"Global rethink on subsidies"

 

By:   Pofessor Datuk Dr. Ahmad Ibrahim, Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy UCSI University

MANY countries use subsidies to kick-start new economic initiatives. One example is the global initiative to embrace solar power and renewable energy. Subsidies are also deployed to cope with rising prices, especially food and fuel, or to keep alive sectors that are slipping into inaction and malaise. Of course, subsidies to a great extent do cushion the impact of inflation, which is often fuelled by high energy prices. We can see this being played out right now as the world oil price stays stubbornly high, hovering around US$100 a barrel. The conflict in Ukraine is much to blame. There is no denying the fact that many of the initiatives to expand world food production would be challenging without agricultural subsidies. Developed economies, including the EU, United States and Japan, spend large amounts of money to support agriculture. But subsidy is a double-edged sword. Prudently managed, it can be positive for the economy, but over-subsidization can result in negative repercussion.

I recently read an article in a local newspaper on how agricultural subsidies can harm nature. The article highlighted New Zealand's experience with its agriculture industry, which was once so heavily subsidised that slaughterhouse workers were earning more than airline pilots. What disturbed the subsidy watchers was that huge subsidies meant that vast swathes of the country's marginal land were cleared for grazing, fertiliser was overused, and the sheep population boomed to the point where surplus meat had to be destroyed. It soon became clear that the subsidy programmes had taken a toll on nature, not only polluting rivers but also eroding soils, as revealed in a UN study. This prompted New Zealand to go for a total revamp in 1984. In a radical shift, the subsidies were either removed or phased out. The outcome was enlightening. Farming became more efficient while harmful practices such as the excessive use of chemical fertilisers decreased. In fact, fertiliser use declined by 50%, according to the report. While agriculture remains a major source of the country's planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions, New Zealand is still held up by biodiversity campaigners as a "poster child" for reforming subsidies that harm nature and the environment. Around the world, it is estimated that government subsidies, which can potentially harm nature, amount to at least US$1.8 trillion each year, or equivalent to 2% of global gross domestic product. Admittedly, agricultural subsidies, at US$520bil annually, are the largest drivers of ecosystem destruction along with those for fossil fuels at US$640bil. Agricultural subsidies for industries like meat production and fertilisers are also considered a threat to long-term food security. Methane emissions from subsidised livestock farming are creating climate concerns, as methane is the more potent GHG. What is happening in Brazil, where vast tracts of forest land are being cleared for cattle rearing, has come under close global scrutiny. Decision-makers are calling for aggressive subsidy reforms to close most of the financing gap for biodiversity protection, which is estimated at US$700bil annually. Analysts say a major reason reform can be so difficult is that many powerful interests are beneficiaries of subsidies. Research has flagged that agricultural subsidies tend to disproportionately favour large farms at the expense of small farmers. The experience in New Zealand is a case for us to ponder and re-evaluate our own subsidy schemes. What is clear is that subsidies in energy and agriculture need more diligent study. Then impact on nature and climate deserves scrutiny. Otherwise, we may end up with the negatives out weighing the positives.  

"Reconsider Subsidies, Negatives Outweighing Positives"

 

By:  Professor Dato Dr Ahmad Ibrahim, Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy, UCSI University

 

SUBSIDIES have always been an important feature in the world economic management. Many countries use subsidies to kick start new economic initiatives. One example is the global initiative to embrace solar power and the renewables. They are also deployed to cope with rising prices, especially food and fuel. Not to mention to keep alive sectors which are slipping into inaction and malaise. Of course, subsidies to a great extent do cushion the impact of inflation, which is often fuelled by high energy prices. We can see this being played out right now as the world oil price stays stubbornly high, hovering around USD100 a barrel. The conflict in Ukraine is much to blame. There is no denying the fact that much of the initiatives to expand world food production is challenging without agricultural subsidies. Developed economies including the EU, USA and Japan spend large amounts of money to support agriculture.    

    Though there are many positive sides of subsidies, we have also been warned of the darker sides of improperly managed subsidies. Blanket subsidies have come under intense criticisms lately. Non-targeted subsidies often end up helping those who do not really need them, thus creating unnecessary wastage of a country’s resources. Talk of more targeted subsidies is gathering interest. I recently came across an article in the NST on how agricultural subsidies can harm nature. The article mentioned about New Zealand's experience with their agriculture industry which was once so heavily subsidised that slaughterhouse workers were earning more than airline pilots. There are more sheep than people in New Zealand. What has been disturbing subsidy watchers is that huge subsidies then meant vast swathes of the country's marginal land was cleared for grazing, fertiliser was overused, and the sheep population boomed to the point where surplus meat had to be destroyed. It soon became clear that the subsidy programmes took a toll on nature, not only polluting rivers, but also eroding soils, as unveiled in a UN study.

    This prompted New Zealand to go for a total revamp in 1984. In a radical shift, the subsidies were either removed or phased out. The outcome was enlightening. Farming became more efficient while harmful practices such as the excessive use of chemical fertilizers decreased. Fertiliser use in fact declined by 50 per cent, according to the report. While agriculture remains a major source of the country's planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions, New Zealand is still held up by biodiversity campaigners as a "poster child" for reforming subsidies that harm nature and the environment. Around the world, it is estimated that government subsidies which can potentially harm nature amount to at least US$1.8 trillion each year, equivalent to 2 per cent of global gross domestic product. Admittedly, agriculture subsidies, at US$520 billion annually, are the largest drivers of ecosystem destruction, along with those for fossil fuels at US$640 billion which also impact climate change.

    Agricultural subsidies for things like meat production and fertilisers are also considered a threat to long-term food security. Methane emissions from subsidised livestock are creating climate concerns as methane is the more potent GHG. What is happening in Brazil where vast tracts of forest land are cleared for cattle rearing has come under close global scrutiny. The world is warned that a decrease in fertile soil means 95 per cent of land worldwide could become degraded by 2050. Decisionmakers are calling for aggressive subsidy reforms to close most of the financing gap for biodiversity protection which is estimated at US$700 billion each year. However, analysts also say a major reason reform can be so difficult is that many powerful interests are beneficiaries of subsidies. Research has flagged that agricultural subsidies tend to disproportionately favour large farms at the expense of small farmers.

    Subsidy is a double-edged sword. Prudently managed it can be positive for the economy. But over subsidization can result in negative repercussions on the economy. The experience in New Zealand is a case for us to ponder and re-evaluate our own subsidy schemes. What is clear is that subsidies in energy and agriculture need more diligent study. Their impact on nature and climate deserves scrutiny. Otherwise we may end up with the negatives outweighing the positives.    

"Science Needs Reform at All Levels"

 by: Professor Dato Dr Ahmad Ibrahim, Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy, UCSI University 

NATION building would be handicapped without a solid support from science and technology. Science is the prerequisite for technology development. Technology however changes so fast that many are not able to keep up. The fact that technological power is a key determinant of a nation’s competitiveness is a foregone conclusion. And technology thrives in a society which embraces innovation as a culture. There is much evidence to corroborate the fact that together the combination of Science, Technology and Innovation, STI, can deliver wonders to a nation’s socio-economic prosperity and sustainability. This is no more a secret as we see mounting evidence of countries, which invest wisely in STI, becoming more competitive. Investments in STI would include robust R&D spending, vibrant talent development, and a healthy innovation ecosystem which brings  strategic stakeholders, including industry, academia, government and even civil society, together to chart the path forward for technology strengthening.

