed with natural resources like Malaysia, which is rich in petroleum, natural gas and palm oil.

Third, democratization in Taiwan and South Korea began shortly before the end of the Cold War in 1989, allowing them to catch the waves of globalization and information technology. Taiwan democratized in 1986 and South Korea in 1987.

Malaysia has held democratic elections since it gained independence, but the country was under a "developmental dictatorship" that prioritized economic development while restricting political freedom. Malaysians had to wait until 2018 for their government to hand power to another party for the first time.

Fourth, internationally competitive businesses like Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., Hyundai Motor and Samsung Electronics have driven growth in Taiwan and South Korea. Malaysia, meanwhile, has failed to nurture such companies with an economy that instead has been led by government-affiliated entities. Its automobile, electrical and electronics industries have depended on foreign businesses.

Grab Holdings, whose ride-hailing superapp is now ubiquitous across Southeast Asia, was founded in Malaysia but quickly relocated its head office to Singapore to facilitate fund-raising and other benefits.

On the whole, Malaysia's lack of economic dynamism was to blame for its lower growth curve.

Still, it should be noted that Malaysia has avoided the so-called resource trap, in which the presence of abundant resources holds back a country's industrialization. Malaysia's leading exports are electrical and electronic products, which account for 40% of its total exports. It tops the U.S. and Japan in terms of exports of semiconductor-related products by value.

A worker inspects chips at Unisem's semiconductor packaging plant in Ipoh, Malaysia, in October 2021. It is becoming imperative for Malaysia to boost investments in higher value-added upstream industries. © Reuters 

This trap can be seen in Saudi Arabia, which in 2016 drafted its Vision 2030 strategy to reduce its dependence on natural resources. Malaysia achieved 40 years ago the industrialization Saudi Arabia is now pursuing.

Said Kumagai: "Malaysia is different from East Asia's elite economies like Japan, Taiwan and South Korea, and from countries with unique strengths such as Singapore, Hong Kong and oil-producing Gulf states. If it achieves high-income status, it will be the first 'normal' country to do so."

Still, challenges abound. In chip manufacturing, Vietnam and India are catching up fast, making it imperative for Malaysia to boost investments in higher value-added upstream industries. Given the accelerating trend toward carbon neutrality, demand for its fossil fuels will likely decline.

Yet, while balancing growth and stability, the multiethnic country with an average age of 30 has succeeded in making slow but steady progress toward overcoming the middle-income trap. Its industrial success will certainly serve as a beacon for other emerging and developing countries in the Global South.


Related posts:










Malaysia's education policy must champion Meritocracy instead of Mediocrity system



Saturday, August 26, 2023

Reversing declining R&D investments

 The country's gross expenditure on the segment has been on downtrend in the past couple of years. More investments are needed in high-growth areas that will yield strong returns.


SIX decades ago, Malaysia was richer than South Korea and Taiwan.

But today, the country is behind these two technology superpowers and is still trying to break out of the middle-income trap.

Taiwan overtook Malaysia’s gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in the mid-70s, and not long after that, South Korea overtook Malaysia in the mid-80s.

A major reason for Malaysia lagging behind Taiwan and South Korea is the failure to invest adequately in research and development (R&D) that ultimately resulted in low local technology creation.

This is reflected in the number of patents granted, as mentioned in the World Intellectual Property Indicators report.

In 2022, a total of 6,876 patents were granted in Malaysia, out of which almost 85% were granted to non-residents.

In contrast, South Korea granted 145,882 patents in 2022. Three out of four patents in that year were granted to residents.

Official figures show that Malaysia’s gross expenditure on R&D (GERD) has been declining in the past several years, even before the Covid-19 pandemic.

In fact, the country’s GERD per GDP dropped to just 0.95% in 2020, which was the lowest since 2010.For comparison, countries like South Korea, the United States and Japan spent 4.81%, 3.45% and 3.26% of their GDP in 2020 for R&D, respectively.

Notably, China’s GERD per GDP stood at 2.4% in 2020, significantly higher than Malaysia despite having an almost similar GDP per capita.

It is noteworthy that Malaysia is well behind its GERD per GDP target of 3.5% by 2030. The intermediate target is 2.5% by 2025, which is just two years’ away.


