新加坡民眾一直在期待該國(guó)政府解除當(dāng)前的防疫限制。然而,由于擔(dān)心醫(yī)療保健系統(tǒng)會(huì)出現(xiàn)不堪重負(fù)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn),10月20日,新加坡政府決定將原定于10月24日解除的防疫限制再延長(zhǎng)一個(gè)月,其中包括對(duì)社交聚會(huì)的限制以及強(qiáng)制居家辦公的要求。
有關(guān)這一數(shù)據(jù)的詳盡分析顯示,很大一部分需要急癥護(hù)理的病患屬于那些可以接種但未接種新冠疫苗的人群,而這些人群僅占總?cè)丝诘?%,其中的高危人群都是老年人。因此,新加坡人也想知道,為什么防疫舉措偏向了少數(shù)人群,而這些人的選擇將為整個(gè)國(guó)家?guī)?lái)巨大的外部效應(yīng)。
新加坡未來(lái)的道路并不平坦。在國(guó)內(nèi),新加坡正在試圖決定到底是依靠政策“好言相勸”,例如要求未接種人群支付其自身的醫(yī)療成本或強(qiáng)制接種,還是通過(guò)不斷延長(zhǎng)的防疫限制繼續(xù)在困境中徘徊。然而,這座城市也正在嘗試面向國(guó)際旅行和活動(dòng)開(kāi)放其國(guó)界。
各類(lèi)政府聲明,比如總理李顯龍?jiān)?0月9日發(fā)表的演講,都表達(dá)了向“與病毒共存”這種生活方式轉(zhuǎn)變的愿望。這樣,這個(gè)城邦國(guó)家便能夠面向國(guó)內(nèi)和國(guó)際重新開(kāi)放。在李顯龍發(fā)表演講之后,新加坡政府又針對(duì)那些出現(xiàn)輕度或無(wú)癥狀患者發(fā)布了“居家康復(fù)計(jì)劃”(Home Recovery Programme),并在已有的兩個(gè)國(guó)家之外新增了8個(gè)可以享受“已接種游客旅行通道”(Vaccinated Travel Lanes)的國(guó)家。
像總理這個(gè)級(jí)別的政府領(lǐng)袖的明確表態(tài)十分重要。當(dāng)新冠肺炎病例的激增迫使衛(wèi)生部門(mén)重新強(qiáng)制實(shí)施一些社交隔離限制時(shí),包括本人在內(nèi)的一些觀察家認(rèn)為,這類(lèi)政策轉(zhuǎn)變說(shuō)明新加坡政府對(duì)于其新冠疫情策略沒(méi)有多少把握。包括彭博社(Bloomberg)和《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》(New York Times)在內(nèi)的外國(guó)媒體則認(rèn)為,新加坡政府內(nèi)部存在分歧。
新加坡因?yàn)槠鋵?shí)用主義而聞名,安全、周密的重新開(kāi)放有助于鞏固這一聲譽(yù),但上述政策的變化可能會(huì)為其帶來(lái)些許負(fù)面影響。這座城市長(zhǎng)期以來(lái)一直都是經(jīng)濟(jì)和社會(huì)發(fā)展成功學(xué)領(lǐng)域的研究案例,而且其對(duì)自由貿(mào)易的投入可謂無(wú)人能及,同時(shí)也是東西方開(kāi)展貿(mào)易的首選戰(zhàn)略合作伙伴。
這些成就源于該國(guó)政府效力和高效的公共管理,也造就了新加坡在這一方面的良好聲譽(yù)。世界其他地區(qū)在羨慕新加坡的同時(shí)還將其視作有關(guān)優(yōu)秀政府治國(guó)有方的教科書(shū)。
然而,殘酷的事實(shí)在于,盡管新加坡的生存之道在于緊跟全球經(jīng)濟(jì)形勢(shì),但全球經(jīng)濟(jì)在沒(méi)有新加坡的情況下依然可以欣欣向榮。隨著世界各國(guó)開(kāi)始思考新冠疫情后的格局,新加坡需要制定一套靈活的策略,來(lái)確保其在全球經(jīng)濟(jì)中的現(xiàn)有地位。
此外,新加坡也有望繼續(xù)成為其他國(guó)家和政府學(xué)習(xí)的榜樣。李顯龍總理的演講雖然針對(duì)的是本國(guó)民眾,但也折射了國(guó)際社會(huì):國(guó)際商界、資本市場(chǎng)和戰(zhàn)略合作伙伴與“新加坡故事”的延續(xù)息息相關(guān)。
