Economist Impact, supported by Google, conducted a survey of 1,375 employees across Asia-Pacific (APAC), including 100 employees from Indonesia, between November 2022 and January 2023. It also interviewed employers and industry experts across the region to understand their perspectives on skills gaps, as well as reskilling and upskilling aspirations.
The survey respondents were drawn from across 14 markets in the region, out of which 11.8% were Gen Z (born in 1997-2012), 63.2% were Millennials (1981-96) and 25% were Gen X (1965-80). They all worked in a diverse mix of industries.
Economist Impact, supported by Google, conducted a survey of 1,375 employees across Asia-Pacific (APAC), including 100 employees from Singapore, between November 2022 and January 2023. It also interviewed employers and industry experts across the region to understand their perspectives on skills gaps, as well as reskilling and upskilling aspirations.
The survey respondents were drawn from across 14 markets in the region, out of which 11.8% were Gen Z (born in 1997-2012), 63.2% were Millennials (1981-96) and 25% were Gen X (1965-80). They all worked in a diverse mix of industries.
The research shows that across the region, common understanding is lacking between employers and employees about future skills and the best way to develop them. In some instances, there is also an expectation mismatch between what employers want and what employees see as being important. Understanding these gaps will be instrumental in creating a workforce that is prepared for the economy of the future.
This article—one in a series of 12 market reports—examines these issues in Singapore. This series complements a research paper that looks at the reskilling and upskilling imperative across APAC.
Key findings
Digital skills are a priority for 69% of employees in Singapore, more than any of the other surveyed APAC markets. Employees in Singapore also prioritise other skills categories such as analytical skills (53%) and soft skills (51%). Nearly half (49%) of employees have a poor understanding of what skills are needed in the market. 61% of employees in Singapore rely on government awareness programmes for information about which skills will be valuable in the future.The pandemic disrupted life in Singapore, and the ensuing, ongoing economic uncertainty has created further difficulties in the job market. But through all of this, the potential of digital technologies in reshaping the economy’s future-readiness has shone through. Compared with most of its neighbours, Singapore is already far along its digitalisation journey, with major policies like the “Smart Nation” initiative1 and the national Green Plan 20302 charting roadmaps towards a highly digital, green economy.
These ambitious plans are creating new pressures and opportunities for the city-state’s workforce. And emerging skill sets will be vital to navigating its changing needs.
Advancing digital skills
Digital skills are a priority for 69% of employees in Singapore, the highest out of the 14 surveyed APAC markets. More than 90% of firms in Singapore have already adopted some type of digital technology, and there is strong demand in the city-state for tech talent.3 Our survey shows that advanced digital skills such as artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning, cloud computing, and the Internet of Things are becoming pivotal. Importantly, these skill sets are increasingly in demand across pretty much every industry imaginable—from healthcare to manufacturing.
Given the shortage of tech talent in Singapore, workers possessing advanced digital skills are also likely to have more bargaining power in the job market.4 Individuals applying these advanced digital skills at work can boost their salaries by more than 120%.5 This is seen in the Economist Impact survey, which shows that one in four employees in Singapore say higher pay and bargaining power best describe their motivation to acquire new digital skills.
One such area of importance is cybersecurity. According to Soon Joo Gog, chief skills officer at SkillsFuture,Singapore, cybersecurity skills are becoming increasingly important to any company engaging with digital services. These skills are considered key to ensuring business continuity, particularly given the spate of major security breaches that have taken place within the past year.6 Among the Economist Impact survey respondents, cybersecurity is considered a “must have” by 24.6% and a “good to have” by 68.1%.
Basic digital skills remain critical too. Given the advanced state of Singapore’s digital transformation, the intensive pace of digital adoption across all economic sectors has made digital skills foundational to many, if not most, careers. The Economist Impact survey shows that basic digital skills are considered a “must have” by the vast majority of respondents (75.4%), in line with the regional average of 73.9%.
Employees in Singapore also place greater importance on other skills categories such as analytical skills (53%) and soft skills (51%). Analytical skills like project management and critical thinking are increasingly becoming foundational skills that enable professional and personal progress, highlight 29% of the employees in our survey. These skills are highly transferable across different roles and are “critical core skills” that facilitate career mobility as well as make it easier to grasp other more technical skills.7 With remote and hybrid setups likely to be a permanent feature for six out of ten companies going forward, soft skills like adaptability, communication and resilience will be increasingly important.8
On the other hand, green skills are considered relatively less valuable by employees at the moment, ranked first by only 12% of employees—compared with 17.7% in APAC. Ms Gog says that while digital skills are pervasive across industries and job roles because of enabling technologies that augment human activities, the momentum of green activities across industries are picking up, eventually all jobs will require green skills, albeit it’s nascent state.
However, as Singapore strengthens its focus on the green economy, and as developments such as COP27 bring sustainability and green issues to the mainstream globally, more companies will focus on the green economy and new roles will emerge in this space, making it important for workers to acquire these skills. In 2020 the Singapore government estimated that the city-state would create 55,000 jobs in the coming decade because of the growing focus on sustainable development. Demand is expected to come from sectors including finance, agriculture, food, urban solutions such as sanitation and waste management, carbon services, and climate science.9
At the moment, however, most green upskilling is driven by employees’ personal interest in the topic (26%), a trend that is expected to change as Singapore prioritises environmental goals and sustainability.
Lack of time is a major barrier to learning new skills
Upskilling and reskilling has a high impact when it comes to improving current employees’ performance, as reported by 38% of workers in Singapore. While employees benefit from upskilling, they face multiple challenges. One of the primary concerns for employees in Singapore is the lack of time to learn new skills (42%). Long working hours and caregiving responsibilities leave little time for learning. Moreover, 49% of respondents say they don’t have a grasp of which skills are in demand in the job market. Due to this lack of clarity, they struggle to decide how best to allocate their already limited time and resources in learning new skills.
Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)—which comprise 99% of all Singaporean companies and 71% of the workforce10—are particularly vulnerable to this problem, due to their limited resources and training capabilities. This results in significant information asymmetry.
Firms in Singapore can engage with resources from the government like the National Centre of Excellence’s Workplace Learning programme, which aims to promote SME reskilling by connecting firms to a pool of mentors and consultancy services.11
While access to resources is a necessary step, it's not sufficient on its own, cautions Ms Gog. Businesses need a fresh approach to make continuous learning a workplace activity and incorporate lifelong learning opportunities into their daily operations.
Some employers are being proactive: respondents report that workplace training and online learning are major sources of skills attainment. Online certificates are also recognised by employers, 56% of survey respondents say.
However, Ms Gog warns that while online learning is a useful mode of learning, it alone is not enough to promote deep learning, especially for technology skills. She talks about the importance of putting into practice what one has learnt from online courses in the workplace, and the role of mentoring, in developing deeper expertise.
Collaboration between employers and government is essential
According to our survey, government awareness programmes (61%) are a main source of skills information for employees in Singapore, ahead of social media and advertisements (45%) and news articles (44%), and substantially higher than the regional average (42.5%).
The Singapore government is driving a number of skilling initiatives through various programmes, subsidies and incentives such as school teacher credits, enterprise credits, and access to online and offline advisory services. More can be done, however, with Ms Gog suggesting that Singapore has been leveraging on “tripartisan approach”—one that engages the efforts of employees, the government and employers to enable a competitive and inclusive economy. Companies may also explore collaborations with universities or polytechnics to develop training opportunities for their employees, she adds.
Employers also have a key role to play in determining how their own skilling needs are met. Our survey reveals that workers in Singapore primarily expect employers to provide information on different skills (64%), support their mental well-being (51%), and provide notable recognition through certification and additional perks (48%). Employers should also look towards training specific skill sets for specific goals—for example, achieving cybersecurity resilience. Employers can focus on developing dedicated cybersecurity talent12 and working with government agencies to explore the requisite upskilling needs.
Moreover, to support employees in managing time, companies could make upskilling a workplace activity, ensuring that learning and working happen in tandem. Employers could also regularly monitor the skills they need and clearly communicate the same to employees. Government through its awareness programmes could continue to keep the workforce updated especially groups and organisations that lack clarity such as SMEs.
Collaboration is, and will continue to be, a crucial ingredient for Singapore’s skilling efforts. Despite the progress that the city-state has made, employers and employees must also be aware that emerging job roles are still being shaped, and that continuous learning will be the fundamental differentiator for change.