Science, Technology and Innovation (Mosti) Minister Chang Lih Kang

In a reply to StarBizWeek, Science, Technology and Innovation (Mosti) Minister Chang Lih Kang acknowledges that the gap to achieve the 2030 target is “stark and significant”.

He also adds that there is a funding shortfall of RM40bil to achieve the 2025 target.

“The slump in GERD before 2020 primarily stems from a dwindling contribution from the business sector, which started around 2016.

“While the government has consistently provided substantial R&D funding, it’s imperative for the business and industry sectors to substantially participate.

“After all, these sectors stand to gain the most from R&D innovations, utilising outcomes to enhance products, refine business processes, and overall drive competitive advantage,” says Chang.

Malaysia’s long-delayed ambition to become a high-income nation relies on the country’s ability to effectively spend on R&D efforts in high-potential areas.

Increased R&D efforts that would lead to greater technology adoption in the country are highly necessary, considering that Malaysia is set to become a super-aged country by 2056.

Amid declining fertility rates, more of the country’s workforce must be automated and mechanised to avert any crisis in the future.

Mosti Minister Chang also says that a higher expenditure on R&D serves as a foundational indicator in many global indices like the Global Innovation Index (GII) and the Global Competitiveness Index (GCI).

In the Madani Economy framework unveiled by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim last month, these two indices were mentioned as some of the key performance indicators (KPIs), moving forward.

Anwar envisages Malaysia to be among the top 20 countries in GII by 2025. As for GCI, Malaysia aims to rank in the top 12 within the next 10 years.

It is understandable why Anwar hopes to improve Malaysia’s ranking in such indices.

“These indices are meticulously scrutinised by foreign investors when determining potential investment destinations,” according to Chang.

Spending it right

A similarity between South Korea and Malaysia is the fact that both governments have in the past invested significantly in building local industries, including for R&D efforts.

“Chaebols” or South Korean mega-conglomerates were once small businesses that received generous support from the government since the early 1960s. This has helped to nurture internationally recognised brands such as Samsung and Hyundai.

Similarly, Malaysia has also channelled billions of ringgit into profit-driven entities such as car manufacturer Proton and semiconductor wafer foundry Silterra.

However, unlike in South Korea, these heavy industrialisation projects that were introduced during the administration of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad failed to sustain commercially and continued to depend on government handouts.

These two projects have since been privatised. Proton Holdings Bhd made a rebound after China’s Zhejiang Geely Holding emerged in the carmaker with a 49.1% stake.

Meanwhile, Silterra was sold to Dagang NeXchange Bhd (Dnex) and Beijing Integrated Circuit Advanced Manufacturing and High-End Equipment Equity Investment Fund Centre (Limited Partnership) – also known as CGP Fund.

Dnex holds a 60% stake in Silterra, while CGP Fund owns the remaining 40%.

An analyst explains that the failure of Proton and Silterra was the result of continued government funding in the past, even if the management did not achieve tangible results.

“South Korea was different. You have a set of KPIs outlined along the timeline. If you don’t perform, you won’t get the money,” the analyst says.

Like it or not, the government has a big role to play in stimulating R&D efforts in the market.

The US government, for instance, is a major funder of R&D and is also a major user of the new innovations that may have yet to receive demand from the public.

It is noteworthy that the Internet and the global positioning system (GPS) began as projects under the US Department of Defence.

It is typical of the private sector to innovate and to create new products only when they foresee market opportunities.

With shareholders’ ultimate focus being on profit, the private sector may have its limitations when it comes to risk-taking.

In the case of Malaysia, businesses do not reinvest an adequate amount of their profits into R&D, despite the fact that Malaysian companies retain high operating profits.

In 2022, the gross operating surplus of businesses constituted 67% of GDP, which increased from 62.6% in 2021.

The easy supply of cheap foreign workers, particularly before the pandemic, has further allowed Malaysian companies to avoid R&D and automating a large part of their operations.

Distinguished professor of economics Datuk Rajah Rasiah agrees that the domestic private sector does not invest adequately in R&D.

“As firms move up the technology trajectory towards frontier innovations, they expect strong support from the embedding ecosystem, especially the science, technology, and innovation (STI) infrastructure.

“Although Malaysia did attempt to create the STI infrastructure after 1991, almost all of them (such as Mimos, Science and Technology Parks and the incubators in them as well as the Malaysian Technology Development Corp) were not effectively governed, and hence, they have become white elephants.

