Search Modules > PP5204 > Module Overview

Learning Outcomes

TopWriting in The New York Times, Thomas Friedman encouraged policymakers to emulate the prevailing attitude in Singapore of ‘taking governing seriously and thinking strategically’. This module is a critical exploration of the basis and implications of such a claim, focusing on features of governance in Singapore that may be viewed as unique. To achieve this, such features – particularly Singapore’s systematic attempt to manage risks and complexity – are discussed in the context of influential theories and models of governance. To bridge theory and practice, the module is team-taught by a top civil servant and a political scientist, both Singaporean.

Prerequisites

TopNA

Syllabus

TopPP5204: Evolving Practices of Governance in Singapore
(AY2014/15, Semester 2)

Donald Low
Senior Fellow and Associate Dean (Executive Education and Research)
sppdlht@nus.edu.sg

Synopsis

Writing in The New York Times, Thomas Friedman encouraged policymakers to emulate the prevailing attitude in Singapore of “taking governing seriously and thinking strategically”. This module is a critical examination of the basis and implications of such a claim, focusing on features of governance in Singapore that may be viewed as unique.

We begin with an exploration of some of the underlying beliefs or principles of governance in Singapore, then examine how these beliefs have been translated into substantive policies and institutions. In the second half of the module, we look at how the socio-political and economic contexts in Singapore are changing, and how this might require change and adaption from a hitherto highly successful government.

At all times, we will reflect on the efficacy, desirability, sustainability and replicability of the Singapore system of governance. Guest speakers will also help us examine how Singapore’s self-proclaimed “paranoid government” tries to stay ahead in a rapidly changing, more complex, and increasingly contested environment.

Learning Outcomes

This module aims to:

Provoke students to examine and explore – through the lens of Singapore’s experience – how countries govern themselves in terms of structure and organisation, their underlying belief systems, the application of economics thinking, key policies and practices, decision-making and leadership modes, and how they respond to and involve their citizens.
Help students understand the key features of governance in Singapore – what works and what does not, and their strengths and limitations.
Train students to think in a dialectical way, engaging theory and practice not as neat and separate realms but as modes that relate to each other in productive tension.

Teaching Modes

The sessions will be conducted as a mix of lectures, small-group discussions, case learning and structured debates.

Schedule

13 Jan	Governance in Singapore: What makes governance in Singapore different and how is it changing?
20 Jan	Principles of governance I: Vulnerability, Elite Governance and Meritocracy
27 Jan	Case Study Discussion I: Public Housing
3 Feb	Principles of governance II: Economic Rationalism and Social Engineering
10 Feb	Fiscal Management in Singapore
17 Feb	Case Study Discussion II: Singapore’s Productivity Challenge
21 Feb - 1 Mar	Recess Week
3 Mar	Behavioural approaches to public policy: why and when might paternalism be justified?
10 Mar	Organisation Behaviour
17 Mar	Case Study Discussion III: Saving the CPF: Restoring Trust in Singapore’s Retirement Savings System
24 Mar	Public participation and the (changing) political and socioeconomic context I
31 Mar	Public participation and the (changing) political and socioeconomic context II Guest lecture: Kenneth Paul Tan (TBC)
7 Apr	Guest lectures: Peter Ho, Manu Bhaskaran, Lim Siong Guan (TBC)
14 Apr	Student presentations of their op-eds