因此,新加坡如何管理新冠疫情不僅關(guān)乎本國(guó),同時(shí)還涉及大量的海外利益相關(guān)方。
由于最初的新冠肺炎病例數(shù)量較低,新加坡政策一開(kāi)始被國(guó)際社會(huì)譽(yù)為新冠疫情管理的“金科玉律”。然而,隨著新冠疫情橫掃人口眾多的移民工人宿舍,事態(tài)急轉(zhuǎn)直下,新加坡政府在此之后實(shí)施了長(zhǎng)達(dá)7周的禁令,美其名曰“熔斷機(jī)制”。新加坡還頒布了旅行限制令;那些已經(jīng)離開(kāi)新加坡的民眾無(wú)法輕易返回新加坡,因?yàn)樵搰?guó)政府擔(dān)心他們會(huì)將新冠病毒帶回國(guó)內(nèi)。
這一控制新冠病毒傳播的策略奏效了:社區(qū)病例在2020年下半年大幅下降。
然而這一舉措亦有其代價(jià)。
新加坡的經(jīng)濟(jì)經(jīng)歷了獨(dú)立之后最嚴(yán)重的蕭條,盡管實(shí)施了略多于1000億新加坡元的財(cái)政刺激,但其經(jīng)濟(jì)依然下滑了5.8%。今年9月,新加坡政府自1970年之后首次宣布新加坡人口出現(xiàn)了4.1%的負(fù)增長(zhǎng),主要?dú)w咎于新冠疫情期間非居民數(shù)量的減少。
作為一項(xiàng)逆周期舉措,新加坡在2020年引入了前所未有的五項(xiàng)預(yù)算,旨在于經(jīng)濟(jì)支持和刺激領(lǐng)域投入1000多億新加坡元。
盡管新加坡的新冠疫苗接種因?yàn)楣?yīng)的限制而在一開(kāi)始進(jìn)展緩慢,但該計(jì)劃在近期開(kāi)始加速,人口的完全接種率達(dá)到了84%。然而,每日新增的新冠肺炎病例數(shù)量卻有所增長(zhǎng),致使該國(guó)政府多次進(jìn)入“高度警戒狀態(tài)”,并限制就餐人數(shù),同時(shí)強(qiáng)制企業(yè)默認(rèn)采取居家辦公的安排。最大的問(wèn)題在于,重癥監(jiān)護(hù)室使用率如今在79%至84%之間波動(dòng)。目前,新加坡正在為30歲以上人士進(jìn)行新冠疫苗的加強(qiáng)接種。
很明顯,繼續(xù)執(zhí)行2020年的防控策略是難以為繼的。德?tīng)査兎N病毒的傳染性要強(qiáng)得多,因此防控的難度也要大很多。激進(jìn)的防控策略會(huì)帶來(lái)諸多社會(huì)和經(jīng)濟(jì)成本,受影響最嚴(yán)重的莫過(guò)于占據(jù)其公司總數(shù)99%、雇傭其73%居民的中小企業(yè)。此外,具有諷刺意味的是,新加坡在接種方面的成功意味著該國(guó)能夠用于加強(qiáng)防護(hù)的手段已經(jīng)是寥寥無(wú)幾。
新加坡并非是唯一一個(gè)考慮開(kāi)放國(guó)界的國(guó)家。我們的鄰居馬來(lái)西亞已經(jīng)接納了“與病毒共存”的策略,為消除國(guó)內(nèi)和國(guó)際旅行的障礙鋪平了道路。盡管澳大利亞也有著異常嚴(yán)格的禁旅令,有時(shí)候甚至連本國(guó)公民都無(wú)法入境,但它如今也承諾到11月面向國(guó)際旅行開(kāi)放。以旅游為經(jīng)濟(jì)支柱的泰國(guó)正在探索通過(guò)各種方式吸引游客回歸。
新加坡向來(lái)以其先見(jiàn)之明、大膽的舉措、進(jìn)行艱難抉擇、在危機(jī)中的韌性,以及最為重要的品質(zhì)——實(shí)用主義,而著稱(chēng)。新加坡將有機(jī)會(huì)利用重新開(kāi)放策略告訴整個(gè)世界,這個(gè)國(guó)家依然還是如此。否則,世人可能會(huì)在不經(jīng)意間看到一個(gè)不一樣的新加坡:一個(gè)優(yōu)柔寡斷、缺乏遠(yuǎn)見(jiàn)和勇氣的新加坡。(財(cái)富中文網(wǎng))