1 https://networkreadinessindex.org/reviewing-the-state-of-southeast-asias-digital-transformation-and-opportunities-for-the-region-moving-forward/
2 https://www.greenplan.gov.sg/
3 https://www.mci.gov.sg/pressroom/news-and-stories/pressroom/2023/2/speech-by-mrs-josephine-teo-minister-of-communications-and-information-at-the-ministry-of-communications-and-information-committee-of-supply-debate-on-28-february-2023
4 https://www.skillsfuture.gov.sg/skillsreport
5 https://www.frontier-enterprise.com/advanced-digital-skills-beef-up-singapore-gdp-by-s62-4-billion/#:~:text=Advanced%20digital%20skills%20include%20cloud,a%20boost%20in%20their%20income
6 https://www.zdnet.com/article/singapore-wants-all-critical-infrastructures-to-be-ready-for-cyber-threats/
7 https://www.skillsfuture.gov.sg/skills-framework/criticalcoreskills
8 https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/most-firms-hybrid-work-employees-well-being-drop-plans-1882486
9 https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/new-jobs-environment-sustainability-grace-fu-mse-633886
10 https://www.singstat.gov.sg/modules/infographics/-/media/Files/visualising_data/infographics/Economy/singapore-economy21032022.pdf
11 https://www.skillsfuture.gov.sg/nace
12 https://govinsider.asia/intl-en/article/cyber-challenges-of-a-digitalised-world-amit-roy-choudhury
The survey respondents were drawn from across 14 markets in the region, out of which 11.8% were Gen Z (born in 1997-2012), 63.2% were Millennials (1981-96) and 25% were Gen X (1965-80). They all worked in a diverse mix of industries.
The research shows that across the region, common understanding is lacking between employers and employees about future skills and the best way to develop them. In some instances, there is also an expectation mismatch between what employers want and what employees see as being important. Understanding these gaps will be instrumental in creating a workforce that is prepared for the economy of the future.
This article —one in a series of 12 market reports—examines these issues in Hong Kong. This series complements a research paper that looks at the reskilling and upskilling imperative across APAC.
Key takeaways:
Almost half (47%) of employees in Hong Kong report a poor understanding of what skills are needed in the market. Although analytical (66%) and self-management (65%) skills are top priorities for employees due to their wide application, advanced digital skills will be key to supporting Hong Kong’s digital economy aspirations. Hong Kong employees view cybersecurity (64.9%) and data analysis and visualisation (54.1%) as must-have advanced digital capabilities. Over half (51%) of employees in Hong Kong report that their employers are shifting their hiring processes to refocus on skills-based qualifications rather than full-time degrees, placing more importance on the role of employers and the government to provide support and clarity into what skills are needed in the market.Despite being a major global business hub, the city’s intensifying talent crunch#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1" title="">[1] is severely impacting its companies’ access to workers with a specific set of skills. Without action, the economy could lose out on US$220bn in unrealised value due to lack of talent by 2030.#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2" title="">[2]
The government has acknowledged the decline in the city’s workforce in the past couple of years and developed policies aimed at attracting high-skilled talent.
The future of the city’s workforce is further complicated by a rapidly ageing population.#_ftn3" name="_ftnref3" title="">[3] By 2050 roughly 40% of citizens will be aged 65 years or above.#_ftn4" name="_ftnref4" title="">[4] With longer life expectancies keeping people in the workforce for longer, sustaining Hong Kong’s economy will require a focus on empowering older workers and bolstering their skills with re-education where required.
Hong Kong employees consider analytical and self-management skills as most important
Similar to their counterparts in Australia, the Philippines and Taiwan, Hong Kong employees consider analytical (66%) and self-management (65%) skills as priority areas. This is likely due to their high degree of transferability and cross-role application (Figure 1). Apart from these skills, more than half of employees in Hong Kong consider advanced digital skills like cybersecurity (64.9%) and data analysis and visualisation (54.1%) as “must haves” (Figure 2). Hong Kong is especially vulnerable to cyber-attacks as a result of low awareness among businesses to monitor these threats. This, along with the rising cost of breaches, is driving more demand for cybersecurity skills.#_ftn5" name="_ftnref5" title="">[5]
Employees are unsure of in-demand skills
Motivations to pursue skills vary. Career progression and promotion opportunities are major drivers for workers to acquire analytical and digital skills, demonstrating their widespread application to different occupations (Figure 2). In comparison, 33% report that their pursuit of soft skills is motivated by personal development and lifelong learning. When asked about the benefits of upskilling and reskilling for their jobs, employees report significant boosts to their salaries and bargaining power (63%) and high improvements in their performance in their current role (55%).
Despite these net positives, many workers in Hong Kong report insufficient time to pursue upskilling and reskilling due to long working hours and other commitments - a trend common across all skill sets. Nearly half (47%) of surveyed employees have a poor understanding of what skills are needed in the market. Mr Jim So, regional development manager of Asia at Skills Consulting Group, shares that even when employees are offered upskilling opportunities, many choose not to pursue them because they “don’t necessarily see the direct benefits”. This might explain why only 18% of Hong Kong employees prioritise green skills, as the applications are still nascent.
The workplace’s key role in upskilling
Employers can play a central role in filling these gaps, as workplace training remains an important source for workers to acquire digital (44%), analytical (37%) and soft (32%) skills. Online courses offer another recourse to employees’ lack of time, offering flexibility and affordability. More than half (52%) of workers in our survey believe that employers now value online certificates. Experts agree. Over half (51%) of employees in Hong Kong report that their employers are shifting their hiring processes to refocus on skills-based qualifications rather than full-time degrees. In addition, recruiters are increasingly prioritising “experience, attitude and skills over paper”, according to Mr So.
Employees also expect their employers to provide information on emerging skills (65%) and offer financial incentives (62%) to reskill and support their mental well-being (44%). To remain competitive, firms could build working environments that appeal to employees’ changing needs—for instance, understanding employees’ needs and providing them with flexibility for working and learning. Furthermore, creating the right policies to enable further learning and embedding incentives would help encourage the upskilling they need to plug labour gaps. For instance, employers should look to align remuneration with skills, especially as the higher skills-based pay is a motivator for digital (25%) and analytical (30%) upskilling.
Government support can reshape Hong Kong upskilling
While employers play a crucial role in supporting the upskilling of their workforces, the government could pivot the macro-environment to incentivise and enable upskilling. One way they can do this is with financial incentives and subsidies. Several initiatives such as the Continuing Education Fund grants HK$25,000 (US$3185) to eligible adults to upskill or reskill. Recently, Hong Kong’s Innovation and Technology Commission established a programme#_ftn6" name="_ftnref6" title="">[6] that will subsidise local firms’ efforts to upskill their employees in advanced technologies.
One key role for the government is to raise awareness of in-demand skills. At present, only a quarter of Hong Kong employees receive information about future skills from government awareness programmes compared with the regional average of 42.5%. Almost a quarter of employees (27%) also identify lack of information as a significant obstacle to learning. To overcome the communication gap, the government could provide clarity on valuable future skills by publishing reports that identify in-demand skills. Working with firms and industry associations, the government could better promote specific reskilling courses that are on offer. Doing so would also support the government’s efforts to bolster its digital economy and solve its tech talent crunch.#_ftn7" name="_ftnref7" title="">[7]
There is room for improvement around developing green skills. While most employees in Hong Kong are aware of sustainability issues, says Mr So, companies could do much more to prioritise green skills and increase awareness of the commercial as well as environmental benefits they can bring. The city’s scramble for talent has accelerated with the requirement of Hong Kong-listed firms to disclose sustainability reports. However, the shortfall in talent is a significant break on the city’s aspiration to become a sustainability hub.#_ftn8" name="_ftnref8" title="">[8] In addition, most green upskilling is currently motivated by personal interest (25%). Mr So remarks that there is an opportunity for the government to step into this gap and provide “investment and support” for learners “to be able to anticipate and adapt” to a changing marketplace and environment.
#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1" title="">[1]https://focus.kornferry.com/leadership-and-talent/hong-kong-must-use-its-competitive-advantages-to-close-the-skills-gap/ #_ftnref2" name="_ftn2" title="">[2] Ibid. #_ftnref3" name="_ftn3" title="">[3] https://www.reuters.com/breakingviews/brain-drain-solution-is-staring-hong-kong-face-2022-10-19/ #_ftnref4" name="_ftn4" title="">[4] https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/02/world-oldest-populations-asia-health/ #_ftnref5" name="_ftn5" title="">[5] https://www.scmp.com/tech/tech-trends/article/3188979/hong-kong-organisations-are-easy-targets-hackers-more-cyberattacks #_ftnref6" name="_ftn6" title="">[6] https://www.itf.gov.hk/en/funding-programmes/nurturing-talent/rttp/ #_ftnref7" name="_ftn7" title="">[7]https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/hong-kong-economy/article/3201238/where-are-all-tech-experts-hong-kongs-got-plenty-jobs-not-enough-talent-and-employers-are-fed #_ftnref8" name="_ftn8" title="">[8] https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Business-trends/Hong-Kong-races-to-hire-ESG-talent-amid-green-hub-push
Yet the enthusiasm in Asia for trade does not appear to have waned. This broad societal consensus behind international trade has enabled Asian countries to continue broadening and deepening existing trading relationships, for example, by quickly hammering out a deal for the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) in early 2018 following the US’s withdrawal from its predecessor in 2017.