“Given the lack of such support and ineffective governance of incentives and grants in the selection, monitoring and appraisal of their output, private firms are unconvinced that attempts to upgrade to participate in R&D will materialise,” he says.

Techpreneur Tan Aik Keong also points out that Malaysian companies face fundraising difficulties for R&D purposes, especially small and medium enterprises and unlisted companies.

Tan was recently appointed as a member of the National Digital Economy and Fourth Industrial Revolution Council. He is also the CEO of ACE Market-listed Agmo Holdings Bhd.

“Investors and lenders may hesitate to support R&D initiatives due to the inherent risks and uncertainties associated with these endeavours.

“The lack of a guaranteed correlation between R&D investment and immediate revenue generation can lead to doubts about the return on investment (ROI),” he says.Tan opines that the lack of “proven success stories” whereby R&D investments in Malaysia resulted in significant ROIs contributed to the scepticism.

In addition, he says that companies with no prior experience in R&D investments would find it challenging to start investing heavily in R&D.

“For listed entities, there is relatively more flexibility in terms of fundraising for R&D purposes.

“Capital market instruments such as private placements and rights issues can be leveraged to raise larger sums of funds to support R&D initiatives.

“Fortunately, the availability of matching grants from agencies like Mosti, MDEC, Miti, and MTDC can provide much-needed financial support and incentive for companies to invest in R&D activities,” he says.

Acknowledging the challenges, Mosti Minister Chang says that alternative financing mechanisms are being considered

A notable example is the Malaysia Science Endowment (MSE), which has set an ambitious goal of raising RM2bil.

“MSE is more than an alternative R&D funding for the nation.

“The working model is to utilise its interest, which will be generated from the investment.

“The fund would be optimised further through a matching fund mechanism – bringing quadruple helix stakeholders together to focus on solution-driven R&D and prioritising based on the nation’s needs,” he says.

Mosti, with Akademi Sains Malaysia, is currently actively developing a fund-raising mechanism to establish the MSE.

In addition, Chang says the government will continue to deploy a myriad of fiscal incentives that include tax exemptions and double deductions on R&D expenditures.“The overarching goal is to promote a symbiotic relationship where both the private sector and the government collaborate seamlessly to advance Malaysia’s R&D aspirations,” he says.

Lack of quality researchers?

R&D efforts are not just about investing a large sum of money. They will only yield best results if they are supported by qualified, world-class researchers.

Unfortunately, in the case of Malaysia, brain drain has become a major challenge in pushing for greater R&D.

The ongoing decline in interest among schoolchildren in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) studies will only worsen the situation in the future.

Agmo’s Tan notes that the declining interest in science subjects among students threatens the availability of skilled researchers, scientists, and engineers needed for a thriving R&D ecosystem.

“The potential for brain drain is a legitimate concern if Malaysia does not foster an environment conducive to R&D growth,” he says.

In 2020, Malaysia saw a decline in the number of researchers per 10,000 labour force at only 31.4 persons, as compared to 74 persons in 2016.

At 31.4 persons, this was the lowest level since 2010.

Rajah says that Malaysia lacks quality R&D researchers, as well as engineers and technicians to support serious R&D participation.

“Malaysia’s researchers and R&D personnel in the labour force fall way below that of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, and China.

“In fact, this is one of the major reasons why national and foreign firms participate little in R&D activities in Malaysia,” he adds.

When asked about the commercialisation of research done by Malaysian universities, Rajah says the commercialisation ratio against grants received in Malaysia is very low.

This is compared to the Silicon Valley and Route 128 in the US, the science parks in Taiwan, and the Vinnova targeted areas in Sweden.

However, Rajah says the blame for the low rate is mistakenly placed on the scientists.

“Most universities in Malaysia focus on scientific publications, which is a major KPI for them. Malaysia does well on scientific publications.

“Mosti and the Higher Education Ministry should make intellectual property (IP) and commercialisation equally important.

“In doing so, the government must tie grants and incentives to link researchers and firms by offering matching grants so that the research undertaken by the scientists are targeted to the pursuit of IPs and monetary returns.

“Firms in this case will ensure that the 1:1 sharing of funds with the government brings returns for them – widely undertaken successfully in Japan, the Netherlands and Taiwan,” he says.