德瓦達(dá)斯·克里希納達(dá)斯是Future-Moves Group的創(chuàng)始人及首席執(zhí)行官,這是一家總部位于新加坡的管理咨詢(xún)公司。他此前曾經(jīng)是新加坡政府的一名政策官員,還著有《應(yīng)對(duì)新冠疫情:領(lǐng)袖和決策者們的戰(zhàn)略手冊(cè)》(Confronting COVID-19: A Strategic Playbook for Leaders and Decision Makers)一書(shū)。
譯者:馮豐
審校:夏林
新加坡民眾一直在期待該國(guó)政府解除當(dāng)前的防疫限制。然而,由于擔(dān)心醫(yī)療保健系統(tǒng)會(huì)出現(xiàn)不堪重負(fù)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn),10月20日,新加坡政府決定將原定于10月24日解除的防疫限制再延長(zhǎng)一個(gè)月,其中包括對(duì)社交聚會(huì)的限制以及強(qiáng)制居家辦公的要求。
有關(guān)這一數(shù)據(jù)的詳盡分析顯示,很大一部分需要急癥護(hù)理的病患屬于那些可以接種但未接種新冠疫苗的人群,而這些人群僅占總?cè)丝诘?%,其中的高危人群都是老年人。因此,新加坡人也想知道,為什么防疫舉措偏向了少數(shù)人群,而這些人的選擇將為整個(gè)國(guó)家?guī)?lái)巨大的外部效應(yīng)。
新加坡未來(lái)的道路并不平坦。在國(guó)內(nèi),新加坡正在試圖決定到底是依靠政策“好言相勸”,例如要求未接種人群支付其自身的醫(yī)療成本或強(qiáng)制接種,還是通過(guò)不斷延長(zhǎng)的防疫限制繼續(xù)在困境中徘徊。然而,這座城市也正在嘗試面向國(guó)際旅行和活動(dòng)開(kāi)放其國(guó)界。
各類(lèi)政府聲明,比如總理李顯龍?jiān)?0月9日發(fā)表的演講,都表達(dá)了向“與病毒共存”這種生活方式轉(zhuǎn)變的愿望。這樣,這個(gè)城邦國(guó)家便能夠面向國(guó)內(nèi)和國(guó)際重新開(kāi)放。在李顯龍發(fā)表演講之后,新加坡政府又針對(duì)那些出現(xiàn)輕度或無(wú)癥狀患者發(fā)布了“居家康復(fù)計(jì)劃”(Home Recovery Programme),并在已有的兩個(gè)國(guó)家之外新增了8個(gè)可以享受“已接種游客旅行通道”(Vaccinated Travel Lanes)的國(guó)家。
像總理這個(gè)級(jí)別的政府領(lǐng)袖的明確表態(tài)十分重要。當(dāng)新冠肺炎病例的激增迫使衛(wèi)生部門(mén)重新強(qiáng)制實(shí)施一些社交隔離限制時(shí),包括本人在內(nèi)的一些觀察家認(rèn)為,這類(lèi)政策轉(zhuǎn)變說(shuō)明新加坡政府對(duì)于其新冠疫情策略沒(méi)有多少把握。包括彭博社(Bloomberg)和《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》(New York Times)在內(nèi)的外國(guó)媒體則認(rèn)為,新加坡政府內(nèi)部存在分歧。
新加坡因?yàn)槠鋵?shí)用主義而聞名,安全、周密的重新開(kāi)放有助于鞏固這一聲譽(yù),但上述政策的變化可能會(huì)為其帶來(lái)些許負(fù)面影響。這座城市長(zhǎng)期以來(lái)一直都是經(jīng)濟(jì)和社會(huì)發(fā)展成功學(xué)領(lǐng)域的研究案例,而且其對(duì)自由貿(mào)易的投入可謂無(wú)人能及,同時(shí)也是東西方開(kāi)展貿(mào)易的首選戰(zhàn)略合作伙伴。
這些成就源于該國(guó)政府效力和高效的公共管理,也造就了新加坡在這一方面的良好聲譽(yù)。世界其他地區(qū)在羨慕新加坡的同時(shí)還將其視作有關(guān)優(yōu)秀政府治國(guó)有方的教科書(shū)。
然而,殘酷的事實(shí)在于,盡管新加坡的生存之道在于緊跟全球經(jīng)濟(jì)形勢(shì),但全球經(jīng)濟(jì)在沒(méi)有新加坡的情況下依然可以欣欣向榮。隨著世界各國(guó)開(kāi)始思考新冠疫情后的格局,新加坡需要制定一套靈活的策略,來(lái)確保其在全球經(jīng)濟(jì)中的現(xiàn)有地位。