    Despite various initiatives by the government, we still struggle to put in place a vibrant STI ecosystem. The stakeholders are not collaborating enough, mostly working in silos. Our R&D spending has remained stuck for decades at around 1% GDP. Most developed countries spend on the average 3-3.5% GDP for R&D. It is a concern that the bulk of our R&D spending comes from the government. In the developed economies, at least 70% of their R&D spending comes from business and industry. We need to invigorate higher R&D spending from industry. The R&D ecosystem in palm oil is one model which has worked well. The innovation quadruple helix has taken our palm oil business to great heights in the highly competitive global oils and fats business. Replicating such a model in other industry sectors is worth looking at.

    Building and retaining good talent in STI is another struggle. Not only are we having difficulty attracting new talent, but we are also losing many among our STI talent to other countries. Many have left to participate in better STI ecosystem elsewhere. How do we minimise such brain drain? There is need for serious rethinking about how to not only retain our trained talent but also attract talents from outside to help us realise our STI aspirations. On top of all that, very few students now opt to take up science. Our 60:40 target of getting more to do science continues to elude us. The closest we got to was 30%. Now it is even lower at 20%. This is despite all the efforts to popularise STEM. The lack of interest is mostly due to the fact that a career in STI, especially in R&D, is not so attractive. We do not face much problem getting students to do science to become engineers and doctors. We need to make a career in STI research more rewarding if we are to attract more to do science.

    However, enough funding and good STI talent alone would not guarantee success, We would still face difficulties if the STI ecosystem is not robust and functioning. A weak R&D ecosystem is especially worrying. The disconnect between industry and academia is still there. Again, it is not that the government has not done anything. Over the years, many initiatives have been introduced to close the gap. Unfortunately, they have not yielded the results we hope for. This partly explain why the commercialization of R&D has always been pitifully low. The mismatch between what business wants and what academia delivers remains unresolved. We need new approaches. We should explore models from outside the country which work, and adapt them for the local situation.

    This is where the new administration can bring change. We need new measures to address the underlined STI weaknesses that have persisted for some time now. The STI policies that are already put in place still face execution challenges for example. Institutions must rise above their individual narrow interest to pursue more collaboration for the sake of the nation. Failure to create the right STI ecosystem, and invest wisely in STI, can be retrogressive as we strive to generate a robust return of value from all our investments in STI R&D and tap on the many opportunities coming our way..                      

 

 

"Rare Earths: Break Free of Petroleum Dependency"

 By: Professor Dato' Dr. Ahmad Ibrahim, Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy, UCSI University, Malaysia

W HEN China first stumbled on her rich deposits of rare earth elements, its leader Deng Xiao Peng proudly declared that the West may have oil,but China has rare earths. He had already proclaimed then that rare earths would one day replace oil as the driver of global energy. His forecast has been proven right. In a world economy posturing to move away from fossil fuels, powerful magnets based on rare earths have become indispensable in the electronics of global products and the race to tap the renewable fuel that supports a sustainable world. China wasted no time in bringing its wealth of rare earths to market. Thanks to their large investment in R&D, such environmental concerns are now history. China is now the leading producer and supplier of rare earths to the world. Inevitably, there is a feeling of insecurity in the West, with China controlling more than 90 per cent of the global supply of a critical metal like rare earths. It is unhealthy for one single country to hold the trump card, which determines the development of new energy for the world. This is also made worse by the fact that rare earths have been reported to be a critical material in the defence industry. It’s no surprise that there is active R&D in the world looking for alternatives. I know of many studies evaluating the combination of readily available metals to replace the rare earths. Malaysia has made the right move by bringing in that rare earth investment from Australia. Many in the West regard Lynas as strategic positioning for Malaysia. It is unfortunate that certain unscrupulous groups have been creating problems for the rare earths processing at Lynas. It’s not helping the country embrace a higher-value economy. As the sole largest supplier of rare earths outside of China, Lynas is now much sought after by investors to replicate their Kuantan operations in the West. It has been reported that technical personnel from Lynas are now actively involved in the setting up of a rare earths facility in Texas, the United States. 

    Malaysia should be proud that the majority of the technical experts deployed in the Texas project are Malaysians. This demonstrates that Malaysia has talent that can be developed into world-class athletes. Many countries that have reported viable deposits of rare earths are seriously considering venturing into the business. Here, at home, news of economic rare earth deposit discoveries in a few states has generated much interest. It has just been announced that the relatively poor state of Kelantan has rare earth mineral deposits that have the potential to generate over RM125 billion in revenue for the state. The extraction of such deposits using cutting-edge environmentally safe technologies should boost Kelantan’s economic standing. For many years now, we have been dependent on our oil revenues to drive our economy. That source is slowly but surely depleting. Even Petronas recognises this and is rightfully taking steps to venture into other energy businesses. Hydrogen has been announced as one such new business venture that Petronas is eyeing. The truth is that many countries around the world are actively preparing to tap into the potential offered by the hydrogen economy. Why not rare earths? Judging by the many recent revelations that we do have rich deposits of rare earths, we should waste no time in harnessing such wealth to replace our dwindling supply of petroleum. There is no more excuse not to do so, as the technology in rare earth processing has made great advances in addressing environmental concerns.

"CHANGE IS CRUCIAL: LEADERS MUST THINK OF A SHARED FUTURE"

 By: Professor Dato' Dr. Ahmad Ibrahim, Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy, UCSI University, Malaysia

N OV 19, 2022 was a historic day for us. We voted hoping for a more stable government after the instability of the last three to four years. Alas, after all the votes were counted, we were informed ofasplit. A hung Parliament was the outcome, with no clear winner. No political coalition could secure a simple majority of at least 112 seats. Come Nov 20, no government could be formalised. The coalitions had until 2pm on Monday to reach an agreement. This was later deferred to the same time Tuesday. As usual, there were some premature claims about securing enough support to form a government. All were quickly disposed of as fake. Many of these claims were made by netizens, who have grown impatient and dissatisfied with the long drawn-out affair. What is most distressing is the stand taken by some leaders, not much different from the little Napoleons that we have become used to, who have declared their unwillingness to work with certain parties. These are also the same leaders, who, before the election, declared their unequivocal support for the concept of “Keluarga Malaysia" and non-partisanship. Are such declarations mere rhetoric made just to fish for the most votes? Where is the statesmanship expected from our leaders? Have these representatives of the people forgotten the common agenda for the nation? Many citizens are baffled by what is now being played out in the negotiation process to secure a deal among parties for a workable government. Where has all the cry for a shared future gone to?