At the same time, Rajah suggests a critical appraisal of previous grants approved to ensure that mistakes are not repeated.

CLICK TO ENLARGECLICK TO ENLARGE

In further strengthening the country R&D expertise, there are calls to improve universities’ curriculum more holistically.

Technology consultant Mohammad Shahir Shikh said there is a gap and misalignment between industries’ requirements versus theoretical research in new knowledge discovery by the universities.

He calls for greater partnership between universities and the industry, including for improving business operations via the integration of new technologies.

Mohammad Shahir has previously served as an engineer with chipmaker AMD for 11 years.

He raises concerns about the severe shortage of STEM graduates in Malaysia to serve the needs of the industries.

“The country’s target was to have 500,000 STEM graduates by 2020, but we now have only 68,000 such graduates.

“Even then, the highest number of unemployed graduates here is from the STEM stream.

“My proposal to the government is to start assisting potential schools and STEM students become familiar with scientific terms in English and improve their communication skills,” he adds.

Mohammad Shahir points out that about 30% of Finland’s workforce consists graduates from the STEM stream.

“This is a priority that needs to be addressed if we want to achieve our national innovation goals,” he says.

National STEM Association president and founder Prof Datuk Dr Noraini Idris laments that only about 15% of form four students take pure science subjects, namely physics, chemistry, biology and additional mathematics.

The percentage has fallen from abogaut 19% back in 2019.

“This is alarming. We need more students to take pure sciences if we want to create more scientists, data analysts and researchers for the future.

Noraini calls for a complete revamp in the national education system, whereby “STEM culture” is fostered among children from a very young age.

“My team and I have proposed the “cradle-to-career” model which instils the interest for STEM from nurseries and preschool to tertiary education.

“It also needs formal and informal support, whereby informal refers to family, peers and community to foster the interest in STEM.

“For this to happen, we need the effort of various ministries and not just the Education Ministry,” she says.

It is high time, according to Noraini, to set up a department for STEM directly under the Prime Minister’s Department to coordinate the joint-efforts across ministries.As the country works towards improving STEM’s acceptance, Agmo’s Tan says Malaysia must put more emphasis on R&D efforts in emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, extended reality and cloud computing, among others.

“We must encourage the establishment of R&D centres by high-tech companies through attractive incentives,” he adds.

Looking ahead, the government has a lot of issues on its plate to address.

To reboot the economy, it is not only about spending more money on R&D.

More importantly, every ringgit invested must be spent efficiently in high-growth research areas that will yield strong ROIs.

Source link

Related posts:

Malaysia's education policy must champion Meritocracy instead of Mediocrity system

Let’s talk economy – the sequel of education

The pump-prime our financial situation, we need a massive investment to revamp and rebuild our education 
  

Wednesday, April 5, 2023

Who is more intelligent and successful, Dr. Mahathir Mohamad or Mr. Lee Kuan Yew (Malaysia vs Singapore)? Why?

 


To compare Mahathir with Mr Lee is like placing a pig next to a lion. The short answer is: No Comparison! Let me explain my reasons.

After 55 years after these 2 men become PM of the respective country, Mr Lee left behind a legacy of democracy, progress, dynamism and true success for Singaporeans and the nation Singapore. On the other hand, Mahathir has broken Malaysia into multiple segments of people - divided by race, religion, economic status - mistrusting and suspicious of each other. Economically 70% of Malaysians are poor except all his 7 children are billionaires in Ringgit terms.

At a personal level, all Mr Lee’s children attended and graduated from top notch universities in the USA or UK and qualified as professionals. On the other hand, all Mahathir attended 2nd or 3rd tier institutions in these countries but never work for a day yet became billionaires. How?? They received parts of the money Mahathir looted from the country’s coffers.

How they are remembered by their country men and women. Singaporeans - even those who dislike Mr Lee’s policies - recognized that the man has been good to Singapore. Conversely, Mahathir has confirmed himself a unreformed racist, self-centred street level political manipulator who destroyed Malaysia. 

  Source link


  https://www.quora.com/ 

Source
Quora is a social question-and-answer website and online knowledge market headquartered in Mountain View, California. It was founded on June 25, 2009, and made available to the public on June 21, 2010. Users can collaborate by editing questions and commenting on answers that have been submitted by other users.Wikipedia