The intrapreneurial state: Singapore’s emergence in the smart and sustainable urban solutions field

ABSTRACT

The East Asian developmental state model and the Anglo-American entrepreneurial state model profile varied ways in which the state continues to intervene in economic development. These models are developed by different disciplines and against diverse contexts to capture extrasocietal state responses to neoliberalism and globalization but leave the intrasocietal preconditions for state evolution little explored. We elaborate the concept of state intrapreneurialism as one way of understanding the interrelationship between economic and state transformation – one ingredient of the intrasocietal preconditions underpinning the responses to extrasocietal changes emphasized in the post-developmental state literature. Drawing on the case of Singapore's emergence in the field of smart/sustainable urban solutions, the subsidiary contributions of this paper are to suggest intrapreneurship as a specific and enduring advantage within the developmental state model, especially when set against its limitations signalled in the post-developmental state literature.

KEYWORDS:

• intrapreneurialism
• developmental state
• entrepreneurial state
• Singapore
• smart and sustainable urban solutions

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors are grateful to both John Agnew and the journal referees for their insightful comments on this paper.

DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

ORCID

Julie Tian Miao http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2164-9074

Nicholas A. Phelps http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8407-9788

Notes

1 The entrepreneurial state literature is heterogeneous in its philosophical underpinnings and in its reference to national and local scales. It is important to bear this limitation in mind as we bring the term into the dialogue with the developmental and post-developmental state literature.

2 These issues are compounded by the application of the developmental state model beyond East Asia (Nee, Opper, & Wong, 2007; Riain, 2000) with Block (2008, p. 172) arguing that developmental state tendencies were ‘hidden’ but functioned crucially in targeting resourcing; opening windows; brokering; and facilitating in the United States.

3 Singapore has been regarded as developmental (Low, 2001) and entrepreneurial (Pereira, 2004); South Korea developmental (Hee-Yeon, 2000) but also networked (entrepreneurial) (Larson & Park, 2014); and China as developmental (Nee et al., 2007) yet entrepreneurial (Duckett, 1998).

4 China's state extra-territoriality is driven by issues of resource security, but overseas industry parks established in Africa also exert soft power.

5 Source: http://www.singstat.gov.sg/statistics/browse-by-theme/investment-tables (accessed January 31, 2017).

6 Singapore was mooted (with Switzerland and Norway) as a potential small-state model for the UK following the referendum decision to exit the European Union. Switzerland was itself the benchmark for Singapore at the time of its regionalization strategy (interview with Ascendas, 15 September 2015).

7 Singapore was ranked the smartest global city by Juniper Research (https://www.juniperresearch.com/press/press-releases/singapore-named-global-smart-city-2016) (assessed on 12 February 2017).

8 Source: http://www.clc.gov.sg/documents/annualreport_doc/CLCAR1213Book.pdf/.

Additional information

Funding

The authors gratefully acknowledge the British Academy [grant number SG140879] for funding the research upon which this paper is based.