This is the first time that the country has been thrown into this state ofahung Parliament. But it is not new in many other countries around the world, including New Zealand, Canada, Germany and Belgium, to name a few. And unlike what we are witnessing now, all the other countries facing a similar situation have managed to sort out the stalemate pretty well. At the end of the d ay, the big g e r agenda than selfish party politics is the nation’s interests and wellbeing. We must be reminded that the 15th General Election is meant for the population to elect good leaders. The next stage is for the elected leaders to decide how best to form a stable government for the nation, not for any selfish political coalition. This is the time leaders demonstrated their statesmanship. Again, we must look at the big picture. What is the state of the nation now? How do we want the nation to look as we journey into the future? What policies do we need to put in place to secure the future we all desire? Listening to the many views and discourses in the media, it is clear that the nation is in chronic pain on many fronts. Our debt level, no thanks to the previous improperly planned borrowing, is running into unmanageable territory. Some are even saying that if we do not manage it well in the coming days, there is no stopping the country from sliding the way of Sri Lanka. We all know the sad episodes in neighbouring Sri Lanka. Like Sri Lanka, which is too dependent on tourism for its revenue, we are also too dependent on petroleum for the bulk of our income. The call to diversify the economy into more high-value-added and technology-driven sectors has yet to find traction with our leaders. We have yet to escape the low-cost labour-intensive economy. The worst is yet to come. 2023 has been proclaimed a recessionary year by literally all the authorities on the global economy. Inflation, they say, will bite hard on consumers. We need to be ready for this dep r e s s e d time. Energy prices are also expected to remain buoyant. Food prices are also rising. We can talk till kingdom come about how to improve our food security situation. Nothing has materialised except for the never-ending policy declarations and promises. Policies that never truly left the paper they were written on. Our foreign direct investments have also shown a declining trend compared with our neighbours. The country’s political insecurity is partly contributing to this malaise. What is certain is that we need change. No more of the same old stuff. And the only way to change is to appoint a new leadership team, one that has never been a part of the previous bank of ineffective leaders.

"Many citizens are baffled by what is now being played out in the negotiation process to secure a deal among parties for a workable government. Where has all the cry for a shared future gone to"

"New Hope and Optimism For the Country"

 By: Professor Dato' Dr. Ahmad Ibrahim, Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy Studies, UCSI University

  THE ongoing election campaign under GE15 is refreshing. Thanks to the power of the internet and the new media, there is more balance in the media opportunities for all the political parties. No more  the  practice of the past when television campaigning was more biased, favouring the government linked parties, which enjoyed more air time and coverage. The new media ushers in a positive development for democracy in the country. As echoed by a panel member of one of the TV discussion recently, democracy should rightfully celebrate differences in views and stands. All must be given the chance to reach out to the electorate. If such an arrangement can be replicated in all future elections, our country is destined for a more harmoniuous, progressive, prosperous and sustainable future.

 What has also lifted our spirit most as we look to the future is the emergence of the new breed of leaders from across the political divide. In Barisan Nasional, KJ, as he is affectionately known among the locals, stands out as a leader who has proven his worth taking charge of the ministries he was tasked to manage. During his time as the Youth and Sports minister, he was visibly involved in bringing improvement to the ministry. Later as MOSTI minister, he was equally dynamic in transforming the ministry into one that, at long last, people can appreciate the important role science plays in building and prospering the nation. But his biggest challenge would surely go to the time he helmed the Ministry of Health. That was when Covid-19 pandemic was at its highest level of threat, cases rising and anti-vaccine feeling high. Credit must surely go to KJ for his persuasive communication and negotiation skills which eventually led to the needed behavioural change among people, not only to get vaccinated but to religiously observe the dos and don’ts of preventive measures prescribed by the ministry.

  Of course, as expected, not many of the elder leaders can tolerate his rapid rise to prominence. Earlier in his political career, some attribute his close relation with the then PM, Pak Lah, and the ability to access the source of power then, for his performance. He was called many unsavoury names then. Now that, even without such access to the high authority, he is able to deliver commendable performance, many now see all such earlier suspicions unfounded. The truth is, KJ has what it takes to perform and deliver, whatever the obstacles. Many welcome his recent pronouncement that he would one day intend to assume the highest post of PM to lead the nation. In fact, some, who are very convinced of his leadership quality, say he is ready right now to assume that PM position.

 The other personality which many agree shows much promise to lead the nation is PKR’s Rafizi. He is also another professional who has never failed to impress the electorate with his brand of campaigning, exposing the rampant leadership malpractice in the country. Unless checked, such mismanagement can lead to negative repercussions for the future of the nation. What is also refreshing is his deployment of the latest data analytics technology to decipher the emotions of the electorate, and use such feedbacks to develop his strategic plan to win votes. His campaigning also uses a lot of the new internet media. As an accomplished debator during his MCKK days, his communication skill comes natural to him. Say what we want, but the fact remains that, as the top leader of the nation, the ability to effectively communicate at all levels is paramount. His party mate, Nurul Izzah, is another promising leader in the making.

 The new secretary-general of the DAP, Mr Anthony Loke is another upcoming political leader that brings optimism and hope to the country. Many salute his pragmatic style of dealing with the very contentious race issue. Then there is UMNO’s Shahril Hamdan who is contesting in Alor Gajah. Watching him offering views on the state of the nation, one cannot help but feel hopeful for the future of the country. I am sure there are many more such young leaders. If not for the new media, all such talents may still lie hidden among the warlords. What is certain is that their emergence has given us all a new hope and optimism.                

 

                

    

 

   

"Create Love of Learning to Nurture Innovation Culture"

By: Professor Dato' Dr. Ahmad Ibrahim, Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy, UCSI University, Malaysia

M ALAYSIA can be a nation of endless possibilities. We do face problems from time to time, which is normal. In dealing with problems, the best we can do is to question what we should strive for. And, we should be proud that, despite the ups and downs, we have resolved our problems pretty well. As the saying goes, where there is a problem, there is an opportunity. We only need to know where the opportunities lie in building a great nation. We should be prepared to grab those opportunities and turn them to our advantage. The truth is, nothing is impossible if we really put our mind to it. Take career development, for example. I have just watched a video produced by a journalist from neighbouring Indonesia. The video talks about how a son of a rubber tapper in Malaysia has risen to become the prime minister of the nation. The video refers to Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob. 

    We all know that if your family taps rubber, the entire family would be doing the trade. But I also know of many Malaysians who rose from rubber-tapping beginnings to assume leadership positions in the country. The late Tan Sri Abdul Rahman Arshad, my ex-teacher, was also the son of a rubber tapper. He rose to become the director-general of education. I am sure there are many more examples. Education, of course, made it all possible. That is why we should pay special attention to our education system. If such personalities can make it to the top from relatively poor upbringing, there must have been something working in our earlier education model. Those days, education was not just about forcing everything down a child’s throat. This, unfortunately, is happening now. No wonder children have to carry big bags to school. No wonder too many children lose interest in schooling. In the 1960s and 1970s, the burden of learning was not as heavy. Schooling was enjoyable and interesting. It was a combination of serious study and recreation. Those who went to boarding schools would testify to that. Whenever we had the term breaks, we could not wait to get back to school. Instead of the rote learning that children now experience, those days we were guided on the art of learning and acquiring knowledge. 

