In an evolving knowledge-economy, where the traditional factors of production are diminishing in importance, knowledge as a linchpin of power holds sway, writes TOMAN MAMORA.
KNOWLEDGE
economy or K-economy is the latest buzzword that’s ringing around the
corridors of power and in conferences. Politicians and senior civil servants
have joined the chorus and are already committing knowledge power, the essence
of K-economy, to a position of high priority in their agenda. Indeed, there is
no escaping from the fact that Sarawak being an integral part of a big global
economy is in a transition to a K-economy, the ultimate domain of success of a
nation state, where knowledge holds sway. In a world of interconnected systems
which transcend political boundaries and where resources such as know-how are
far more critical than economic resources, the rules and practices which once
determined the success of an industrial economy have to be rewritten to suit the
demands of a K-economy.
At
a recent seminar in Damai attended by Ministers and leaders from the four
component parties of the State Barisan Nasional, the subject of K-economy vis-à-vis
the new reality took centre stage, bringing to bear the new challenges and
opportunities in a world of interconnected political and economic systems. Chief
Minister Datuk Patinggi Tan Sri Haji Abdul Taib Mahmud, who delivered a key
paper entitled, “New Reality and Knowledge Society”, reminded State Barisan
Nasional leaders that it was time that they came to grips with the growing
importance of knowledge as a driving force in politics, economy and industry and
to break loose from the old mindset that might have once shaped their pattern
and behaviour of leadership.
In
advocating what may well appear to be a visionary concept that is certain to
underpin the government’s development philosophy, Datuk Patinggi Taib
acknowledges that the rules of business and competitiveness are being influenced
and shaped by
the three interlocking forces of knowledge intensity, globalisation, and
networking. This redefining process is also affecting the rules and norms in
politics. It is therefore imperative that leaders in politics and the industry
are made aware of this imminent shift from traditional economy to knowledge
economy so that they will have no reservation about the importance of equipping
themselves with the relevant knowledge and know-how to adapt to change and
survive in the new environment.
As
reiterated by Datuk Patinggi Taib, conditions under the knowledge economy would
require new thinking and approaches by policy makers, captains of the industry
and knowledge workers alike. This would require, among others, initiative of
leadership and risk-taking against the slow-changing attitudes and practices of
existing institutions and business practice. But what makes the knowledge
economy so different from the traditional physical economy that it demands an
entire shift of the existing paradigm governing politics and industry?
Unlike in traditional economy where resources deplete and economics is
defined in terms of scarcity, a key factor of production in knowledge economy is
knowledge and information which grows and can be shared through application and
the effect of location is diminished. When locked into processes or systems,
knowledge has higher inherent value that when it can `walk out of the door’ in
people’s heads. But what is most germane as a key component of value to
knowledge economy is human capital and its competencies which again have their
roots in knowledge.
The
evolving knowledge economy would require the government to focus its economic
development policy not on jobs created but on infrastructure for sustainable
knowledge enhancement. This in turn will serve as a powerful catalyst to
stimulate the growth of knowledge-based institutions in both the public and
private sector. Recognising this, Datuk Patinggi Taib has already sent out early
signals for increasing emphasis to be placed on the setting up of
knowledge-based industries rather than traditional industries. In anticipation
of that plans will have to be drawn up to develop regulation and taxation for
information and knowledge trading. In the private sector, technology
infrastructure will also have to be in place to enhance knowledge creation and
sharing which can be further supported by effective organisational setting and
practices.
But
basic to the creation of the entire knowledge infrastructure and the system it
supports is education and the level attainable by members of the society. In the
context of Sarawak, it raises questions relating to the adequacy of properly
equipped schools, opportunities for education among the rural and poor and
commitment of parents and opinion leaders to investment in education. Of course,
answers to these will invariably bring to bear other social and economic
considerations which need to be addressed from a state policy perspective and
must involve the concerted efforts of the government and private sector through
some form of legislated programme. Indeed, there has to be a democratisation of
education and a revamp of its contents to ensure their relevance to the
k-economy. Unless this is resolved, it would be difficult to expect rural
students to advance beyond secondary education and be on par with their urban
counterparts. But Datuk Patinggi Taib is determined to see that it has to be
done if the desired level of equality in education opportunities that befit a
k-economy is to be achieved.
Competitiveness,
productivity, effectiveness and efficiency are key words that can best describe
the end products of a knowledge economy. Although the degree of knowledge and
know-how will obviously vary with different levels of the workforce, it is
important to note, according to Datuk Patinggi Taib,
that enhancing knowledge flows within an organisation and between an
organisation and its external publics will add value to the process and
production in question. He is, however, aware that this whole new experience
cannot be realised by policy makers and business leaders alone. It would involve
seeking new patterns of partnership and synergising existing education and
economic policies.
Leaders
in politics and industry must lead the way and be exemplary in their knowledge
and pursuit of new innovations which characterise the k-economy. Simply put,
they must not be ashamed to make the first bold step, if they have not, to
acquire the relevant knowledge and know-how which will make them competent
authorities in their respective fields and be respected in the eyes of their
charges. With knowledge becoming increasingly a primary source and linchpin of
power, it is imperative that leaders come to grips with this new defining
factor, lest power will slip away.
|
|