Asia, then, finds itself in the unique position of helping lead and sustain the global economy’s commitment to free and fair trade. It is in this context that the need for sustainability in trade is ever more crucial.
The Hinrich Foundation Sustainable Trade Index was created for the purpose of stimulating meaningful discussion of the full range of considerations that policymakers, business executives, and civil society leaders must take into account when managing and advancing international trade.
The index was commissioned by the Hinrich Foundation, a non-profit organisation focused on promoting sustainable trade. This, the second edition of the study, seeks to measure the capacity of 20 economies—19 in Asia along with the US—to participate in the international trading system in a manner that supports the long-term domestic and global goals of economic growth, environmental protection, and strengthened social capital. The index’s key findings include:
Countries in Asia, especially the richer ones, have broadly regressed in terms of trade sustainability. Hong Kong is developed Asia’s bright spot, recording a slight increase in its score and topping the 2018 index. Several middle-income countries perform admirably, led by Sri Lanka. For the economic pillar, countries generally performed well in terms of growing their labour forces as well as their per-head GDPs. For the social pillar, sharp drops for some countries in certain social pillar indicators contribute to an overall decline. For the environmental pillar, with deteriorating environmental sustainability in many rich countries, China, Laos and Pakistan are the only countries to record increases in scores. Sustainability is an ever more important determinant of FDI and vendor selection in choosing supply-chain partners. Companies are improving the sustainability of their supply chains by restructuring and broadening relationships with competitors and vendors.The Food and Agriculture Organisation’s (FAO) Food Price Index,a monthly measure of food price changes, averaged 127.2 points in April 2023. This is down 31.2 points (19.7%) from April 2022 [1].
Yet the enthusiasm in Asia for trade does not appear to have waned. This broad societal consensus behind international trade has enabled Asian countries to continue broadening and deepening existing trading relationships, for example, by quickly hammering out a deal for the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) in early 2018 following the US’s withdrawal from its predecessor in 2017.
Asia, then, finds itself in the unique position of helping lead and sustain the global economy’s commitment to free and fair trade. It is in this context that the need for sustainability in trade is ever more crucial.
The Hinrich Foundation Sustainable Trade Index was created for the purpose of stimulating meaningful discussion of the full range of considerations that policymakers, business executives, and civil society leaders must take into account when managing and advancing international trade.
The index was commissioned by the Hinrich Foundation, a non-profit organisation focused on promoting sustainable trade. This, the second edition of the study, seeks to measure the capacity of 20 economies—19 in Asia along with the US—to participate in the international trading system in a manner that supports the long-term domestic and global goals of economic growth, environmental protection, and strengthened social capital. The index’s key findings include:
Countries in Asia, especially the richer ones, have broadly regressed in terms of trade sustainability. Hong Kong is developed Asia’s bright spot, recording a slight increase in its score and topping the 2018 index. Several middle-income countries perform admirably, led by Sri Lanka. For the economic pillar, countries generally performed well in terms of growing their labour forces as well as their per-head GDPs. For the social pillar, sharp drops for some countries in certain social pillar indicators contribute to an overall decline. For the environmental pillar, with deteriorating environmental sustainability in many rich countries, China, Laos and Pakistan are the only countries to record increases in scores. Sustainability is an ever more important determinant of FDI and vendor selection in choosing supply-chain partners. Companies are improving the sustainability of their supply chains by restructuring and broadening relationships with competitors and vendors.
To measure how nations are addressing the issue of illicit trade, the Transnational Alliance to Combat Illicit Trade (TRACIT) has commissioned The Economist Intelligence Unit to produce the Global Illicit Trade Environment Index, which evaluates 84 economies around the world on their structural capability to protect against illicit trade. The global index expands upon an Asia-specific version originally created by The Economist Intelligence Unit in 2016 to score 17 economies in Asia.
View the Interactive Index >> Download workbook
The GCC-LAC agricultural trading relationship has thus far been dominated by the GCC’s reliance on food imports, specifically meat, sugar, and cereals. Over the past two years, however, there has been a notable decline in the share of sugar imported from LAC, and 2017 saw the biggest importers in the GCC—Saudi Arabia and the UAE—impose a ban on Brazilian meat.
Market players on both sides of the aisle are keen to grow the relationship further, but there are hurdles to overcome. In this report, we explore in greater depth the challenges that agricultural exporters and importers in LAC and the GCC face. We consider both tariff and non-tariff barriers and assess key facets of the trading relationship including transport links, customs and certification, market information, and trade finance.
Key findings of the report:
GCC will need to continue to build partnerships to ensure a secure supply of food. Concerns over food security have meant that the GCC countries are exploring ways to produce more food locally. However, given the region’s climate and geology, food imports will remain an important component of the food supply. Strengthening partnerships with key partners such as those in LAC, from which it sourced 9% of its total agricultural imports in 2016, will be vital to food security in the region.
There is a wider range of products that the LAC countries can offer the GCC beyond meat, sugar and cereals. Providing more direct air links and driving efficiencies in shipping can reduce the time and cost of transporting food products. This will, in turn, create opportunities for LAC exporters to supply agricultural goods with a shorter shelf life or those that are currently too expensive to transport. Exporters cite examples such as berries and avocados.
The GCC can engage small and medium-sized producers that dominate the LAC agricultural sector by offering better trade financing options and connectivity. More direct air and sea links can reduce the cost of transporting food products, making it viable for smaller players to participate in agricultural trade. The existing trade financing options make it prohibitive for small and medium-sized players too. Exporters in LAC suggest that local governments and private companies in the GCC can offer distribution services with immediate payments to smaller suppliers at a discount.
Blockchain technology is poised to address key challenges market players face in agricultural trade. Through a combination of smart contracts and data captured through devices, blockchain technology can help to reduce paperwork, processing times and human error in import and export processes. It can improve transparency, as stakeholders can receive information on the state of goods and status of shipments in real time. Finally, it can help with food safety and quality management—monitoring humidity and temperature, for instance, along the supply chain can help to pinpoint batches that may be contaminated, minimising the need for a blanket ban on a product.
The ability to work, socialise, and conduct personal and business activities online presents endless possibilities. Our understanding of its impacts on businesses, economies and the planet is still evolving. Our study shows that, overall, both executives and consumers are confident that the anywhere economy will improve economic conditions and personal lives. They also believe that embedding digitalisation in daily life can help overcome some of the inequities of modern life and accelerate the planet’s decarbonisation process.
Yet the enthusiasm in Asia for trade does not appear to have waned. This broad societal consensus behind international trade has enabled Asian countries to continue broadening and deepening existing trading relationships, for example, by quickly hammering out a deal for the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) in early 2018 following the US’s withdrawal from its predecessor in 2017.
Asia, then, finds itself in the unique position of helping lead and sustain the global economy’s commitment to free and fair trade. It is in this context that the need for sustainability in trade is ever more crucial.
The Hinrich Foundation Sustainable Trade Index was created for the purpose of stimulating meaningful discussion of the full range of considerations that policymakers, business executives, and civil society leaders must take into account when managing and advancing international trade.
The index was commissioned by the Hinrich Foundation, a non-profit organisation focused on promoting sustainable trade. This, the second edition of the study, seeks to measure the capacity of 20 economies—19 in Asia along with the US—to participate in the international trading system in a manner that supports the long-term domestic and global goals of economic growth, environmental protection, and strengthened social capital. The index’s key findings include:
Countries in Asia, especially the richer ones, have broadly regressed in terms of trade sustainability. Hong Kong is developed Asia’s bright spot, recording a slight increase in its score and topping the 2018 index. Several middle-income countries perform admirably, led by Sri Lanka. For the economic pillar, countries generally performed well in terms of growing their labour forces as well as their per-head GDPs. For the social pillar, sharp drops for some countries in certain social pillar indicators contribute to an overall decline. For the environmental pillar, with deteriorating environmental sustainability in many rich countries, China, Laos and Pakistan are the only countries to record increases in scores. Sustainability is an ever more important determinant of FDI and vendor selection in choosing supply-chain partners. Companies are improving the sustainability of their supply chains by restructuring and broadening relationships with competitors and vendors. To measure how nations are addressing the issue of illicit trade, the Transnational Alliance to Combat Illicit Trade (TRACIT) has commissioned The Economist Intelligence Unit to produce the Global Illicit Trade Environment Index, which evaluates 84 economies around the world on their structural capability to protect against illicit trade. The global index expands upon an Asia-specific version originally created by The Economist Intelligence Unit in 2016 to score 17 economies in Asia.
