Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Lessons from the Asian Tigers

Home Archived Lessons from the Asian Tigers

The influence of science and technology on the economic development of the ‘Asian tigers’

By Prof. E.M.R. Kiremire

As we may recall, the term “Asian tigers or the little 4 dragons” originally referred to the four small Asian countries, namely Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan which underwent a rapidly accelerated economic growth between 60s and 90s.

Subsequently, the term has been extended to include yet another four new Asian tigers, namely Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand and Malaysia. All these eight countries are within proximity of other three economic giants Japan, China and India.

In line with the spirit of the term ‘tiger’, we may perhaps refer to the latter as the ‘Asian lions’. Indeed, this is reflected in the 2006 Gross Domestic Product (GDP) ranking (of 181 countries of the world) which puts Japan in position 2 after USA, China 4, South Korea 13, India 12, Indonesia 21, Taiwan 22, Thailand 34, Hong Kong 36, Malaysia 39, Singapore 45 and the Philippines 40.

With the exception of South Africa (# 29) and thirteen others (Nigeria 48, Algeria 49, Egypt 51, Morocco 59, Libya 62, Angola 63, Sudan 67, Tunisia 75, Kenya 79, Cameroon 88, Cote d’Ivoire 91, Ethiopia 98, and Ghana 100) which are in the top 100, the rest of the African nations are clustered in the bottom range between 101 (Tanzania) to 181(Kiribati).

How come the Asian tigers both the old and new ones have experienced a rapid economic growth over the last 40 years whereas the African countries have not? This is not a very easy question to answer.

In the 60s, the level of underdevelopment of both the Asian tigers and the African counterpart was about the same. On one hand, both the Asian tigers and the African countries suffered the pangs of occupation. On the other, the Asian tigers became liberated much earlier than their African counterparts.

Even then, the principal driving force for the enormous economic development of the Asian tigers was the deliberate move to implement massive education with a heavy infusion of science and technology.

Malaysia as a Case Study

Let us take Malaysia as an illustration. Under Malaysian Vision 2020 (V2020), Malaysia decided to transform an agricultural-based economy into a technological-based economy. One of its key objectives was to produce a critical mass of highly trained research and development (R+D) personnel in Science and Technology.

Furthermore, it identified key strategic knowledge industries in which it wished to excel, namely Biotechnology, Advanced Materials, Microelectronics, Information and Communication Technologies, Aerospace Science and Pharmaceuticals.

Specifically, Malaysia’s plan for developing a knowledge-based economy was formulated into the Second National Science and Technology Policy (NSTP2) whose key elements are:

– Strengthening Research and Technological Capacity and Capability,

– Promoting commercialisation of Research outputs,

– Developing Human Research Capacity and Capability,

– Promoting a culture for Science Innovation and Techno-Entrepreneurship,

– Strengthening institutional framework and management for S+T and monitoring S+T policy implementation,

– Ensuring widespread diffusion and application of technology leading to market-driven R+D to adapt and improve technologies, and

– Build competence for specialisations in key emerging technologies.

Enrolment Figures and Science Graduates and Engineers of the Asian Tigers
Arising from this policy, the Malaysian education system from primary to tertiary level was overhauled with a dramatic increase in output of the number of graduates at all levels coupled with the emphasis on technical-based skills in S+T.

For instance, the Malaysian primary education enrolment figures rose from 284 700 (1960) to 372 000 (1968) an increase of 30% while that of secondary level rose from 59 000 (1960) to 151 000 (1968) an increase of 156%.

Similarly, the number of scientists graduating from science and technical universities increased over the years as follows: 4949( 1971-75), 8 079 (76-80), 12 036 (81-85), 25 060 (86-90), 30 150 (91-95) and 62 030 (1996-2000).

Thus, over a period of about 30 years, the number of science graduates had swelled by 1150%. This is an incredible average increase rate of 1,800 science graduates every year spread over 30 years in Malaysia.

A final example to underpin the emphasis on S+T by the Asian tigers is illustrated by the enrolment figures of engineers as a percentage of population between 1990 and 2000.

Starting with South Korea the respective figures are (0.46 and 0.68), Singapore (0.45 and 0.68), Taiwan (0.51 and 0.70) and Malaysia (0.02 and 0.16).

These figures translate into a large number of engineers enrolled.

For example, suppose, today, the enrolment figure of engineers as a population percentage in Namibia was 0.68 (similar to that of South Korea or Singapore), this would mean approximately 12,000 students enrolled for engineering fields for the Namibian population of 1.8 million.