Session Readings

13 Jan	Governance in Singapore: What makes governance in Singapore different and how is it changing? Thomas Friedman (2011), “Serious in Singapore”, The New York Times, 29 January. “Go East, young bureaucrat”, The Economist, 17 May 2011. Gillian Tett (2013), “Thank you, Singapore”, Financial Times, 7 June. http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/c7e99970-ce3c-11e2-a13e-00144feab7de.html#axzz2YbHcfoLt Lee Hsien Loong, Speech at the Parliamentary Debate on Civil Service Salary Revision, 11 April 2007. Donald Low (2011), “Governing in the new normal”, Straits Times, 9 September.
20 Jan	Principles of governance I: Vulnerability, Elite Governance and Meritocracy Francis Fukuyama (2013), “What is Governance?”, Centre for Global Development, Working paper 314, January. Henri Ghesqueire (2007), “Growth-Enhancing Institutions and Culture”, Singapore’s Success: Engineering Economic Growth, Singapore: Thomson, pp. 99-128. Michael Barr (2014), The Ruling Elite of Singapore: Networks of Power and Influence, chapters 1-2. Garry Rodan (2006), “Singapore ‘Exceptionalism’? Authoritarian Rule and State Transformation, Asia Research Centre, Working Paper No. 131, May. http://wwwarc.murdoch.edu.au/publications/wp/wp131.pdf Kenneth Paul Tan (2008), “Meritocracy and Elitism in a Global City: Ideological Shifts in Singapore”, International Political Science Review, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 7-27. Michael Sandel (2009), “The Case for Equality: John Rawls”, Justice: What’s the Right Thing to do?, Chapter 6. Conor Friedersdorf (2012), “The Cult of Smartness: How Meritocracy is Failing America”, The Atlantic, 14 June. (supplementary) Donald Low (2014), “Good Meritocracy, Bad Meritocracy”, Hard Choices: Challenging the Singapore Consensus, Singapore: NUS Press (supplementary)
27 Jan	Case Study Discussion I: Public Housing 5.30-8.30pm: Visit to a public housing estate and dinner.
3 Feb	Principles of governance II: Economic Rationalism and Social Engineering Henri Ghesqueire (2007), “Pro-growth Economic Policies”, Singapore’s Success: Engineering Economic Growth, Singapore: Thomson, pp. 49-98 John W. Thomas and Lim Siong Guan (2001), “Using Markets to Govern Better in Singapore”, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Faculty Research Working Papers Series Kenneth Paul Tan (2012), “The Ideology of Pragmatism: Neoliberal Globalization and Political Authoritarianism in Singapore”, Journal of Contemporary Asia, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 67-92. James C. Scott (1998), Seeing Like A State, New Haven: Yale University Press, pp. 1-8; 87-102, 132-146.
10 Feb	Fiscal Management in Singapore Donald Low (2010), “Fiscal Policy: Discipline with Discretion”, The Singapore Synthesis: The Government, The Market and Innovations in Public Policy, ed. Ravi Menon Youyenn Teo (2014), “Governance through Familialist Social Policies in Singapore”, TRaNS: Trans-Regional and –National Studies of Southeast Asia, October 2014, pp 1-21 Bo Rothstein and Eric M. Uslaner (2005), “All for All: Equality, Corruption and Social Trust”, World Politics 58, no. 1, pp. 41-72.
17 Feb	Case Study Discussion II: Singapore’s Productivity Challenge
21 Feb – 1 Mar	Recess Week
3 Mar	Behavioural approaches to public policy: why and when might paternalism be justified? Ravi Menon (2011), “How Singapore uses Behavioural Economics”, Speech at the launch of Behavioural Economics and Policy Design: Examples from Singapore, 9 November Richard Thaler, Cass Sunstein and John Balz (2012), “Choice Architecture”, The Behavioural Foundations of Public Policy¸ ed. Eldar Shafir, Princeton University Press, pp. 428-439 Cass Sunstein (2013), Simpler: The Future of Government, pp. 51-74, 100-126
10 Mar	Organisation Behaviour Richard Foster and Sarah Kaplan (2001), Creative Destruction: Why Companies That are Built to Last Underperform the market – and How to Successfully Transform Them, chapters 1,3. John Kay (2012), “Why Sony did not invent the iPOD?”, Financial Times, 4 September. http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/7558a99e-f5ed-11e1-a6c2-00144feabdc0.html The Economist, “The last Kodak moment?”, 14 Jan 2012. Alex Au (2014), “Manpower director makes incredible claims about how well migrant workers are treated by ministry”, http://yawningbread.wordpress.com/2014/03/24/manpower-director-makes-incredible-claims-about-how-well-migrant-workers-are-treated-by-ministry/ Watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ulp8DHPJhoA Donald Low (2013), “Some Reflections on the Little India Riot” (supplementary).
17 Mar	Case Study Discussion III: Saving the CPF: Restoring Trust in Singapore’s Retirement Savings System Guest Speaker: Kenneth Paul Tan
24 Mar	Public participation and the (changing) context I Kenneth Paul Tan (2012), “Singapore in 2011: A New Normal in Politics”, Asian Survey, Vol. 52, No. 1, pp. 220-226 Michael Barr (2014), The Ruling Elite of Singapore: Networks of Power and Influence, chapters 6, 7. Linda Y.C Lim (2013), “Singapore’s success: After the miracle”, Handbook of Emerging Economics, ed. Robert E. Looney, London and New York: Routledge Cherian George (2012), Freedom from the Press, chapter 8, NUS Press.
31 Mar	Public participation and the (changing) context II National Population and Talent Division (2013), “A Sustainable Population for a Dynamic Singapore: Population White Paper” http://202.157.171.46/whitepaper/downloads/population-white-paper.pdf Donald Low et al. (2013), “Economic Myths in the Great Population Debate”, Hard Choices: Challenging the Singapore Consensus, Donald Low and Sudhir Vadaketh, Singapore: NUS Press Linda Lim (2013), “How Land and People Fit in Singapore’s Economy”, Hard Choices: Challenging the Singapore Consensus, Donald Low and Sudhir Vadaketh, Singapore: NUS Press Alex Au (2013), “Population: Elemental Considerations”, http://yawningbread.wordpress.com/2013/02/04/population-elemental-considerations-1/; http://yawningbread.wordpress.com/2013/02/06/population-elemental-considerations-2/ Alex Au (2014), “Khaw Finds Obedience School Meaningful”, https://yawningbread.wordpress.com/2014/11/15/khaw-finds-obedience-school-meaningful/ Donald Low (2013), “Rethinking Singapore’s Housing Policies”, Hard Choices: Challenging the Singapore Consensus, Donald Low and Sudhir Vadaketh, Singapore: NUS Press
7 Apr	What Next for Singapore? (Guest Speakers: Peter Ho, Manu Bhaskaran, Lim Siong Guan) Manu Bhaskaran et al. (2012), “Inequality and the Need for a New Social Compact”, background paper to Singapore Perspectives 2012. http://lkyspp.nus.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/SP2012_Bkgd-Pa.pdf Ho Kwon Ping, “The Future of Singapore, Lecture I: Politics and Governance”, IPS-Nathan Lectures, http://lkyspp.nus.edu.sg/ips/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2014/07/IPS-Nathan-Lectures_Lecture-I-Politics-and-Governance-speech_201014_v2.pdf Michael Barr (2014), The Ruling Elite of Singapore: Networks of Power and Influence, chapter 8
14 Apr	Student Presentations

