By Yasmin Esack, Guest Writer
We only have to look at BBC’s World Challenge programme to appreciate the value of creativity and innovation and what these can do to change the world.
While the developed countries like the UK, Germany and USA push ahead with new technology, the underdeveloped word is sorely lacking in this area. We hear of trains that can run on magnetic fields and computers that no longer need booting and much, much more from the developed world.
The avenues for creativity and innovation are endless. Recycling
quickly comes to mind. What with waste paper, glass, metal, rubber and plastics, industries should be springing up all over. This is a great way to employ masses of poor folks or to create self employment and booming trade in recycled materials. Every day we can see people scavenging dumps. What are they looking for? Waste they can sell like copper wire and bottles.
Sadly government scoffs at this and looks down at the poor man with disdain instead of seeing the potential for industry.
What are they doing to encourage creativity and innovation? Nothing. Trinidad and Tobago needs to be singled out for the reason that the ‘national music’ known to the world as steel pan came from a man who took an old oil drum and created the steel pan. Now Japan, I believe, leads the world in the manufacture of steel pans and has gone further to electrify them, so creating greater sounds.
Whole industries can be created from so many sub-sectors if governments will only listen: Agriculture, Medicine, Energy, Art and Culture, Music, Education are just some of the many areas where innovative ideas are waiting to unfold.
Do you think governments will ever pay serious attention to creativity and innovation as a means to economic development?
[…] See more here: Creativity and innovation – a way forward […]
I do not agree that one using Trinidad and Tobago as one bad historical example and then turn down creativity possibilities for other member states of the Commonwealth. Four little dragons (Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong) has always been the most successful creative economies since 1970s up to now. Their economies emerging from SMEs in manufacturing sector. After SMEs growing big and equipt the capability to invest oversea, some may grow big. However those big firms are still supported by lots of SMEs as their supply chains.
Besides, the crucial factors that making creative economy and philantropic society are education, self-esteem on their culture, compassionate heart for their own country people. Compulsory education up to 9 years has been conducted since 1968 in Taiwan. We are now even extending to 12 years for occupational trainning. In the meantime, government must adjust the standard of SMEs for official financial suport. Taiwan has famous on its evolving definition of SMEs on 1967, 1973,1977, 1982, 1995 and 2000. )For the details please read my paper “Industrial Policy and Structural Change in Taiwan’s Textile and Garment Industry”, Journal of Comtemporary Asia, Vol.39, No.4, November 2009, pp. 512-529.)
hello Lee
Poor commonwealth countries need to be led by Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong and South Korea but they aren’t. They are still economically and socially dependant on the USA, Germany, UK etc. They have no eslf esteen and no compassion for their countries. You should post your article on this website! Is it in English?
Hello Yasmin
Thank you for responding to my comments. I am sorry that I can not post this academic paper on this website for its copy right belongs to the publisher - Routledge. I guess I can post the evolving definition of SMEs below. (For the full contents, you need order in the website of Journal of Contemporary Asia.)
“Appendix I The Evolving Defintion of SMEs in Taiwan
Industry Manufacturing Constr-
uction Mining & quarrying Commerce, transportation services and other services
September
1967 Capital under NT$ 5 million; and regular employees under 100 persons. Annual operating revenue under NT$ 5 million; and regular employees under 50 persons.
March
1973 Registered capital under NT$ 5 million and total assets not exceeding NT$ 200 millions, or registered capital under
NT$ 5 million and the number of regular employees in accordance with the standards as below:(1) under 300 persons for garments, clothing and electronics industry; (2) under 200 persons for food products industry; (3)under 100 persons for others. No change.
August
1977 Paid-in capital under NT$20 million and total assets amount not exceed NT$60 million, and the number of regular employees not exceed 300 persons. Paid-in capital under NT$20 million and the number of regular employees not exceed 50 persons. Annual operating revenue under NT$ 20 million; and regular employees under 50 persons.
February
1979 No change. Paid-in capital under NT$40
Million. No change.
July
1982 Paid-in capital under NT$40 million and total assets amount not exceed NT$120 million No change. Annual operating revenue under NT$ 40 million.