View the Interactive Index >> Download workbook
The GCC-LAC agricultural trading relationship has thus far been dominated by the GCC’s reliance on food imports, specifically meat, sugar, and cereals. Over the past two years, however, there has been a notable decline in the share of sugar imported from LAC, and 2017 saw the biggest importers in the GCC—Saudi Arabia and the UAE—impose a ban on Brazilian meat.
Market players on both sides of the aisle are keen to grow the relationship further, but there are hurdles to overcome. In this report, we explore in greater depth the challenges that agricultural exporters and importers in LAC and the GCC face. We consider both tariff and non-tariff barriers and assess key facets of the trading relationship including transport links, customs and certification, market information, and trade finance.
Key findings of the report:
GCC will need to continue to build partnerships to ensure a secure supply of food. Concerns over food security have meant that the GCC countries are exploring ways to produce more food locally. However, given the region’s climate and geology, food imports will remain an important component of the food supply. Strengthening partnerships with key partners such as those in LAC, from which it sourced 9% of its total agricultural imports in 2016, will be vital to food security in the region.
There is a wider range of products that the LAC countries can offer the GCC beyond meat, sugar and cereals. Providing more direct air links and driving efficiencies in shipping can reduce the time and cost of transporting food products. This will, in turn, create opportunities for LAC exporters to supply agricultural goods with a shorter shelf life or those that are currently too expensive to transport. Exporters cite examples such as berries and avocados.
The GCC can engage small and medium-sized producers that dominate the LAC agricultural sector by offering better trade financing options and connectivity. More direct air and sea links can reduce the cost of transporting food products, making it viable for smaller players to participate in agricultural trade. The existing trade financing options make it prohibitive for small and medium-sized players too. Exporters in LAC suggest that local governments and private companies in the GCC can offer distribution services with immediate payments to smaller suppliers at a discount.
Blockchain technology is poised to address key challenges market players face in agricultural trade. Through a combination of smart contracts and data captured through devices, blockchain technology can help to reduce paperwork, processing times and human error in import and export processes. It can improve transparency, as stakeholders can receive information on the state of goods and status of shipments in real time. Finally, it can help with food safety and quality management—monitoring humidity and temperature, for instance, along the supply chain can help to pinpoint batches that may be contaminated, minimising the need for a blanket ban on a product.
The covid-19 pandemic cannot be seen solely as a global health crisis; the impact on the health, livelihoods and functioning of individuals and global economies deems it a humanitarian and economic crisis. It is estimated that an additional half a billion people have fallen into poverty due to the pandemic [1].
In the UK for example, black women are four times more likely than white women to die in childbirth. Furthermore, babies that are black or black-British, Asian or Asian-British have a more than 50% higher risk of perinatal mortality, compared to white-British babies.
Typically, people with the highest incomes from dominant or majority groups enjoy the best health and the most years of their lives in good health—while people with lower incomes from marginalised groups are most vulnerable to morbidity and mortality. There is a need to think dynamically about the role of structural barriers and sociocultural influences and how they impact holistic health:this is where inclusivity in health comes in. It’s about challenging us to think differently about health: exploring new partnerships, better understanding of what good health means to the different communities within our societies, engaging with the public and thinking outside the box to bring new stakeholder groups into action.
In October we launched the Health Inclusivity Index, developed by Economist Impact and supported by Haleon. The first edition of a three-year research program assessing the state of health inclusivity in an initial 40 countries, based on three domains: health in society, inclusive health systems, and community and individual empowerment. I had the pleasure of sharing a stage with influential opinion leaders during the launch event–organised by Haleon at the Wellcome Collection—where we discussed how inclusivity is essential to better health for all. We explored the role of policy in facilitating collaboration to improve health and removing structural barriers to accessing care, and the critical need to match policy with structured implementation mechanisms.
The majority (93%) of countries in our index recognise health as a human right; only Jordan, the UAE, and the US fail to do so. All but seven countries also recognise that health (as a human right) means more than access to healthcare and includes access to safe drinking water, sanitation, food, housing and other requirements for a health-promoting environment. Despite this one in five countries have exclusionary policies or practices that explicitly restrict access to healthcare for certain groups or individuals. Six of these eight countries are also countries who claim to recognise health as a human right. Professor David Napier, professor of medical anthropology at University College London, introduced the concept of defining “who we, (the population) are”. He highlighted that governments must define “we” and this is often narrowly focused on the majority, leaving those who fall outside of this definition of ‘we’ without access to social services.
According to our findings there is a clear role for inclusivity in improving health and plugging the inequitable gap in outcomes for the most vulnerable. While life expectancy has improved globally, healthy life expectancy has not, meaning we are living more of our life in poor health. Countries with a higher inclusivity index have populations that live for longer in better health.
We know that inclusivity goes beyond the provision of services. Barriers to health prevent individuals within a population from accessing services, even when they are readily available. Services that are free at the point of use are not inclusive if they are under-resourced, low in quality, have limited hours of service, do not cater to language differences and require long-distance travel. Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson, a member of House of Lords, detailed how under-resourced they are and therefore lack the capacity to effectively respond to the overwhelming number of public requests.
People need the capacity to engage with and influence their health, recognising that many barriers are outside of their control. Examples include being time poor - lacking the time to exercise or prepare healthy food and having a job that does not pay for time off to seek healthcare. Language barriers and limited literacy skills,—particularly health literacy and the ability to understand health information. Domain 3 of our index, “Community, and Individual Empowerment”, emerged as the strongest driver of inclusivity. Countries that prioritised empowering local communities—removing these socio-cultural barriers—and placing individuals at the centre of service delivery, were among the highest-scoring for health inclusivity. Eight of the top ten scoring countries achieve their highest score in this domain. Beyond this, Domain 3 has the strongest correlation with overall inclusivity score, indicating that it is the best predictor of a country’s overall score in the index.
People need the capacity to engage with and influence their health, recognising that many barriers are outside of their control. Examples include being time poor - lacking the time to exercise or prepare healthy food and having a job that does not pay for time off to seek healthcare. Language barriers and limited literacy skills,—particularly health literacy and the ability to understand health information. Domain 3 of our index, “Community, and Individual Empowerment”, emerged as the strongest driver of inclusivity. Countries that prioritised empowering local communities—removing these socio-cultural barriers—and placing individuals at the centre of service delivery, were among the highest-scoring for health inclusivity. Eight of the top ten scoring countries achieve their highest score in this domain. Beyond this, Domain 3 has the strongest correlation with overall inclusivity score, indicating that it is the best predictor of a country’s overall score in the index.
What should be done?
Don’t stop campaigning for universal health coverage and the social determinants of wellbeing —they are critical to expanding access to healthcare particularly for the most vulnerable
Empower communities and enable self-agency:an effective approach to expanding access to whole health. During our discussions, Katy Jon Went, head of methodology at the Human Library, reminded us at the event of the “need to humanise the data” recognising that there are individuals, communities and societies behind the numbers
Work from the outside in. By deliberately supporting vulnerable groups, you will help improve health for all and remove structural barriers that mostly impact the minority
Pull in the same direction: elevate the importance of coordination to achieve common goals
Advocate for high-quality data collection, and “real-world evidence” for inclusivity
Nations must tackle all three domains of the Health Inclusivity Index to achieve an inclusive system that promotes universal wellbeing . The Health Inclusivity Index provides the first ever quantitative measure of inclusivity, but also provides a framework for countries to pull levers that drive inclusivity and improve health for all. For more information, explore the Health Inclusivity Index Hub and white paper.
Personalised healthcare for billions: Communication challenges in the post covid-19 age is a report written by Economist Impact and commissioned by WhatsApp.
Understanding the healthcare communications methods that worked during the covid-19 pandemic, and the new and innovative approaches and digital tools that facilitated this, can help guide the development of an improved approach to healthcare communications in the future. The experience of governments in managing complex healthcare challenges, such as mass vaccinations, while combating misinformation and ensuring data privacy, also provide key insights to guide the development of further digitalisation of healthcare communications and services.