    We were taught how to communicate well and think critically. As we enter this era of an innovation-driven global economy, thinking and communication skills become even more critical. At a recent forum on innovation at MRANTI Park in Bukit Jalil, Germany’s Fraunhofer Institute, IEM, based in Paderborn, spoke about partnerships with Universiti Teknologi Mara and Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia in driving innovation in small and medium enterprises. Funded by the German Ministry of Science and Economy, the partnerships have been running innovation labs in UiTM, Shah Alam, and UTHM, Batu Pahat. Judging by what has been developed in the last three years of operation, both labs, which operate on the innovation model of ideate, create and collaborate, have substantially lifted the innovation interest in the participating SMEs. 

    In fact, I think the innovation lab idea should be replicated in all higher learning institutions. I would hasten to suggest setting up innovation labs even in schools. We know innovation always start with an idea.  How to create new ideas should be taught at schools. This is where the thinking-outside-of-the-box skill is useful. Ideas are never perfect when first mooted. They require critical evaluation and debate. The culture of agreeing to disagree is a good way to generate ideas. The ability to accept criticism is also an important part of the ideation process. Unfortunately, I have dealt with officers in ministries who take criticisms personally. Such an attitude is a big obstacle to innovation. Innovation is all about making changes for the better. The other important attribute of innovators is that they dare to fail. They look at failing as part of the path to success. Innovation labs can be an effective way to sow the seed of an innovation culture to build a great nation.

"Thinking Outside the Box to Build Innovation"

 By: Professor Dato' Dr. Ahmad Ibrahim, Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy, UCSI University, Malaysia

MALAYSIA can be a nation of endless possibilities. We do face problems from time to time, which is a normal thing for countries. Dealing with problems the best we can is what we should strive for. We should be proud that, despite the ups and downs, we have been able to resolve our problems pretty well. As the saying goes, where there is a problem, there is an opportunity. We only need to know where the opportunities lie in building a great nation. We should be prepared to grab those opportunities and turn them to our advantages. The truth is, nothing is impossible if we really put our minds to it. Take career development, for example. I have just watched a video produced by a journalist from our neighbouring Indonesia. The video talks about how a son of rubber tapper in Malaysia has risen to become the Prime Minister and CEO of the nation. The video refers to our Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri who had his early beginnings in a rubber tapping family. We all know for a fact that if your family earns their keep tapping rubber, the entire family would be doing the trade. But I also know of many other Malaysians who rose from rubber tapping beginnings to assume leadership positions in the country.

    The late Tan Sri Abdul Rahman Arshad, my ex-teacher, also had a poor beginning as the son of a rubber tapper. He rose to become the DG of education. I am sure there are many more. Education, of course, made it all possible. That is why we should pay special attention to our education system. If such personalities can make it to the top from relatively poor upbringing, there must be something working in our earlier education model. Those days, education was not about forcing everything down the children's throats. This is unfortunately what is happening now. No wonder children have to carry big bags to school. No wonder many children lose interest in schooling. In the 1960s and 70s, the burden on learning was not as heavy. Schooling was enjoyable and interesting. It was a combination of serious study and recreation. 

    Those who went to boarding schools would testify to that. Whenever we had the term breaks, we could not wait to get back to schools. Instead of the rote learning that children now experience, those days we were guided on the art of learning and acquiring knowledge. We were taught how to communicate well and think critically. As we enter this era of an innovation-driven global economy, thinking and communication skills become even more critical. At a recent forum on innovation at MRANTI Park in Bukit Jalil, Germany's Fraunhofer Institute, IEM, based in Paderborn, spoke about their partnership with UiTM and UTHM in driving innovation among our SMEs. Funded by the German Ministry of Science and Economy, the partnerships have been running innovation labs, one in UiTM Shah Alam, and the other at UTHM Batu Pahat. Judging by what has developed in the last three years of their operation, both labs, which operated on the innovation model of ideate, create and collaborate, have substantially lifted the innovation interest among the participating SMEs. In fact, I think the innovation labs idea should be replicated in all our higher learning institutions. I would hasten to suggest building the innovation labs even at the school level. We know innovation always start with an idea. How to create new ideas should be taught at schools. This is where the thinking-out-of-the-box skill is useful.

    Ideas are never perfect when first mooted. They require critical evaluation and debate. The culture of agreeing to disagree is a good way to generate ideas. The ability to accept criticism is also an important part of the ideation process. Unfortunately, I have experienced dealing with officers in government ministries who take criticisms personally. Such an attitude is a big obstacle to innovation. Innovation is all about making changes for the better. The other important attribute of innovators is that they dare to fail. They look at failing as the path to success. Innovation labs can be an effective way to sow the seed of the nation's innovation culture, to build a great nation.  

"USE THE NET, BE HEARD"

 By: 

Professor Dato' Dr. Ahmad Ibrahim, Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy, UCSI University, Malaysia

A LOT of things have hanged since the emergence of new information and communications technology. The Internet has been a game-changer in elections, as it allowed anyone to reach a large audience. As expected, the non-government groups wasted no time incapitalising on the new media. Social media itself underwent rapid change. Initially, the only way to reach a mass audience was through the short messaging service (SMS). eventually, longer messages were possible as the Internet technology developed. Then, audio messages were possible. videos on the internet came along and watching programmes became mobile. Fewwoulddisagreethatthe Internet has transformed democratic processes. Groups that mastered the Internet would often emerge victorious. 

    We saw this in the United States elections earlier. The deployment of the so-called cybertroopers to shape public opinion became commonplace. Those who offered credible arguments ended with bigger followings. The greatest impact initially was felt by the more urban electorates. rural voters remained largely untouched by the new media. The 15th General election (Ge15) will see further change for us here. There are two reasons for this. With the entry of the 18-year-olds as voters, social media campaigning will intensify. Internet-savvy young voters will influence the election outcome, provided they come out to vote. If they are smart, they will vote because much of the recent happenings in the country will have an impact on their future. Their voices can make a difference. Issues about future jobs, environmental concerns, education and housing should rightfully worry the young. They should not only participate in the democratic process by voting, but also influence the outcome of the election by flooding social media with their messages. Failure to do so may result in an outcome which they will later regret. Whatever it is, increasingly, technology is reshaping our democratic process, hopefully for the better.

"Innovation Labs to Perk Up Innovation Culture"

 By: Professor Dato Dr Ahmad Ibrahim, Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy, UCSI University

MALAYSIA can be a nation of endless possibilities. We do face problems from time to time, which is a normal thing for countries. Dealing with problems  the best we can is what we should strive for. We should be proud that, despite the ups and downs, we have been able to resolve our problems pretty well. As the saying goes, where there is a problem, there is an opportunity. We only need to know where the opportunities lie in building a great nation. We should be prepared to grab those opportunities and turn them to our advantages.