November
1991 No change, except for extending industry terms into construction. No change No change
September
1995 Paid-in capital under NT$60 million; or regular employees not exceed 200 persons. Total operating revenue in the proceeding year not exceeds NT$80 million; or its regular employees not exceed 50 persons(extending industry terms to agriculture).
May
2000 Paid-in capital not exceed NT$ 80 million;
Or regular employees not exceed 200 persons. Total operating revenue in the proceeding year not exceed NT$ 100 million; or its regular employees not exceed 50 persons(extending industry terms to agriculture).
Source: Small and Medium enterprise Administration, Ministry of Economic Affairs.”
I guess some leaders in the USA, Germany, UK intend to stimulate more creativity and innovation for youth in the poor Commonwealth countries. This is why they invite economists of the four little Asian dragans to join this web discussion. For that reason, I post our most updated national plan to become a innovative island for your reference.
“National Innovation Corridors Programs
Abstract
i-Taiwan 12 foresight projects are current priority national economic and infrastructure development. Therein the national industrial innovation corridors is managed to promote future industrial clusters development and long-term national economic investment. To meet the mega trend of globalization and the rising era of global knowledge economy, this nationwide project draws on developing current internationally competitive industry clusters into several different innovative Center of Expertise (CoE) in 2030 so as to enhance Taiwan’s long-term international competitiveness. Through some concrete evaluation and practical approaches, seventeen innovation corridors which are planed to distribute equally in four regions are sketched. However the success of this project depends on the integration works between various R&D capabilities (i.e. universities, business and nonprofit R&D institutes). The aim of the project is to spurt the next wave of domestic and FDI investment in Taiwan. In the long term, the object is to foster Taiwan into a sustainable health, stable, well-being improving and a knowledge society.
Ratifying the definition, strategies and methodologies about developing industrial clusters and regional innovation systems by OECD and Porter (2003), we define the innovation corridors as “geographically annex locations with interconnected companies and associated institutions in a particular region, their technologies or R&D expertise are linked to support manufacturing or service supply chains. They normally exist within a geographic area where ease of communication, logistics and personal interaction is conveniently linked by one or several transportation backbone(s). Those agencies upgrade their innovation capacity so as the external competitiveness via establishing common strategic construction items, scientific talents pool, and innovation on marketing or operation models.” Basing on such definition, we developed the industrial clusters and location innovation capacity assessment methodologies. The 2001 and 2006 Industry, Commerce and Service Census as well as 2000 and 2005 Agricultural, Forestry, Fishery and Husbandry Census are used to conduct the spatial innovation capacity assessment.
In the meantime, this project also collects opinions from industry leaders, scholars and industry association high-level officials who are familiar with government industrial policies in past decade and have clear vision or scenario for their own industry and/or local future development (Focus Group Interview) to identify the objects and strategies proposed by those programs.
This project selects 15 key areas for future industrial innovation, including Flora, Agriculture and Biotechnology, Tourism, Health care, Petrochemical, Plastic, Textiles, Precision Machinery, ITS, Metal, Solar Power, Photonics, Semiconductor, Software Services, Professional Innovative Services. As to the service level of those innovation corridors, three categories are identified: World, Asia-Pacific and National. The planed world and Asia Pacific levels are designed to be organized and integrated by central government, big multi-national enterprises and R&D universities. The national-level of innovation corridors are encouraged to submit their proposals by local governments with sound integrated implementation plans with business-centered and profitable goals. In such framework, we name the aim of this project:
Expertise Taiwan: Competitive Innovation Clusters Taiwan
1. Knowledge industrial innovation corridor in northern region.
The main priority of industrial knowledge economy center and Asia-Pacific operations center in the northern region, including the Taipei metropolitan innovation corridor, Twinport innovation corridor, Science City innovation corridor, Tucheng Longtan innovation corridor and Northern Cross-Island innovation corridor, the northern regional industrial innovation corridor effectively integrate International Airport (Taoyuan airport city) and the Harbor (Taipei port) and the northern part of city transport network, as the integration of the world’s knowledge and technology innovation and the core engine of the Asia-Pacific logistics.