Key findings from this project include:
Effective healthcare communications is critical. Beyond its sizeable physical impact, covid-19 revealed how vulnerabilities in healthcare systems have implications for health, economic progress, trust in governments, and social cohesion. It also highlighted the importance of healthcare communications to overall health among populations, and its impact on trust and national structures. Transformation of healthcare communications requires support. The need for digitalisation of healthcare communications during the pandemic shows that governments, and public and private healthcare organisations, must drive transformation through funding and access to innovation. This will ensure that the healthcare communications lessons from the pandemic are not lost, and better prepare systems to be resilient in order to respond effectively and help protect lives during future pandemics. Cooperation is key. As well as funding and guidance, partnerships between different levels of government, between governments and technology companies, and with nongovernment organisations and stakeholder groups are vital to provide an ecosystem that supports and encourages the longterm positive transformation of healthcare communications. Fundamental communications principles remain. Digitalisation enables new ways of communicating and engaging with healthcare information and services, but the fundamentals of targeting an audience, crafting reliable, trusted messages, and keeping things clear and simple remain. Humans remain at the heart of healthcare communications, and fostering their development is just as important as improving digital technology. More research is required. Investment in and development of digital tools like chatbots and telehealth that facilitate healthcare communications and services are expanding rapidly, often without sufficient evidence that these tools are effective. Further research is required into the pros and cons of such services before they are fully embraced by healthcare organisations.Economist Impact would like to thank the interviewees who generously offered their time and insights, including:
Shri Abhishek Singh: President & Chief Executive Officer, NeGD and MyGov, and Managing Director, Digital India Corporation Setiaji Setiaji: Chief of Digital Transformation Office, Ministry of Health of the Republic of Indonesia Diego Fernandez: Secretary of Innovation & Digital Transformation, City of Buenos Aires, Argentina Noella Bigirimana: Deputy Director General, Rwanda Biomedical Centre Dr Genya Dana: Global Head of Health Policy, Avellino, and former Head of Health and Healthcare, The World Economic ForumThe findings and views expressed in this report are those of Economist Impact and do not necessarily reflect the views of survey respondents, interviewees or the project sponsor.
How will digital health evolve? Will cost containment come back? Are we prepared for the next pandemic? Will mental health remain as a priority? These are common questions Economist Impact gets from stakeholders in health, nearly two-and-a-half years since covid-19 first dominated the world’s agenda. While it’s challenging to separate passing fads from long-term drivers, there are clear themes that will rightly shape the future of health. However, the path each takes is not predetermined—at least not yet.
Here are five important trends we are tracking in a post-pandemic world of health:
Is covid-19 really over?
In most of the world, the pendulum has already swung from one end to the other and back again with responses to covid-19. Long periods of strict mask adherence, widespread testing and restrictions on social interaction have given way to activities that are nearing pre-pandemic levels. A reason for this shift is due to human nature, where the combination of exhaustion and desire for normalcy drive current behaviors. However, another factor stems from changing perceptions about the virus, levels of risk posed and the anticipated movement to endemic status.
There are positive signs, such as the ratio of cases to hospitalisations and the effectiveness of vaccines, indicating a different stage in the covid-19 evolution, but it’s also clear the path forward will be both uneven and unpredictable. Countries employed varying tactics during the pandemic, from “zero-covid” strategies in China and New Zealand to a mixed-policy approach in America and the UK, but all have experienced similar or worse metrics this month, than a year before. Also, with mounting evidence about long-term health concerns for those with prior infections, we are likely to see more—not fewer— risks in the near future.
In this sense, there is a need for a balanced approach moving forward. Instead of “learning to live”with the virus, affected stakeholders—health, economic, societal—can seek out nuanced policies and integrated actions to mitigate future threats. The scars of the recent past should also spur proactive monitoring and preparation as frantic, reactive efforts across the world have already proven too costly. As covid-19 maintains an active presence, these actions allow for a greater chance of success and will also foster an environment better placed to deal with future pandemics.
What to do with the silent pandemic?
Many health experts argue that another major crisis had been prevalent before covid-19, but its slow-building nature ensured it did not attract nearly as much attention. The “silent pandemic”of non-communicable diseases (NCDs)—diabetes, cancer, respiratory and cardiovascular conditions—had plagued advanced and emerging economies for decades. This stems from a combination of underlying lifestyle choices and ageing populations. While progress had been made, countries were still falling behind targets such as Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 3.4 and the reduction of premature deaths from NCDs.
The pandemic not only halted progress but led to regression: postponement of public health screenings, disruptions in quality treatments, lower patient engagement, worsening healthy behaviors and overstretched healthcare workforce. In the past year, as much of the world has attempted to return to past care dynamics, these factors have led to a “double burden” with NCDs, where the backlog of cases weighing down fragile health systems is putting the “silent pandemic” on an even more precarious path.
Tackling this will be an ongoing effort for years to come. However, positive ramifications from the pandemic—new tools in health, better understanding of wellbeing, active support from outside of health systems—can lead to improved interventions and outcomes. A pertinent example is the current dialogue and action around mental health—in the workplace, in communities and the mainstream media— raising awareness and promoting openness to combat a critical issue. Sustaining that trend across different NCDs could lead to lasting change.
What will technology’s role be in the future health ecosystem?
Technology has long offered great potential for health; the challenge has not been generating innovative ideas, but translating them into real-world solutions. The pandemic experience—either through necessity or real progress—has in part bridged the existing gap, providing a clear roadmap for the application of tools such as “augmented intelligence” in proactive decision-making. This type of problem-solving goes beyond health, intersecting with societal challenges such as ensuring the important principle of medical neutrality in conflict zones.
The question of who will lead the way in generating impactful solutions remains. For years, expectations have been high for technology firms increasing their health presence, yet measured impact has been inconsistent at best. However, the pandemic has accelerated this movement with Alphabet’s growing investment in health and Amazon’s recent acquisition of a US primary care entity.. This trend is expected to continue, especially as the technology industry applies lessons from its role in the pandemic response towards more mainstream healthcare needs.
Where is health’s voice in the sustainability movement?
Health is intertwined with one of the world’s most important movements: the urgent need for global action towards a more sustainable planet. The recent heatwave across many parts of the world is another reminder of the importance of sustainability efforts and its relationship with health. As Natalia Kanem from the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) aptly stated at last year’s World Health Summit, “climate change affects poverty, affects hunger, certainly affects health”.
Acting upon that clear and logical connection will be a critical area of focus for health. From more eco-friendly healthcare supply chains, to access to sustainable food systems for balanced diets, a multitude of opportunities exist for stakeholders to assume greater leadership. Not only will health further strengthen the need for increased investment and attention on this issue, a “health in all policies” approach will also ensure a holistic, societal view around sustainability goals.
Will the pandemic foster a new age or will we revert to past norms?
One of the most critical lessons from the pandemic is found throughout history—the power of collective action and singular focus on a shared goal. In the case of covid-19, this was manifested through numerous collaborations: vaccine development and distribution, research and public health communication and societal interventions to slow the spread of a dangerous new virus. Actors that embraced a dedication to the “common good” instead of individual objectives, generated clear results: findings from an Economist Impact study on pandemic response is one example of many that identified stakeholder collaboration as a vital element of success.
The opportunity exists to employ the same tactic for the biggest issues that rose in importance following the pandemic: health equity, sustainable innovation and holistic wellness. Underpinning this window for seismic change is a greater recognition from actors in health and society that known problems in health require new approaches. That recognition, along with existing models of success, such as a cross-sectoral group of actors working together for healthy ageing, offer a roadmap to replicate in the future.
Tackling these issues requires the same collaborative spirit and long-run view; two dynamics that are difficult to maintain beyond moments of crisis. Indeed, a return to short-term focused, incentive-driven and siloed activity in health is likely. To ensure the window is not lost, it is vital to reframe the benefits of wellness in a way that aligns shared goals between a wider group of actors. The vision laid out by business leaders, who increasingly see health as a strategic imperative, is a signal of a larger paradigm shift in how we can collectively work towards a world of better health for all.
The past three years have given rise to a series of shocks that have affected geopolitics and global economics. Developments such as the US-China trade tensions, the covid-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine are weighing heavily on governments’ budgets. Government responses to such shocks have led to public borrowing and spending on an unprecedented scale. Traditional government budgetary processes have also been upended in response to these shocks, leading to more agility, but less transparency.
Yet the enthusiasm in Asia for trade does not appear to have waned. This broad societal consensus behind international trade has enabled Asian countries to continue broadening and deepening existing trading relationships, for example, by quickly hammering out a deal for the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) in early 2018 following the US’s withdrawal from its predecessor in 2017.
Asia, then, finds itself in the unique position of helping lead and sustain the global economy’s commitment to free and fair trade. It is in this context that the need for sustainability in trade is ever more crucial.
The Hinrich Foundation Sustainable Trade Index was created for the purpose of stimulating meaningful discussion of the full range of considerations that policymakers, business executives, and civil society leaders must take into account when managing and advancing international trade.