`The truth is nothing is impossible if we really put our mind to it. Take career development for example. I have just watched a video produced by a journalist from our neighbouring Indonesia. The video talks about how a son of rubber tapper in Malaysia has risen to become the Prime Minister and CEO of the nation. The video refers to our Dato Seri Ismail Sabri who had his early beginnings in a rubber tapping family. We all know for a fact that if your family earns their keep tapping rubber, the entire family would be doing the trade. But I also know of many other Malaysians who rose from rubber tapping beginning to assume leadership positions in the country. The late Tan Sri Abdul Rahman Arshad, my ex-teacher, also had a poor beginning as the son of a rubber tapper. He rose to become the DG of education. I am sure there are many more.

    Education of course made it all possible. That is why we should pay special attention to our education system. If such personalities can make it to the top from relatively poor upbringing, there must be something working in our earlier education model. Those days, education was not just about forcing down literally everything down the children’s throats. This is unfortunately what is happening now. No wonder children have to carry big bags to school. No wonder many children lose interest in schooling. In the 60s and 70s, the burden on learning for the schools was not as heavy. Schooling was enjoyable and interesting. It was a combination of serious study and recreation. Those who went to boarding schools would testify to that. Whenever we had the term breaks, we could not wait to get back to schools. Instead of the rote learning that children now experience, those days we were guided on the art of learning and acquiring knowledge. We were taught how to communicate well and think critically. 

    As we enter this era of an innovation driven global economy, thinking and communication skills become even more critical. At a recent forum on innovation at MRANTI Park in Bukit Jalil, Germany’s Fraunhofer Institute, IEM, based in Paderborn, spoke about their partnership with UiTM and UTHM in driving innovation among our SMEs. Funded by the German Ministry of Science and Economy, the partnerships have been running innovation labs, one in UiTM Shah Alam, and the other at UTHM Batu Pahat. Judging by what has developed in the last three years of their operation, both labs, which operated on the innovation model of ideate, create and collaborate, have substantially lifted the innovation interest among the participating SMEs. In fact, I think the innovation labs idea should be replicated in all our higher learning institutions.

    I would hasten to suggest building the innovation labs even at the school level. We know innovation always start with an idea. How to create new ideas should be taught at schools. This is where the thinking out of the box skill is useful. Ideas are never perfect when first mooted. They require critical evaluation and debate. The culture of agreeing to disagree is a good way to generate ideas. The ability to accept criticism is also an important part of the ideation process. Unfortunately, I have experienced dealing with officers in government ministries who take criticisms personal. Such an attitude is a big obstacle to innovation. Innovation is all about making changes for the better. The other important attribute of innovators is that they dare to fail. They look at failing as the path to success. Innovation labs can be an effective way to sow the seed of the nation’s innovation culture to build a great nation.

 

   

     

 

 

      

"Higher Education Business at the Crossroads"

 by Professor Dato' Dr Ahmad Ibrahim, Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy Studies, UCSI University

Ali scored 8As in his 2021 SPM. That would have easily secured him a place in the university. Under normal times, it would be common practice for students who have scored well in their SPM to apply for a university degree. They look to studying for a degree to land a good career. 2022 is not a normal year though. This is because according to the latest information, more than 70% of SPM holders have not bothered to apply for a university place, a big departure from the normal year. This is quite unexpected and has taken the higher education business in the country by surprise. Ever since the government embarked on the strategy to make Malaysia an international hub in higher education, private investments in higher education have witnessed a jump. The business was doing well for several years until the pandemic. It was badly disrupted during the pandemic especially since overseas students could not come. 

     Admittedly, we are not quite there yet in making the country an attractive international hub for higher education. But we are making credible progress. Many of our universities are now internationally recognised, including a few privately run universities. However, the process of bringing in international students’ needs some fine tuning, especially the part which concerns the visa. Now that international students can travel as covid restrictions are lifted, universities are starting to reach out to the overseas market. Universities with excellent track record like UCSI do not face much problem attracting foreign students. But the biggest headache is the local students. It has become known that many among our recent SPM graduates have given a cold shoulder to university admission. They have opted to instead work first before thinking of a university degree. This may have resulted from the disappointment university graduates faced securing jobs. Many believe this may be the trend. The higher education business must strategize differently now that the game is changing.

     In the higher education business, the courses offered are essentially our products. Making sure that the products would fulfil the demand of the higher education market is key to the success of the business. Therefore understanding the marketplace is a critical prerequisite of the courses succeeding. This is where the market report must be comprehensive, not only looking at potential demand but also the competing suppliers of similar courses in the market. Very often, the market study is not done elaborately. In fact, many higher education institutions have established teams dedicated to deep market research on the courses to be offered. As is true for higher education courses, not much different from manufactured products, they become obsolete with times. The practice of reviewing and revamping courses is common among universities. It is done every few years. Unfortunately such exercise often does not take into account the changing market.

     The market does constantly undergo changes not only because of changing technology but also because of changing expectations from consumers. The expectations from consumers, which include the students and the industries, do change because of changes in business trends. There is no denying the fact that consumer expectations have shifted in recent years. One major driver of change is the world concern over the potential global climate crisis which looks more real by the day. Businesses which must take part of the blame for the looming crisis, mainly because of business practices which contribute to the rise in carbon emissions, are now under pressures to embrace the world sustainability agenda. The agenda encompasses making sure their businesses do not compromise the wellness of the environment, the wellbeing of society and practice of good governance, as embodied in the ESG international standards. The technology to deliver courses has also witnessed change as a result of the pandemic. Like most industries, the higher education business has also to go digital.

    Few would disagree that the higher education business is at a crossroads. The traditional way of doing business is no longer acceptable. The introduction of new courses must now undergo more rigorous market study. The courses must also take into account the changing consumer expectations as well as technological development. Not taking such measures would not augur well for the success of the higher education business.           

"The Changing Trends in Business Education"

 by Professor Datuk Dr. Ahmad Ibrahim, Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy Studies, UCSI University

EARLIER this year, the Statistics Department released a report stating that about 390,000 out of 560,000 SPM candidates, or 72.1%, preferred to join the workforce after sitting for the examination. Only 170,000 were found to be keen to pursue their studies. Over the years, private investments in higher education have been on the rise in line with the government's aim to make Malaysia an international hub in tertiary studies. Though not quite there yet, we are making credible progress.

    However, this recent revelation could potentially throw a spanner in the works. Stakeholders in the higher education business must therefore strategise differently now that the game is changing. Take business education in universities as an example. At one time, getting a Master of Business Administration (MBA) was a popular choice; it could enhance one's marketability as a professional and make them more employable. It was no surprise then that business schools mushroomed everywhere, including online. Although business education remains popular among new enrolments, the focus and delivery have been undergoing changes. 

    At the same time, because of the disruptions caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, business schools are now attempting to perfect hybrid learning. There is also general agreement that the climate crisis will force business schools to adapt their curriculum in order to translate climate science into action. There has been a shift in how organizations think about value, with many agreeing that genuine ESG (environmental, social, and governance) strategies can lead to growth and profitability. 