2. NanoTec industrial innovation corridor in central region.
The main priority to polymer and precision technology, materials science and technology innovation focused on agriculture, metal, electronic medical equipment and polymer related industries in the central region, including Da-Du Mountain innovation corridor, Baguashan innovation corridor, Chou-shui River innovation corridor and the Central Cross-Island innovation corridor. The planning and building transportation network links Taichung Ching-Chuang-Kang Airport, Taichung Harbor, Central Taiwan Science Park, Taiwan high speed rail, and establishment of a Nantou’s Central Taiwan branch of the Industrial Technology Research Institute.
3. VariTec industrial innovation corridor in southern region.
The main priority to alloy technology, green technology, high-quality agriculture biotechnology and flora focus on innovation clusters in the southern region, including Southern Taiwan Science Park innovation corridor, Kaohsiung metropolitan, agriculture biotechnology innovation corridor and Flora innovation corridor, the southern regional industrial innovation corridor extend from southern Taiwan science park to KenTing and integrate reform with a traditional industries into the emerging economic advantages. The effective use of the Kaohsiung Harbor and Kaohsiung airport transportation function and performance of two ports enhance innovation industrial value in the southern region.
4. Quality Life industrial innovation corridor in eastern region.
The main priority to fragrance, ecological science and technology, health care technology and life science focus on innovation clusters in the eastern region, including Taroko innovation corridor, green valley Innovation corridor, the east coast corridor and Yuli Chihpen innovation corridor, the eastern corridor of regional industrial innovation strengthen the airport and seaport functions, efficient use of existing transport networks, geographical and organic agriculture, tourism and leisure, and create the quality characteristics of eastern Taiwan life sciences innovation corridor.
The final goal of this project is to strengthen past development of Taiwan’s industry economy to reach high value-added international competitiveness. The important policy objectives include:
(1) To reform regional industrial innovation system. With setting up one intermediate regional governance organ or mechanism, we hope the utilization of budget, resources and development strategies can be better integrated.
(2) To Strengthen SMEs clusters in revitalizing the position of the localized economy.
(3) To develop at least one Center of Expertise with one or several core competence in each of the four regions.
(4) To construct, prevail and quality-managed the necessary transportation and telecommunication infrastructure for vulnerable regions.
(5) To introduce new and advanced R&D or inspect/quarantine labs and its operation system in each region so as to complete regional innovation system.
(6) To change or improve industry-university collaboration model. For transforming previously academic-oriented R&D in the universities into market and profit oriented business R&D, new mechanism in research budget allocation and innovation resource integration need be enhanced.
(7) To lift the ban, consolidate and upgrade related laws or regulations that will hinder the development of regional innovation corridors.
The total budget for this project is 115 billions (NT$). The implementation items (to be applied by local governments or to be coordinated by central governments) to be conducted or distributed by Northern, Central, Southern and Eastern Regions are set as 34.78%, 26.09%, 26.09% and 13.04%. As comparing to current regional proportion of value added in National Domestic Product 63.12%:14.96%:19.88%:0.91%, it is highly expecting the implementation of this Taiwan Industrial Innovation Corridors will bring more balanced regional development by 2030.”
By the way, do we have common good friens in the Commonwealth? Do you know Zena Daysh CNZM and Professor Ian Douglas?
Thanks Lee for educating us!I hope others will listen.
Good day,
I am amazed that we have no comments by any local aka Trinis on any of these articles.
Needless to say education in our country is like the growing gap between the first and lower class , growing and growing, with issues like this, important to lower class not represented or promoted by the first class’ power and authority, education being one element of power.
I am a firm advocate of recycling and it pains me to see how much raw material and recycled material is wasted in my island.
I hope countries like the ones above would somehow be of a great influence during the summit to evoke the change needed fr this avenue to be widely explored in Trinidad and Tobago, our oil and gas will run out one day , and if not we cannot drink it !
Not true Talya. The author of this article is a Trini and there are msny posts on this site from trinis.Keep well.
great to hear
ill keep exploring the site
in the mean time keep up the good work
Thanks Talya and please explore and write your comments. They’re important! cheers
Hello, eveyone. It is nice to know that you all have such passion on how to develop your island into creative and innovation ones. Do you like to organize your local economists and some opinions leaders in exploring how can your historical islands be developed into culture and ecology tourism ones so as to encourage education for next generation? Do you guys know that CHOGM will be held in the end of this month? It will be the best opportunity to attract the attention of investment of Commonwealth member states.