The index was commissioned by the Hinrich Foundation, a non-profit organisation focused on promoting sustainable trade. This, the second edition of the study, seeks to measure the capacity of 20 economies—19 in Asia along with the US—to participate in the international trading system in a manner that supports the long-term domestic and global goals of economic growth, environmental protection, and strengthened social capital. The index’s key findings include:
Countries in Asia, especially the richer ones, have broadly regressed in terms of trade sustainability. Hong Kong is developed Asia’s bright spot, recording a slight increase in its score and topping the 2018 index. Several middle-income countries perform admirably, led by Sri Lanka. For the economic pillar, countries generally performed well in terms of growing their labour forces as well as their per-head GDPs. For the social pillar, sharp drops for some countries in certain social pillar indicators contribute to an overall decline. For the environmental pillar, with deteriorating environmental sustainability in many rich countries, China, Laos and Pakistan are the only countries to record increases in scores. Sustainability is an ever more important determinant of FDI and vendor selection in choosing supply-chain partners. Companies are improving the sustainability of their supply chains by restructuring and broadening relationships with competitors and vendors. To measure how nations are addressing the issue of illicit trade, the Transnational Alliance to Combat Illicit Trade (TRACIT) has commissioned The Economist Intelligence Unit to produce the Global Illicit Trade Environment Index, which evaluates 84 economies around the world on their structural capability to protect against illicit trade. The global index expands upon an Asia-specific version originally created by The Economist Intelligence Unit in 2016 to score 17 economies in Asia.
View the Interactive Index >> Download workbook
The GCC-LAC agricultural trading relationship has thus far been dominated by the GCC’s reliance on food imports, specifically meat, sugar, and cereals. Over the past two years, however, there has been a notable decline in the share of sugar imported from LAC, and 2017 saw the biggest importers in the GCC—Saudi Arabia and the UAE—impose a ban on Brazilian meat.
Market players on both sides of the aisle are keen to grow the relationship further, but there are hurdles to overcome. In this report, we explore in greater depth the challenges that agricultural exporters and importers in LAC and the GCC face. We consider both tariff and non-tariff barriers and assess key facets of the trading relationship including transport links, customs and certification, market information, and trade finance.
Key findings of the report:
GCC will need to continue to build partnerships to ensure a secure supply of food. Concerns over food security have meant that the GCC countries are exploring ways to produce more food locally. However, given the region’s climate and geology, food imports will remain an important component of the food supply. Strengthening partnerships with key partners such as those in LAC, from which it sourced 9% of its total agricultural imports in 2016, will be vital to food security in the region.
There is a wider range of products that the LAC countries can offer the GCC beyond meat, sugar and cereals. Providing more direct air links and driving efficiencies in shipping can reduce the time and cost of transporting food products. This will, in turn, create opportunities for LAC exporters to supply agricultural goods with a shorter shelf life or those that are currently too expensive to transport. Exporters cite examples such as berries and avocados.
The GCC can engage small and medium-sized producers that dominate the LAC agricultural sector by offering better trade financing options and connectivity. More direct air and sea links can reduce the cost of transporting food products, making it viable for smaller players to participate in agricultural trade. The existing trade financing options make it prohibitive for small and medium-sized players too. Exporters in LAC suggest that local governments and private companies in the GCC can offer distribution services with immediate payments to smaller suppliers at a discount.
Blockchain technology is poised to address key challenges market players face in agricultural trade. Through a combination of smart contracts and data captured through devices, blockchain technology can help to reduce paperwork, processing times and human error in import and export processes. It can improve transparency, as stakeholders can receive information on the state of goods and status of shipments in real time. Finally, it can help with food safety and quality management—monitoring humidity and temperature, for instance, along the supply chain can help to pinpoint batches that may be contaminated, minimising the need for a blanket ban on a product.
Cooperation in a fragmented world was the theme of this year’s World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland. While cooperation was high on everyone’s agenda, there was a realisation that ongoing fragmentation was a genuine concern for the global economy. As many conversations focused on sustainability, inclusion and digitalisation, efforts are complicated by increasing geopolitical and economic uncertainty.
After many panels, roundtables and discussions at Davos, here are my three key takeaways from this year’s WEF:
Yet the enthusiasm in Asia for trade does not appear to have waned. This broad societal consensus behind international trade has enabled Asian countries to continue broadening and deepening existing trading relationships, for example, by quickly hammering out a deal for the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) in early 2018 following the US’s withdrawal from its predecessor in 2017.
Asia, then, finds itself in the unique position of helping lead and sustain the global economy’s commitment to free and fair trade. It is in this context that the need for sustainability in trade is ever more crucial.
The Hinrich Foundation Sustainable Trade Index was created for the purpose of stimulating meaningful discussion of the full range of considerations that policymakers, business executives, and civil society leaders must take into account when managing and advancing international trade.
The index was commissioned by the Hinrich Foundation, a non-profit organisation focused on promoting sustainable trade. This, the second edition of the study, seeks to measure the capacity of 20 economies—19 in Asia along with the US—to participate in the international trading system in a manner that supports the long-term domestic and global goals of economic growth, environmental protection, and strengthened social capital. The index’s key findings include:
Countries in Asia, especially the richer ones, have broadly regressed in terms of trade sustainability. Hong Kong is developed Asia’s bright spot, recording a slight increase in its score and topping the 2018 index. Several middle-income countries perform admirably, led by Sri Lanka. For the economic pillar, countries generally performed well in terms of growing their labour forces as well as their per-head GDPs. For the social pillar, sharp drops for some countries in certain social pillar indicators contribute to an overall decline. For the environmental pillar, with deteriorating environmental sustainability in many rich countries, China, Laos and Pakistan are the only countries to record increases in scores. Sustainability is an ever more important determinant of FDI and vendor selection in choosing supply-chain partners. Companies are improving the sustainability of their supply chains by restructuring and broadening relationships with competitors and vendors. To measure how nations are addressing the issue of illicit trade, the Transnational Alliance to Combat Illicit Trade (TRACIT) has commissioned The Economist Intelligence Unit to produce the Global Illicit Trade Environment Index, which evaluates 84 economies around the world on their structural capability to protect against illicit trade. The global index expands upon an Asia-specific version originally created by The Economist Intelligence Unit in 2016 to score 17 economies in Asia.
View the Interactive Index >> Download workbook
The GCC-LAC agricultural trading relationship has thus far been dominated by the GCC’s reliance on food imports, specifically meat, sugar, and cereals. Over the past two years, however, there has been a notable decline in the share of sugar imported from LAC, and 2017 saw the biggest importers in the GCC—Saudi Arabia and the UAE—impose a ban on Brazilian meat.
Market players on both sides of the aisle are keen to grow the relationship further, but there are hurdles to overcome. In this report, we explore in greater depth the challenges that agricultural exporters and importers in LAC and the GCC face. We consider both tariff and non-tariff barriers and assess key facets of the trading relationship including transport links, customs and certification, market information, and trade finance.
Key findings of the report:
GCC will need to continue to build partnerships to ensure a secure supply of food. Concerns over food security have meant that the GCC countries are exploring ways to produce more food locally. However, given the region’s climate and geology, food imports will remain an important component of the food supply. Strengthening partnerships with key partners such as those in LAC, from which it sourced 9% of its total agricultural imports in 2016, will be vital to food security in the region.
There is a wider range of products that the LAC countries can offer the GCC beyond meat, sugar and cereals. Providing more direct air links and driving efficiencies in shipping can reduce the time and cost of transporting food products. This will, in turn, create opportunities for LAC exporters to supply agricultural goods with a shorter shelf life or those that are currently too expensive to transport. Exporters cite examples such as berries and avocados.
The GCC can engage small and medium-sized producers that dominate the LAC agricultural sector by offering better trade financing options and connectivity. More direct air and sea links can reduce the cost of transporting food products, making it viable for smaller players to participate in agricultural trade. The existing trade financing options make it prohibitive for small and medium-sized players too. Exporters in LAC suggest that local governments and private companies in the GCC can offer distribution services with immediate payments to smaller suppliers at a discount.
Blockchain technology is poised to address key challenges market players face in agricultural trade. Through a combination of smart contracts and data captured through devices, blockchain technology can help to reduce paperwork, processing times and human error in import and export processes. It can improve transparency, as stakeholders can receive information on the state of goods and status of shipments in real time. Finally, it can help with food safety and quality management—monitoring humidity and temperature, for instance, along the supply chain can help to pinpoint batches that may be contaminated, minimising the need for a blanket ban on a product.
China remains the dominant manufacturing hub globally in 2023 and has been for the past ten years. So, any reshaping of supply chains due to their reversal of the zero-covid policy will not happen overnight due to the complexity that has been built up over the last decade, with China at the epicentre.
Yet the enthusiasm in Asia for trade does not appear to have waned. This broad societal consensus behind international trade has enabled Asian countries to continue broadening and deepening existing trading relationships, for example, by quickly hammering out a deal for the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) in early 2018 following the US’s withdrawal from its predecessor in 2017.
Asia, then, finds itself in the unique position of helping lead and sustain the global economy’s commitment to free and fair trade. It is in this context that the need for sustainability in trade is ever more crucial.
The Hinrich Foundation Sustainable Trade Index was created for the purpose of stimulating meaningful discussion of the full range of considerations that policymakers, business executives, and civil society leaders must take into account when managing and advancing international trade.