    There is no denying that business schools need to pay attention to the intersection between business and the environment. They are, after all, two sides of the same coin, and it is through an integrated approach that the biggest impact in tackling climate change can be made. Green topics like sustainability and green finance are growing in demand. These used to be integrated into the traditional core courses, but now entire programmes could be developed around them. 

    Many see this development as the rebirth of business schools. And fundamental to that rebirth will be a shift to a much greater emphasis on inter-disciplinary programmes. We will also see business schools embracing flexible and multi-mode delivery, offering students a campus experience that integrates the best blend of face-to-face and online learning. When it comes to the future of business schools, the most significant change will be in the curriculum, which will need to conform to such trends as climate change, big data, health and well-being, which have not featured prominently in business education before. Business educators will also need to develop strategies to nurture transformational leaders who will become the new driving force of social impact.

"Rubber Tappers in the Lurch "

 by Professor Datuk Dr. Ahmad Ibrahim, Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy Studies, UCSI University

    HUSIN is a rubber tapper. He lives alone and taps rubber on a small patch of land owned by Hasan. The arrangement is that whatever rubber he taps, it is shared half-half with Hasan who, because of old age, is no longer able, to tap his own holding. There are many like Husin in the country. There are also many like Hasan. They are all rubber smallholders. The plot of land owned by Hasan is less than three hectares. Most of the hundreds of thousands of rubber smallholders in the country own similar plots to earn a living. For decades now, ever since the big plantation boys abandoned rubber cultivation for oil palm, rubber in the country has been supplied by people like Husin and Hasan. 

   There have been periods when world rubber price hit the high of more than RM5 per kg. But more often than not, prices have hovered way below. Recently it dropped below RM2.50 per kg. People like Husin and Hasan would be lucky to earn at the most RM700 per month each. In these days of high food prices, not much can be bought with such meagre sums. Husin is luckier because he lives alone. 

    But it is different for Hasan who has his aging wife to care for. If not for the money he occasionally receives from his son, a teacher, he would be even more worse of. This has been going on for decades now. Is there a chance for  Hasan and Husin to escape poverty? This is most unlikely, looking at the trends in rubber prices these past years. Can the government put in place a policy to at least provide citizens like Husin and Hasan a decent living? While rubber smallholders suffer such misfortune, others involved in the making of products from rubber do not face the same challenges. 

    In fact, most have become richer from the rubber supplied by smallholders. Tyre manufacturers are among those that have gained tremendously from the rubber that these smallholders toil to produce. It is a fact that tapping rubber is not an easy task. Husin has to wake up before sunrise to do his job. This is because science has shown that the early hours of the morning are the best time to tap to get the best yield. This is also the time when mosquitoes are most active in the rubber holdings, not to mention other menaces. But rubber smallholders - have to soldier on. 

    Tyre-manufacturing accounts for around 70% of the volume of rubber supplied worldwide. Tyre producers will also be the biggest loser if rubber smallholders abandon tapping on account of poor returns. A recent move by some to push for sustainability certification may not be in the best interest of smallholders. The narratives that are being bandied around, mostly unsubstantiated, may lead to new import restrictions by rubber buyers who may deny smallholders access to markets. This can be even more damaging for an already deprived group in the world rubber supply chain. Instead of going down that road, it would be more constructive for companies to support rubber smallholders by giving guaranteed pricing. 

    Only after smallholders are assured of a humane income should issues of sustainability be introduced. A new initiative by the government to establish the National SDG Centre under the Economic Planning Unit is a welcome move. Since the number one goal of the 17 SDGs is to reduce world poverty, rubber smallholders are definitely among the relevant groups. Unless the issue of under-compensation is effectively addressed, the job of the SDG Centre can never be complete.

"Art of Diplomacy Key to Biodiversity Conservation"

 by Professor Datuk Dr. Ahmad Ibrahim, Tan Sri Omar Centre of STI Policy Studies, UCSI University

 M ANY may not be aware that biodiversity is a critical element in the jigsaw puzzle of life. Those who have watched the movie A Bug’s Life would appreciate the fact that insects and other pollinating organisms contribute to the sustenance of agriculture and farming. Without them, pollinating at their speed is extremely challenging. We saw the case of the oil palm where weevils improved the pollination process tremendously. Studies have confirmed that all plants and animals, which form nature’s biodiversity, play an important role in delivering the ecosystem services that we need to produce food, conserve water and even contain the spread of diseases. This explains why the world is concerned about activities that compromise biodiversity. 

    I recently attended a lecture by Tan Sri Zakri Abdul Hamid, who holds the Tun Hussein Onn Chair in International Studies at the Institute of Strategic and International Studies Malaysia. As the fifth holder of the chair, he delivered a thought-provoking talk on The Politics of Biodiversity Loss: International Response and Malaysia. There were more than 200 participants, including many close family members of the late Hussein Onn, the third prime minister. Many participants could be considered as hardcore biodiversity activists. Many were from the science fraternity, academics and some journalists. All came away enlightened with the urgency to address biodiversity. 

    Zakri put his message clear, which was not surprising coming from someone who has spent more than three decades involved in the international diplomacy of biodiversity. As the founding chairman of the International Panel on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), he shared the latest statistics on the state of biodiversity loss in the world. IPBES is the equivalent to the UN climate change panel, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The data he shared showed that the losses through poaching and other incursions by humans were staggering. In some species, close to 70 per cent has been wiped out. The Malaysian tiger population, for example, is now numbered at not more than 200. Zakri shared how India was having a programme to conserve its tiger population. He lamented that we were still far behind. It is not easy to convince people why more resources are needed in tiger conservation since tigers are also seen as a menace to farmers who lose livestock to displaced tigers. Maybe tiger scientists need to show more evidence on the role tigers play in the biodiversity balance. 

    Biodiversity conservation also has implications on business. The story surrounding the threat of an import ban by the European Union (EU) on our palm oil is a case in point. As a result of intensive pressure from consumer groups blaming oil palm cultivation for the decline in the orang utan population, the EU imposed rulings that restrict palm oil import. Though the evidence shows otherwise, we have not been able to communicate the real situation. Zakri did touch on the worrying development that we are not investing enough to communicate our facts internationally. We used to be more active in the past where delegates were sent in good numbers to negotiate and contribute to the development of the international standards on biodiversity. 

    This needs to change. What became clear during the question-and-answer session was that we should take biodiversity concerns seriously. We should participate in more international forums on biodiversity where the negotiations and in his words, horse trading, take place. The art of diplomacy is central to all that. That is why we should train enough people in science diplomacy and communication to participate in such forums. The new InternationalInstitute for Science Diplomacy and Sustainabilty at UCSI university, helmed by Zakri, is a positive step not only for Malaysia but also the region. Many see it as a strategic initiative to build the right talent for the region. It will strengthen the resolve to uphold the global call for biodiversity conservation.

"New Strategy Needed To Help Rubber Smallholders"

 by Professor Datuk Dr. Ahmad Ibrahim, Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy Studies, UCSI University

SEPT 4 proved to be another sad day for the more than 200,000 rubber smallholders in the country, as news of the drastic decline in the world rubber price hit the headlines again. It was reported that in two months, the price of cup lump rubber dropped from RM3.20 per kg to RM2.30 per kg. 

