Case study on Singapore in The Economist, 17 March

I think I’m most certainly biased, but there’s an excellent and very interesting article in the Economist which is essentially a case study on Singapore – why its government works and what the West can learn from it.

Because Singapore gets dissed so often by international press, I really enjoy articles that sing a different tune, especially when national pride comes into play. Here are some highlights:

“Singapore is important to any study of government just now, both in the West and in Asia. That is partly because it does some things very well, in much the same way that some Scandinavian countries excel in certain fields… First, Singapore is good at government (which is largely true). Second, the secret of its success lies in an Asian mixture of authoritarian values and state-directed capitalism (largely myth). Third, China is trying to copy Singapore (certainly true). Last, China’s government is already more efficient than the decadent West (mostly rubbish, see next section).

…

There is an odd imbalance between the things that Singapore and others make so much noise about and the reasons why the place works. In particular, the “Asian values” bits of Singapore—its authoritarianism and its industrial policy—that the Chinese seem to find especially congenial are less vital to its success than two more humdrum virtues: a good civil service and a competitively small state.

…

One thing that stands out in Singapore is the quality of its civil service

…

But arguably the place that should be learning most from Singapore is the West. For all the talk about Asian values, Singapore is a pretty Western place. Its model, such as it is, combines elements of Victorian self-reliance and American management theory. The West could take in a lot of both without sacrificing any liberty.”