此外,新加坡也有望繼續(xù)成為其他國(guó)家和政府學(xué)習(xí)的榜樣。李顯龍總理的演講雖然針對(duì)的是本國(guó)民眾,但也折射了國(guó)際社會(huì):國(guó)際商界、資本市場(chǎng)和戰(zhàn)略合作伙伴與“新加坡故事”的延續(xù)息息相關(guān)。
因此,新加坡如何管理新冠疫情不僅關(guān)乎本國(guó),同時(shí)還涉及大量的海外利益相關(guān)方。
由于最初的新冠肺炎病例數(shù)量較低,新加坡政策一開(kāi)始被國(guó)際社會(huì)譽(yù)為新冠疫情管理的“金科玉律”。然而,隨著新冠疫情橫掃人口眾多的移民工人宿舍,事態(tài)急轉(zhuǎn)直下,新加坡政府在此之后實(shí)施了長(zhǎng)達(dá)7周的禁令,美其名曰“熔斷機(jī)制”。新加坡還頒布了旅行限制令;那些已經(jīng)離開(kāi)新加坡的民眾無(wú)法輕易返回新加坡,因?yàn)樵搰?guó)政府擔(dān)心他們會(huì)將新冠病毒帶回國(guó)內(nèi)。
這一控制新冠病毒傳播的策略奏效了:社區(qū)病例在2020年下半年大幅下降。
然而這一舉措亦有其代價(jià)。
新加坡的經(jīng)濟(jì)經(jīng)歷了獨(dú)立之后最嚴(yán)重的蕭條,盡管實(shí)施了略多于1000億新加坡元的財(cái)政刺激,但其經(jīng)濟(jì)依然下滑了5.8%。今年9月,新加坡政府自1970年之后首次宣布新加坡人口出現(xiàn)了4.1%的負(fù)增長(zhǎng),主要?dú)w咎于新冠疫情期間非居民數(shù)量的減少。
作為一項(xiàng)逆周期舉措,新加坡在2020年引入了前所未有的五項(xiàng)預(yù)算,旨在于經(jīng)濟(jì)支持和刺激領(lǐng)域投入1000多億新加坡元。
盡管新加坡的新冠疫苗接種因?yàn)楣?yīng)的限制而在一開(kāi)始進(jìn)展緩慢,但該計(jì)劃在近期開(kāi)始加速,人口的完全接種率達(dá)到了84%。然而,每日新增的新冠肺炎病例數(shù)量卻有所增長(zhǎng),致使該國(guó)政府多次進(jìn)入“高度警戒狀態(tài)”,并限制就餐人數(shù),同時(shí)強(qiáng)制企業(yè)默認(rèn)采取居家辦公的安排。最大的問(wèn)題在于,重癥監(jiān)護(hù)室使用率如今在79%至84%之間波動(dòng)。目前,新加坡正在為30歲以上人士進(jìn)行新冠疫苗的加強(qiáng)接種。
很明顯,繼續(xù)執(zhí)行2020年的防控策略是難以為繼的。德?tīng)査兎N病毒的傳染性要強(qiáng)得多,因此防控的難度也要大很多。激進(jìn)的防控策略會(huì)帶來(lái)諸多社會(huì)和經(jīng)濟(jì)成本,受影響最嚴(yán)重的莫過(guò)于占據(jù)其公司總數(shù)99%、雇傭其73%居民的中小企業(yè)。此外,具有諷刺意味的是,新加坡在接種方面的成功意味著該國(guó)能夠用于加強(qiáng)防護(hù)的手段已經(jīng)是寥寥無(wú)幾。
新加坡并非是唯一一個(gè)考慮開(kāi)放國(guó)界的國(guó)家。我們的鄰居馬來(lái)西亞已經(jīng)接納了“與病毒共存”的策略,為消除國(guó)內(nèi)和國(guó)際旅行的障礙鋪平了道路。盡管澳大利亞也有著異常嚴(yán)格的禁旅令,有時(shí)候甚至連本國(guó)公民都無(wú)法入境,但它如今也承諾到11月面向國(guó)際旅行開(kāi)放。以旅游為經(jīng)濟(jì)支柱的泰國(guó)正在探索通過(guò)各種方式吸引游客回歸。
新加坡向來(lái)以其先見(jiàn)之明、大膽的舉措、進(jìn)行艱難抉擇、在危機(jī)中的韌性,以及最為重要的品質(zhì)——實(shí)用主義,而著稱(chēng)。新加坡將有機(jī)會(huì)利用重新開(kāi)放策略告訴整個(gè)世界,這個(gè)國(guó)家依然還是如此。否則,世人可能會(huì)在不經(jīng)意間看到一個(gè)不一樣的新加坡:一個(gè)優(yōu)柔寡斷、缺乏遠(yuǎn)見(jiàn)和勇氣的新加坡。(財(cái)富中文網(wǎng))