    The price is simply not enough to support smallholders and their families. It is much worse if you are just a rubber tapper and not a small holder, as you will get only half the proceeds. On average, a tapper working 18 days a month brings home a meager RM700. 

    With the rise in living costs, rubber tappers will be pushed further down the poverty ladder. Smallholders are not asking for much, just that the price of cup lump rubber be maintained at above RM3 per kg.

    With climate uncertainties and flooding during the monsoon months, one can understand their growing restlessness. The irony of it all is that while rubber smallholders are suffering, downstream rubber product manufacturers benefit from the resurgence in demand as the global economy recovers from the lull during the pandemic. 

    By right, they should also be worried because if fewer small holders are tapping rubber, the world supply will also decline. We must remember that natural rubber remains a sought-after material in many products. It has been suggested by some that one strategy would involve the government buying rubber from smallholders at a fixed higher price. 

    This may be funded by the entire downstream rubber industry, but keeping the rubber as stock may not be a good idea. This is because in a market with high inventories the world price will continue to be suppressed, which will make things worse. Another strategy is to use excess rubber in roads, as we spend a lot on road repair and maintenance year in and year out. I have observed that refilling potholes accounts for much of the maintenance costs. 

    The government should consider incorporating rubber in the road repair formulations. Studies by the Malaysian Rubber Board have shown that the durability of roads can be improved significantly by using a rubberised bitumen mix. The more important thing is that a high volume of cup lump rubber can be used directly. We should encourage all natural rubber-producing countries to do the same. That would take away a high volume of rubber from the stock and prop up world prices. The Bangkok-based International Rubber Consortium, funded by Malaysia, Indonesia, and Thailand, is supposed to manage stock levels. 

    However, it is dysfunctional and has never worked, so it may be time to close that organisation. Another threat to the production of natural rubber has also emerged. I am referring to the Pestalotiopsis leaf disease, which has been spreading in rubber-producing-countries lately. Rubber agrono-mists have confirmed that this debilitating disease can have serious consequences for rubber yield. Many studies have predicted a yield decline of up to 25 per cent if the disease is left unattended. Unless the right measures are developed to deal with this disease, the world supply of natural rubber will be adversely affected.

    It is in the interest of the world’s rubber industry to take this potential supply disruption seriously. We have not even touched on the supply threats to synthetic rubber, as the world pushes or NetZero. NetZero will lead to a decline in the supply of fossil-based synthetic rubber (SR). The fact that there are many applications that do not have a substitute for SR should cause concern in product manufacturers. Whatever it is, there is a strong message here that everyone must work together to ensure a sustained supply of rubber for the industry.  

"CAPITALISE ON SOARING RARE EARTHS DEMAND"

 by Professor Datuk Dr. Ahmad Ibrahim, Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy Studies, UCSI University

It has been long predicted that the business in rare earths will head for soaring growth as the world pushes towards a“netzero” future. Lynas, the world’s largest producer of rare earths out side of China, has just reported three-fold jump in profits from year earlier, as world rare earths prices were almost 80 per cent higher compared with that of the previous year. the demand for rare earths for the manufacture of magnets, which are used to power electric motors, has seen a massive jump. Their use in iPhones and laptops remains strong as the world continues to digitalise. It has been announced that Lynas will expand production in its Western Australia-based mount Weld mine with a further injection of A$500 million. 

    It is good to hear that Perak has just announced investing in rare earth mining. A few other states with rare earth deposits, including Kedah and Kelantan, have also shown interest. this is an encouraging development. but we should not miss out on the opportunity to capitalise on the rare earths that are already accessible on our doorstep, from Lynas. We should not be perturbed just because of some misguided pressures from pseudo rare earth experts. Instead, get guidance from real experts, who are saying the opposite of doomsayers the radioactive risks associated with rare earth processing have been scientifically proven to be almost negligible. the environmental risks are also manageable with the right treatment regime, not much different from the usual chemical processing industry. there is no reason to be unnecessarily alarmed by the claims bandied around by the anti-rare earths groups. 

    In fact, we should be active not only in rare earth mining, but more so as a committed player in the entire value chain of the rare earth business. Investing in the rare earth industry will help us realise our high-income dreams. However, building the rare earth-based industry calls for careful planning and strategising. As usual, we should start with a roadmap or blueprint to guide us. but it must be action-oriented, not theoretical and academic. building a vibrant rare earth industry must start with the right business model. We need to be clear on our target market and the competition we will be up against technology is at the heart of the rare earth business. And we all know technology changes fast, so we need a kind of technology clearing house, which would advise industry on investments in research and technology development. Having the right talent pool is also critical in building such an industry. The blueprint has, therefore, to be holistic if it is to have any chance of success. since we are starting from scratch, attracting the right foreign investment should be the first step. 

    We should prioritise those with a good understanding of the market, as well as a good command of technology, even talent may need to be sourced internationally initially. but we should in parallel build our own talent capacity. Lynas is a good example of an international business where a high percentage of local talents is deployed. We need to eventually attract domestic investment because being over dependent on foreign investment will not guarantee the sustainability of the industry. As the world races to deliver the netzero future, the demand for rare earths is seen racing upwards. this has come about because rare earth elements have become a critical part in the manufacture of low carbon emission equipment that supports net zero. the key components include power magnets used in electric motors. As a country that has viable rare earth deposits, we should not hesitate to capitalise them for the nation’s socio-economic advantage. We have the capacity to be a viable global player.

"Profiting from Rare Earths"

 by Professor Datuk Dr. Ahmad Ibrahim, Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy Studies, UCSI University

IT has long been forecast that the business in rare earth elements (REEs) will spike as the world pushes towards achieving the net zero target. Last July, Australia's Lynas Rare Earths Ltd, the world's largest producer of REEs outside of China, reported a 58% rise in quarterly revenue from a year earlier as prices of the elements were almost 80% higher than in the previous year. It has been announced that Lynas will further expand production in their Western Australia-based Mount Weld mine with a further injection of A$500mil. It is therefore good to hear that mining of REEs will be starting soon in Perak. Other states with viable deposits of REEs, including Kedah and Kelantan, have also expressed interest in this industry. But we should not be missing out on the opportunity to capitalise on the REEs industry that is already on our doorstep. We should not be perturbed just because of some misguided pressure from pseudo REEs experts. What the real experts are saying is the complete opposite of the doomsayers. The radioactive risks associated with processing REEs have been scientifically proven to be almost negligible. The environmental risks are also manageable with the right treatment regime, which is not much different from the usual chemical processing industry. There is no reason to be alarmed by the claims bandied about by the anti-REEs groups. In fact, investing in the rare earths industry will help us realise our vision of becoming a high-income nation. The fact that the commodity business is now being rattled by labour issues is creating more urgency to invest in the less labour intensive and higher paying industry like the REEs supply chain business. But this calls for careful planning and strategising. We should start with a roadmap or blueprint to guide us. This roadmap must be action-oriented, not theoretical and academic like many of our past blueprints. Building a vibrant rare earths industry must start with the right business model. We need to be clear on our target market and the competition we will be up against. Technology is at the heart of the REEs business. And we all know technology changes fast, so we need a kind of knowledge clearing house that would advise industry on investments in research and technology development. Having the right talent pool is also critical in building this industry. The blueprint must therefore be holistic if it is to have any chance of success. Since we are starting from scratch, attracting the right foreign investors should be the first step. We should prioritise those with a good understanding of the market and strong command of the technology. Even talents may initially need to be sourced internationally, but  we should in parallel build our own capacity. Lynas is a good example of an international business where a high percentage of local talents is deployed. We need to eventually attract domestic investment because being over-dependent on foreign investment will not guarantee the sustainability of the industry. Soaring demand for REEs has come about as investments in clean energy are increasing. REEs are critical in the manufacture of high-tech, low carbon emission equipment, including hybrid and electric vehicles, elect tronics, LED lights and wind turbines. As a country with viable REEs deposits, we should not hesitate to capitalise on this industry for the nation's socio-economic advantage. We have the capacity to be a global player. 