The index was commissioned by the Hinrich Foundation, a non-profit organisation focused on promoting sustainable trade. This, the second edition of the study, seeks to measure the capacity of 20 economies—19 in Asia along with the US—to participate in the international trading system in a manner that supports the long-term domestic and global goals of economic growth, environmental protection, and strengthened social capital. The index’s key findings include:
Countries in Asia, especially the richer ones, have broadly regressed in terms of trade sustainability. Hong Kong is developed Asia’s bright spot, recording a slight increase in its score and topping the 2018 index. Several middle-income countries perform admirably, led by Sri Lanka. For the economic pillar, countries generally performed well in terms of growing their labour forces as well as their per-head GDPs. For the social pillar, sharp drops for some countries in certain social pillar indicators contribute to an overall decline. For the environmental pillar, with deteriorating environmental sustainability in many rich countries, China, Laos and Pakistan are the only countries to record increases in scores. Sustainability is an ever more important determinant of FDI and vendor selection in choosing supply-chain partners. Companies are improving the sustainability of their supply chains by restructuring and broadening relationships with competitors and vendors. To measure how nations are addressing the issue of illicit trade, the Transnational Alliance to Combat Illicit Trade (TRACIT) has commissioned The Economist Intelligence Unit to produce the Global Illicit Trade Environment Index, which evaluates 84 economies around the world on their structural capability to protect against illicit trade. The global index expands upon an Asia-specific version originally created by The Economist Intelligence Unit in 2016 to score 17 economies in Asia.
View the Interactive Index >> Download workbook
The GCC-LAC agricultural trading relationship has thus far been dominated by the GCC’s reliance on food imports, specifically meat, sugar, and cereals. Over the past two years, however, there has been a notable decline in the share of sugar imported from LAC, and 2017 saw the biggest importers in the GCC—Saudi Arabia and the UAE—impose a ban on Brazilian meat.
Market players on both sides of the aisle are keen to grow the relationship further, but there are hurdles to overcome. In this report, we explore in greater depth the challenges that agricultural exporters and importers in LAC and the GCC face. We consider both tariff and non-tariff barriers and assess key facets of the trading relationship including transport links, customs and certification, market information, and trade finance.
Key findings of the report:
GCC will need to continue to build partnerships to ensure a secure supply of food. Concerns over food security have meant that the GCC countries are exploring ways to produce more food locally. However, given the region’s climate and geology, food imports will remain an important component of the food supply. Strengthening partnerships with key partners such as those in LAC, from which it sourced 9% of its total agricultural imports in 2016, will be vital to food security in the region.
There is a wider range of products that the LAC countries can offer the GCC beyond meat, sugar and cereals. Providing more direct air links and driving efficiencies in shipping can reduce the time and cost of transporting food products. This will, in turn, create opportunities for LAC exporters to supply agricultural goods with a shorter shelf life or those that are currently too expensive to transport. Exporters cite examples such as berries and avocados.
The GCC can engage small and medium-sized producers that dominate the LAC agricultural sector by offering better trade financing options and connectivity. More direct air and sea links can reduce the cost of transporting food products, making it viable for smaller players to participate in agricultural trade. The existing trade financing options make it prohibitive for small and medium-sized players too. Exporters in LAC suggest that local governments and private companies in the GCC can offer distribution services with immediate payments to smaller suppliers at a discount.
Blockchain technology is poised to address key challenges market players face in agricultural trade. Through a combination of smart contracts and data captured through devices, blockchain technology can help to reduce paperwork, processing times and human error in import and export processes. It can improve transparency, as stakeholders can receive information on the state of goods and status of shipments in real time. Finally, it can help with food safety and quality management—monitoring humidity and temperature, for instance, along the supply chain can help to pinpoint batches that may be contaminated, minimising the need for a blanket ban on a product.
Yet the enthusiasm in Asia for trade does not appear to have waned. This broad societal consensus behind international trade has enabled Asian countries to continue broadening and deepening existing trading relationships, for example, by quickly hammering out a deal for the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) in early 2018 following the US’s withdrawal from its predecessor in 2017.
Asia, then, finds itself in the unique position of helping lead and sustain the global economy’s commitment to free and fair trade. It is in this context that the need for sustainability in trade is ever more crucial.
The Hinrich Foundation Sustainable Trade Index was created for the purpose of stimulating meaningful discussion of the full range of considerations that policymakers, business executives, and civil society leaders must take into account when managing and advancing international trade.
The index was commissioned by the Hinrich Foundation, a non-profit organisation focused on promoting sustainable trade. This, the second edition of the study, seeks to measure the capacity of 20 economies—19 in Asia along with the US—to participate in the international trading system in a manner that supports the long-term domestic and global goals of economic growth, environmental protection, and strengthened social capital. The index’s key findings include:
Countries in Asia, especially the richer ones, have broadly regressed in terms of trade sustainability. Hong Kong is developed Asia’s bright spot, recording a slight increase in its score and topping the 2018 index. Several middle-income countries perform admirably, led by Sri Lanka. For the economic pillar, countries generally performed well in terms of growing their labour forces as well as their per-head GDPs. For the social pillar, sharp drops for some countries in certain social pillar indicators contribute to an overall decline. For the environmental pillar, with deteriorating environmental sustainability in many rich countries, China, Laos and Pakistan are the only countries to record increases in scores. Sustainability is an ever more important determinant of FDI and vendor selection in choosing supply-chain partners. Companies are improving the sustainability of their supply chains by restructuring and broadening relationships with competitors and vendors. To measure how nations are addressing the issue of illicit trade, the Transnational Alliance to Combat Illicit Trade (TRACIT) has commissioned The Economist Intelligence Unit to produce the Global Illicit Trade Environment Index, which evaluates 84 economies around the world on their structural capability to protect against illicit trade. The global index expands upon an Asia-specific version originally created by The Economist Intelligence Unit in 2016 to score 17 economies in Asia.
View the Interactive Index >> Download workbook
The GCC-LAC agricultural trading relationship has thus far been dominated by the GCC’s reliance on food imports, specifically meat, sugar, and cereals. Over the past two years, however, there has been a notable decline in the share of sugar imported from LAC, and 2017 saw the biggest importers in the GCC—Saudi Arabia and the UAE—impose a ban on Brazilian meat.
Market players on both sides of the aisle are keen to grow the relationship further, but there are hurdles to overcome. In this report, we explore in greater depth the challenges that agricultural exporters and importers in LAC and the GCC face. We consider both tariff and non-tariff barriers and assess key facets of the trading relationship including transport links, customs and certification, market information, and trade finance.
Key findings of the report:
GCC will need to continue to build partnerships to ensure a secure supply of food. Concerns over food security have meant that the GCC countries are exploring ways to produce more food locally. However, given the region’s climate and geology, food imports will remain an important component of the food supply. Strengthening partnerships with key partners such as those in LAC, from which it sourced 9% of its total agricultural imports in 2016, will be vital to food security in the region.
There is a wider range of products that the LAC countries can offer the GCC beyond meat, sugar and cereals. Providing more direct air links and driving efficiencies in shipping can reduce the time and cost of transporting food products. This will, in turn, create opportunities for LAC exporters to supply agricultural goods with a shorter shelf life or those that are currently too expensive to transport. Exporters cite examples such as berries and avocados.
The GCC can engage small and medium-sized producers that dominate the LAC agricultural sector by offering better trade financing options and connectivity. More direct air and sea links can reduce the cost of transporting food products, making it viable for smaller players to participate in agricultural trade. The existing trade financing options make it prohibitive for small and medium-sized players too. Exporters in LAC suggest that local governments and private companies in the GCC can offer distribution services with immediate payments to smaller suppliers at a discount.
Blockchain technology is poised to address key challenges market players face in agricultural trade. Through a combination of smart contracts and data captured through devices, blockchain technology can help to reduce paperwork, processing times and human error in import and export processes. It can improve transparency, as stakeholders can receive information on the state of goods and status of shipments in real time. Finally, it can help with food safety and quality management—monitoring humidity and temperature, for instance, along the supply chain can help to pinpoint batches that may be contaminated, minimising the need for a blanket ban on a product.
Although trade is still expected to grow in 2023, the outlook is worse than 2022. The global economy is still facing multiple headwinds, including the war in Ukraine and the perpetual US-China tensions.
The WTO initially estimated that global merchandise trade would grow by 3.4% in 2023. This has been revised down by 2.4 percentage points accounting for both demand and supply side shocks [1].
Yet the enthusiasm in Asia for trade does not appear to have waned. This broad societal consensus behind international trade has enabled Asian countries to continue broadening and deepening existing trading relationships, for example, by quickly hammering out a deal for the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) in early 2018 following the US’s withdrawal from its predecessor in 2017.