德瓦達(dá)斯·克里希納達(dá)斯是Future-Moves Group的創(chuàng)始人及首席執(zhí)行官,這是一家總部位于新加坡的管理咨詢(xún)公司。他此前曾經(jīng)是新加坡政府的一名政策官員,還著有《應(yīng)對(duì)新冠疫情:領(lǐng)袖和決策者們的戰(zhàn)略手冊(cè)》(Confronting COVID-19: A Strategic Playbook for Leaders and Decision Makers)一書(shū)。
譯者:馮豐
審校:夏林
Singaporeans were looking forward to the lifting of current restrictions, originally due to end on Oct. 24. Instead, on Oct. 20, the government decided to extend restrictions—such as constraints on social gatherings and mandating work from home—by an additional month, citing the potential strain on health care capacity.
A close analysis of the data shows that a significant proportion of the cases that require acute care come from the 6% of the population who are unvaccinated despite being eligible, the most vulnerable portion of whom are seniors. Thus, Singaporeans are asking why they are being held hostage by a minority, whose choice is placing a huge externality on the rest of the nation.
Singapore has a tough path to tread. Domestically, it is trying to determine whether it will rely on policy “nudges”—such as requiring the unvaccinated to pay their own health care costs or mandating vaccination—or stutter in limbo with ever-extending restrictions. Yet the city is also trying to open its borders to international travel and events.
Government statements, like the speech delivered by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on Oct. 9, show the desire to pivot to a “l(fā)iving with the virus” approach that allows the city-state to reopen domestically and internationally. Lee’s speech was followed by the announcement of a Home Recovery Programme for those with mild or no symptoms and the opening up of eight more countries to “Vaccinated Travel Lanes” in addition to the two already activated.