SUMMARIES

IT has long been forecast that the business in rare earth elements (REEs) will spike as the world pushes towards achieving the net zero target. Last July, Australia's Lynas Rare Earths Ltd, the world's largest producer of REEs outside of China, reported a 58% rise in quarterly revenue from a year earlier as prices of the elements were almost 80% higher than in the previous year. 

"Capitalise on Soaring Rare Earths Demand "

 by Professor Dato Dr Ahmad Ibrahim, Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy, UCSI University

 

   It has been long predicted that the business in rare earths will head for soaring growth as the world pushes towards NetZero. Lynas, the world’s largest producer of rare earths outside of China, has just reported a three fold jump in profits from a year earlier, as world rare earths prices reached almost 80% higher than in the previous year. The demand for rare earths for the manufacture of magnets, which are used to power electric motors, has seen a massive jump. Their use in iPhones and laptops remains  strong as the world continues to digitalise. It has been announced that Lynas will further expand production in their Western Australia-based Mount Weld mine with a further injection of A$500 million. It is good to hear that Perak has just announced investing in rare earths mining. A few other states with rare earths deposits including Kedah and Kelantan also show interest. This is encouraging development. But we should not be missing out on the opportunity to capitalise on the rare earths that are already accessible on our door step, from Lynas. We should not be perturbed just because of some misguided pressures from pseudo rare earths experts. We must instead get guidance from the real experts. 

What the real experts are saying is the complete opposite of the doomsayers. The radioactive risks associated with rare earths processing have been scientifically proven to be almost negligible. The environmental risks are also manageable with the right treatment regime, not much different from the usual chemical processing industry. There is no reason to be unnecessary alarmed by the claims bandied around by the anti-rare earths groups. In fact we should be active not only in the rare earths mining, but more so as a committed player in the entire value chain of the rare earths business. Investing in the rare earths industry will help us realise our high income dreams. We should move beyond the volatile price taking commodity business. The fact that the commodity business is now rattled by labour issues creates more urgency to invest in the less labour intensive and higher paying industry like the rare earths supply chain business.

 However, building the rare earths-based industry calls for careful planning and strategising. As usual, we should start with a roadmap or blueprint to guide us. But the roadmap to be action-oriented, not theoretical and academic. Unlike many of our past blueprints which lack reality. That explains why implementing them has been problematic and challenging. Building a vibrant rare earths industry must start with the right business model. We need to be clear on our target market and the competition we will be up against. Technology is at the heart of the rare earths business. And we all know technology changes fast. So we need a kind of technology clearing house which would advise industry on investments in research and technology development. Having the right talent pool is also critical in building such industry. The blueprint has therefore to be holistic if it is to have any chance of success. Since we are starting from scratch, attracting the right foreign investment should be the first step. We should prioritise those with a good understanding of the market, as well as a good command of the technology. Even talents may need to be sourced internationally initially. But we should in parallel build our own talent capacity. Lynas is a good example of an international business where a high percentage of local talents is deployed. We need to eventually attract domestic investment because being over dependent on foreign investment will not guarantee the sustainability of the industry.

 As the world races to deliver NetZero, the demand for rare earths is seen racing upwards. This has come about because rare earth elements have become a critical element in the manufacture of low carbon emission equipments which support Netzero. The key component includes power magnets used in the electric motors. As a country which has viable rare earths deposits, we should not hesitate to capitalise them for the nation’s socio-economic advantage. We have the capacity to be a viable global player.          

 

"Academic Intolerance Hurts Growth Of New Ideas"

by Professor Datuk Dr. Ahmad Ibrahim, Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy Studies UCSI University

ALL great things start with an idea. This applies to national policies, business undertakings and societal projects. They would always begin with ideas coming from someone, somewhere. More often than not, tracing back such ideas would confirm they originate from those with knowledge and experience who constantly think of new ideas to bring to the table. These people are idea-centric, seldom stingy with their ideas. Over the years, we have seen how great scientists and business icons of the world often share their thoughts before they submit them for application. Many such greats would most likely have their early beginnings in higher learning institutions. This is understandable since university academics are constantly doing research and discovering new things.

    Some of the new ideas are also accidental outcomes of research. There have been many such cases. The story about the MP3 technology spotted accidentally from a research project is well known.The Fraunhofer institutes in Germany made that accidental discovery which earned them millions in licensing royalty. 

    Here at home, we have also borne witness to the emergence of great ideas coming from university academics. One such idea is the Tabung Haji model introduced by the late Royal Professor Ungku Abdul Aziz Ungku Abdul Hamid. He also had a hand in other ideas, such as the business of cooperatives, which have now assumed national significance, and the establishment of Angkasa. Admittedly, when Ungku Aziz helmed Universiti Malaya, discourse and debates among academics were common. 

    That was how new ideas were born and polished till they became ready for real adoption. Thought leadership was then the hallmark of universities. It is unfortunate that tolerating differences of opinion has seen much erosion in recent years. It was such tolerance that has been important in churning out new ideas. Oftentimes, the crude ideas when mooted could even be controversial. But, they were debated and argued, further improving their acceptance. It has become clear in recent times that many new academics are not comfortable with controversial ideas. They are quick to pass judgment and brand them unacceptable. Some even say they should be avoided at all costs. If we continue with such intolerance, universities will one day be no longer the nation’s repository of knowledge and birthplace of new ideas.

    It is still not too late to stop this decline in thought leadership. Some say the root cause is the fear of failure among today’s academics—the fear of making mistakes. It has driven many to hide in their comfort zone. This is unhealthy and will not give rise to new ideas. They may not realise that without fresh ideas there can be no great innovation, which is now recognised as a critical recipe for human development. We will succumb to development paralysis if we continue to deny the need to generate good ideas. This is where the culture of critical thinking needs constant nurturing by having a healthy ecosystem of agreeing to disagree and inculcating the respect for idea sharing in others.