Asia, then, finds itself in the unique position of helping lead and sustain the global economy’s commitment to free and fair trade. It is in this context that the need for sustainability in trade is ever more crucial.
The Hinrich Foundation Sustainable Trade Index was created for the purpose of stimulating meaningful discussion of the full range of considerations that policymakers, business executives, and civil society leaders must take into account when managing and advancing international trade.
The index was commissioned by the Hinrich Foundation, a non-profit organisation focused on promoting sustainable trade. This, the second edition of the study, seeks to measure the capacity of 20 economies—19 in Asia along with the US—to participate in the international trading system in a manner that supports the long-term domestic and global goals of economic growth, environmental protection, and strengthened social capital. The index’s key findings include:
Countries in Asia, especially the richer ones, have broadly regressed in terms of trade sustainability. Hong Kong is developed Asia’s bright spot, recording a slight increase in its score and topping the 2018 index. Several middle-income countries perform admirably, led by Sri Lanka. For the economic pillar, countries generally performed well in terms of growing their labour forces as well as their per-head GDPs. For the social pillar, sharp drops for some countries in certain social pillar indicators contribute to an overall decline. For the environmental pillar, with deteriorating environmental sustainability in many rich countries, China, Laos and Pakistan are the only countries to record increases in scores. Sustainability is an ever more important determinant of FDI and vendor selection in choosing supply-chain partners. Companies are improving the sustainability of their supply chains by restructuring and broadening relationships with competitors and vendors. To measure how nations are addressing the issue of illicit trade, the Transnational Alliance to Combat Illicit Trade (TRACIT) has commissioned The Economist Intelligence Unit to produce the Global Illicit Trade Environment Index, which evaluates 84 economies around the world on their structural capability to protect against illicit trade. The global index expands upon an Asia-specific version originally created by The Economist Intelligence Unit in 2016 to score 17 economies in Asia.
View the Interactive Index >> Download workbook
The GCC-LAC agricultural trading relationship has thus far been dominated by the GCC’s reliance on food imports, specifically meat, sugar, and cereals. Over the past two years, however, there has been a notable decline in the share of sugar imported from LAC, and 2017 saw the biggest importers in the GCC—Saudi Arabia and the UAE—impose a ban on Brazilian meat.
Market players on both sides of the aisle are keen to grow the relationship further, but there are hurdles to overcome. In this report, we explore in greater depth the challenges that agricultural exporters and importers in LAC and the GCC face. We consider both tariff and non-tariff barriers and assess key facets of the trading relationship including transport links, customs and certification, market information, and trade finance.
Key findings of the report:
GCC will need to continue to build partnerships to ensure a secure supply of food. Concerns over food security have meant that the GCC countries are exploring ways to produce more food locally. However, given the region’s climate and geology, food imports will remain an important component of the food supply. Strengthening partnerships with key partners such as those in LAC, from which it sourced 9% of its total agricultural imports in 2016, will be vital to food security in the region.
There is a wider range of products that the LAC countries can offer the GCC beyond meat, sugar and cereals. Providing more direct air links and driving efficiencies in shipping can reduce the time and cost of transporting food products. This will, in turn, create opportunities for LAC exporters to supply agricultural goods with a shorter shelf life or those that are currently too expensive to transport. Exporters cite examples such as berries and avocados.
The GCC can engage small and medium-sized producers that dominate the LAC agricultural sector by offering better trade financing options and connectivity. More direct air and sea links can reduce the cost of transporting food products, making it viable for smaller players to participate in agricultural trade. The existing trade financing options make it prohibitive for small and medium-sized players too. Exporters in LAC suggest that local governments and private companies in the GCC can offer distribution services with immediate payments to smaller suppliers at a discount.
Blockchain technology is poised to address key challenges market players face in agricultural trade. Through a combination of smart contracts and data captured through devices, blockchain technology can help to reduce paperwork, processing times and human error in import and export processes. It can improve transparency, as stakeholders can receive information on the state of goods and status of shipments in real time. Finally, it can help with food safety and quality management—monitoring humidity and temperature, for instance, along the supply chain can help to pinpoint batches that may be contaminated, minimising the need for a blanket ban on a product.
It will be another challenging year for the global economy in 2023. The long-lasting effects of covid, macroeconomic shocks and geopolitical risks will likely lead to a global recession. Like most crises, the poor will be disproportionately affected. The World Bank estimates that by the end of 2022, as many as 685 million people will be living in extreme poverty [1].
Yet the enthusiasm in Asia for trade does not appear to have waned. This broad societal consensus behind international trade has enabled Asian countries to continue broadening and deepening existing trading relationships, for example, by quickly hammering out a deal for the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) in early 2018 following the US’s withdrawal from its predecessor in 2017.
Asia, then, finds itself in the unique position of helping lead and sustain the global economy’s commitment to free and fair trade. It is in this context that the need for sustainability in trade is ever more crucial.
The Hinrich Foundation Sustainable Trade Index was created for the purpose of stimulating meaningful discussion of the full range of considerations that policymakers, business executives, and civil society leaders must take into account when managing and advancing international trade.
The index was commissioned by the Hinrich Foundation, a non-profit organisation focused on promoting sustainable trade. This, the second edition of the study, seeks to measure the capacity of 20 economies—19 in Asia along with the US—to participate in the international trading system in a manner that supports the long-term domestic and global goals of economic growth, environmental protection, and strengthened social capital. The index’s key findings include:
Countries in Asia, especially the richer ones, have broadly regressed in terms of trade sustainability. Hong Kong is developed Asia’s bright spot, recording a slight increase in its score and topping the 2018 index. Several middle-income countries perform admirably, led by Sri Lanka. For the economic pillar, countries generally performed well in terms of growing their labour forces as well as their per-head GDPs. For the social pillar, sharp drops for some countries in certain social pillar indicators contribute to an overall decline. For the environmental pillar, with deteriorating environmental sustainability in many rich countries, China, Laos and Pakistan are the only countries to record increases in scores. Sustainability is an ever more important determinant of FDI and vendor selection in choosing supply-chain partners. Companies are improving the sustainability of their supply chains by restructuring and broadening relationships with competitors and vendors. To measure how nations are addressing the issue of illicit trade, the Transnational Alliance to Combat Illicit Trade (TRACIT) has commissioned The Economist Intelligence Unit to produce the Global Illicit Trade Environment Index, which evaluates 84 economies around the world on their structural capability to protect against illicit trade. The global index expands upon an Asia-specific version originally created by The Economist Intelligence Unit in 2016 to score 17 economies in Asia.
View the Interactive Index >> Download workbook
The GCC-LAC agricultural trading relationship has thus far been dominated by the GCC’s reliance on food imports, specifically meat, sugar, and cereals. Over the past two years, however, there has been a notable decline in the share of sugar imported from LAC, and 2017 saw the biggest importers in the GCC—Saudi Arabia and the UAE—impose a ban on Brazilian meat.
Market players on both sides of the aisle are keen to grow the relationship further, but there are hurdles to overcome. In this report, we explore in greater depth the challenges that agricultural exporters and importers in LAC and the GCC face. We consider both tariff and non-tariff barriers and assess key facets of the trading relationship including transport links, customs and certification, market information, and trade finance.
Key findings of the report:
GCC will need to continue to build partnerships to ensure a secure supply of food. Concerns over food security have meant that the GCC countries are exploring ways to produce more food locally. However, given the region’s climate and geology, food imports will remain an important component of the food supply. Strengthening partnerships with key partners such as those in LAC, from which it sourced 9% of its total agricultural imports in 2016, will be vital to food security in the region.
There is a wider range of products that the LAC countries can offer the GCC beyond meat, sugar and cereals. Providing more direct air links and driving efficiencies in shipping can reduce the time and cost of transporting food products. This will, in turn, create opportunities for LAC exporters to supply agricultural goods with a shorter shelf life or those that are currently too expensive to transport. Exporters cite examples such as berries and avocados.
The GCC can engage small and medium-sized producers that dominate the LAC agricultural sector by offering better trade financing options and connectivity. More direct air and sea links can reduce the cost of transporting food products, making it viable for smaller players to participate in agricultural trade. The existing trade financing options make it prohibitive for small and medium-sized players too. Exporters in LAC suggest that local governments and private companies in the GCC can offer distribution services with immediate payments to smaller suppliers at a discount.
Blockchain technology is poised to address key challenges market players face in agricultural trade. Through a combination of smart contracts and data captured through devices, blockchain technology can help to reduce paperwork, processing times and human error in import and export processes. It can improve transparency, as stakeholders can receive information on the state of goods and status of shipments in real time. Finally, it can help with food safety and quality management—monitoring humidity and temperature, for instance, along the supply chain can help to pinpoint batches that may be contaminated, minimising the need for a blanket ban on a product.