It is also interesting to note that one of its policy objectives in research and development (R+D) in science is to produce a Nobel Prize winner in science by 2020 in Malaysia. In order to realize this, Malaysia is and has been investing heavily in R+D.

How Many Universities does Namibia Need for Vision 2030?

This is also not an easy question. Let us take the examples from the ‘Asian tigers and lions’ as a guide. The number of universities that have been established by the Asian tigers is quite impressive.

South Korea has 50 with a population of 48.85 million. This gives us a population ratio of 0.98 million for 1 university for South Korea. Indonesia has 41 universities with a population of 245.45 m giving us a population per university ratio of 5.99, Malaysia 25 (24.39 m) with a ratio of 0.98, Philippines 20 (91.08m) has a ratio of 4.55, Hong Kong 12 (6.94 m) ratio 0.58, and Singapore 5 (4.49 m) with a ratio of 0.89. These figures can be compared to those of Japan 548 (127.43m) with the ratio of 0.23 and India 224 (1,129.89 m) with a ratio of 5.04.

The ratio varies widely from 0.2 million to 6.0 million people for 1 university.
It is quite interesting to scrutinize the population/university ratio of developed countries. Arranging the ratios in the order of decreasing magnitude for a selected sample of countries, we get Italy (1.2), followed by Germany (0.82), France (0.80), Sweden (0.30), UK (0.26), Finland (0.24), Canada (0.23), and USA (0.072).

Taking USA as an example, this means that on average, there is a university or college for every 72,000 people. With the exception of Italy, all the above highly developed countries have low population/university ratios.

The other two Nordic countries Denmark and Norway have the population/university ratios 0.39 and 0.16 respectively. It is quite striking and interesting to note that the population to university ratios for the ‘Asian lions’ Hong Kong, Japan, Malaysia, South Korea, and Singapore are similar to those of the heavily industrialized and developed Western countries.

If we exclude Italy and take the average of the rest of these selected European nations we get 0.36. This implies that on average, there is a college or university for every 360 000 people in the developed Europe.

Population to University Ratio for Namibia

Using the Japanese ratio as a yardstick to estimate the number of universities Namibia should have today, the figure comes to approximately 8. Thus, the current Namibian population needs at least 8 universities to be at par with the rate of production of scientists by Japan.

If we use the European average to estimate the minimum number of universities Namibia should have is 5. On the other hand, if we use the USA ratio, the estimation gives a staggering figure of 25 universities for Namibia.

It is important to note that despite the high-density population of Japan, and lack of oil and minerals such as gold, diamonds and uranium, among others, Japan is ranked number 2 in the world in wealth. Thus, Japan’s secret for it vast wealth is simply derived from its heavy investment in education and science and technology coupled with its serious discipline and commitment to work.

Science and Technology as Catalyst – the Malaysian Case Study

Although Malaysia is a ‘new Asian tiger, with a relatively low population to university ratio as compared to that of the ‘old Asian tiger’ South Korea, it has a high rate of access to education up to tertiary level.

This coupled with a vigorous national policy on Science and Technology, Malaysia has advanced to the rank of newly industrialised countries (NICs) within about 30 years.

In actual fact, Malaysia has economically transformed itself from being a ‘tiger’ into a ‘lion’.

The Malaysian breakdown of the economic contributions to the GDP include Agriculture (8.3%), Industry (48.1%) and Services (43.6%).

Malaysia has a sizeable number of important industries which include rubber, oil palm processing and manufacturing, light manufacturing, electronics, tin mining and smelting, logging, timber processing, petroleum production and refining, agriculture processing, automobile assembling, iron and steel production, petrochemical industry, textile industry, manufacture of some military equipment such as naval patrol vehicles, missiles and tanks and information technology industries.

Consequently, it exports electronic equipment, petroleum and liquefied natural gas, wood and wood products, palm oil, rubber, textiles, chemicals and pepper.

Thus, by vigorous and deliberate implementation of science and technology policies, the Malaysian economy has moved from a simple agrarian economy to an industrialized one.

All in all, Malaysia like all the other Asian tigers is steadily moving towards complete industrialization due its total commitment to science and technology.

For our African continent to industrialize, clearly total commitment to science and technology is the road map. In other words, the master key to real economic development is not the abundance of natural resources (wonderful God’s gifts) which our continent has, but massive education catalysed by heavy science and technology.

No more and no less.

– Prof. E.M.R. Kiremire is Dean, Faculty of Science, University of Namibia (UNAM), ekiremire@unam.na