The clarity from leaders like the prime minister is important. When a surge in COVID cases had prompted health authorities to reimpose some social distancing restrictions, some observers—including me—argued that these policy shifts showed a city government unsure of its COVID strategy. Foreign outlets including Bloomberg and the New York Times suggested there were divisions in the government.
Singapore’s reputation as a pragmatic nation—which may be floundering a little in the wake of its policy shifts—will be bolstered by a safe and well thought out reopening. The city has long been a case study for economic and social success, with an unrivaled commitment to free trade, and is the go-to strategic partner for trade between East and West.
These achievements were built upon and helped to build a reputation for effective government and efficient public administration. The rest of the world not only looks upon Singapore with envy, and for lessons learned, but as an example of what good government can achieve.
Yet the unforgiving truth is that while Singapore survives based on its relevance to the global economy, the global economy can thrive without Singapore. As the world begins to consider what a post-pandemic world looks like, the city needs a deft strategy to ensure it keeps its place in the global economy.
And, perhaps, Singapore will sustain its status as a role model for other nations and governments. The prime minister’s speech, meant for a domestic audience, has global repercussions: The international business community, capital markets, and strategic partners have a stake in the continuity of the “Singapore Story.”
How Singapore manages the COVID-19 pandemic thus matters both for its own sake, and for so many other stakeholders beyond its shores.
Singapore was originally held up internationally as the “gold standard” in managing COVID owing to its initial low case numbers. Yet matters took a nosedive as the pandemic swept through crowded migrant worker dormitories, a development that was followed by a seven-week lockdown, euphemistically called a “circuit breaker.” Singapore also instituted travel restrictions; those who left were not allowed to return to Singapore easily, for fear they would import the virus.
This containment strategy to limit the transmissibility of the virus worked: Community cases plunged in the latter half of 2020.
But it had consequences.
Singapore’s economy endured its deepest recession in its independent history, with a contraction of 5.8% despite a fiscal stimulus of just over 100 billion Singapore dollars. And in September of this year, the government announced that, for the first time since 1970, Singapore’s population had shrunk, by 4.1%, largely due to a drop in nonresidents amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
Singapore introduced an unprecedented five budgets in 2020, with more than 100 billion Singapore dollars in economic support and stimulus as countercyclical measures.
Despite a slow start owing to limited supply, Singapore’s vaccination program has picked up the pace recently, reaching an 84% full vaccination rate as of publication. Yet daily case numbers have risen, leading to multiple episodes of “Heightened Alerts,” with restrictions on numbers of those dining out and the imposition of default work-from-home arrangements for businesses. Of greatest concern is the fact that ICU occupancy now fluctuates between 79% and 84%. Singapore is now rolling out booster shots for all above the age of 30.
Clearly, keeping with the 2020 containment strategy was unsustainable. The Delta variant is far more transmissible, making it much more difficult to contain. The aggressive containment strategy had several social and economic costs, especially on the small- and medium-size enterprises that make up 99% of its firms and employ 73% of its residents. And finally, Singapore’s vaccination success ironically means little room left to expand protection.
Singapore is not the only country considering ways to open up. Our neighbor Malaysia has just embraced a strategy of “l(fā)iving with the virus,” setting out a path to remove barriers to intrastate and international travel. Australia—with travel restrictions so tough that even its own citizens couldn’t enter at times—has now pledged an aggressive strategy of opening to international travel by November. Thailand, dependent on tourists for its economy, is exploring ways to let visitors back into the country.
Singapore built its reputation on being farsighted, taking bold steps, making hard choices, resiliency in the face of crisis, and, above all, pragmatism. Singapore’s reopening strategy would be an opportunity to show that this reputation remains intact. Or it may inadvertently show the world a different Singapore: one that is indecisive, lacking both foresight and fortitude.
Devadas Krishnadas is founder and CEO of the Future-Moves Group, a Singapore-based management consultancy. He was previously a policy official with the Singapore government. He is also the author of Confronting COVID-19: A Strategic Playbook for Leaders and Decision Makers.