Assessment

Class participation	20%
Three Case Study Responses	50%	Submit in class at the start of each case study class
Op-ed	30%	Submit by email or IVLE by 21 Apr

Case Study Responses (50%) – Students are to submit a response of no longer than 1,000 words to the question(s) set for each of the three case study sessions. These responses should be submitted (in soft or hard copy) before the start of each case study class. The three case study responses will carry a combined weight of 50% of the overall grade.

Op-ed/Essay (30%) – Students are to submit an op-ed of no more than 2,000 words on one of the following questions:

Compare and contrast governance in Singapore with that in one other country, highlighting major similarities and differences, emphasising practical lessons (if any) from Singapore, and evaluating the extent to which the Singapore experience offers useful guidance. Focus on at least two of the following areas: outcomes, principles and beliefs of governance, the application of economics thinking, decision-making and leadership modes, and the role of public participation. This should not be a descriptive exercise but a critical/analytical essay that makes and defends a central argument, appreciates the changing context in Singapore, and highlights the usefulness and limitations of making such a comparison.

How is the political and policy context in Singapore changing? How should governance in Singapore evolve? Focus on 2 or 3 of the following areas: outcomes, principles and beliefs of governance, decision-making and leadership modes, the application of economics thinking, and the role of public participation. This should not be a descriptive exercise but a critical/analytical essay that makes and defends a central argument, analyses the changing context in Singapore, and assesses the scope, extent and pace of reforms it needs.

Preclusions

TopNA

Workload

Top0-3-0-4-3

Workload Components : A-B-C-D-E
A: no. of lecture hours per week
B: no. of tutorial hours per week
C: no. of lab hours per week
D: no. of hours for projects, assignments, fieldwork etc per week
E: no. of hours for preparatory work by a student per week