Singapore: After the Circuit Breaker?
We’re now in the month of May, with another month of the circuit breaker to go. Personally, I would very much love to be able to savour the fiery, crispy and juicy delicious-ness that is a McSpicy Double once again.
I say this in (partial) jest, of course. If anything, Covid-19 and the extensive circuit-breaker measures that have been implemented are now shining a light on the many gaps in the way we have organised ourselves as a society, enjoining us to look deeper beneath the veneer of a hyper-connected, cosmopolitan Smart Nation and global city.
Already, we have been reminded that life will not go back to normal even after the end of the (extended) circuit breaker period. Research is also showing that Covid-19 is unlikely to disappear as quickly and suddenly as SARS did, and that there may be a need for intermittent circuit breakers over a sustained period of time.
But I am not going to write this as a critique of the efficacy of the various measures put in place thus far. Rather, I see this as a time to reflect on the current situation, and the role that we play as citizens, and so this piece sets out some views on what I think might emerge from the Covid-19 situation.
Food and essential supplies
It feels like a long time ago now, but who could forget the Great Singapore Panic Buying of…
7 February, when the Government raised the DORSCON alert to Orange…
16 March, when Malaysia announced its lockdown…
And then again on the afternoon of 3 April, as soon as the Prime Minister’s Office announced that PM would be addressing the nation later in the day*…
*Earlier that morning, a leaked press release from MOE and MSF had already made its rounds on WhatsApp, and there was little doubt that a lockdown was to come.
Each time, the Government had to assure us that our food supply was secure and diversified. Minister Chan Chun Sing even had to make a special visit down to Changi Airport to personally receive over 300,000 eggs, #justsoyouknow you can still have your kaya toast with soft-boiled eggs or chorizo omelettes, so don’t worry guys!
But let’s not discount the concern that many Singaporeans probably had over our food security. Singapore is small and land-scarce, a fact that has been drilled into our heads through National Education since young. And textbook Economics would tell us that it makes more sense to import food from larger countries where the cost of land is lower. However, the textbook doesn’t instruct us on what happens if there are supply disruptions in countries we import from because of climate change. Or if global trade flows have to be halted or slowed down because of a pandemic. This is quite literally a bread and butter issue that now confronts us.
There are some facts that might put us a little more at ease. While Singapore currently imports over 90% of the food it consumes, these imports come from over 170 countries and regions around the world, up from 160 in 2007. We have local agricultural firms operating abroad that we can call upon in times of crisis. We have national stockpiles, with the Government having the right to acquire essential supplies like rice from importers when it is needed. And in March last year, way before Covid-19 hit, our Ministry for Environment and Water Resources outlined the 30 by 30 plan — that is, by 2030, Singapore aims to provide 30% of its nutritional needs with homegrown produce. We are currently at less than 10% of this goal.
Prediction: We will pay more attention to locally-grown produce once Covid-19 blows over, and take a harder look at how we can reach the 30 by 30 target. Beyond the catchy tagline, there are real impediments in scaling up domestic production. Tech is not a magic wand that can improve yields overnight, so it will take a few years of research, funding and experimentation to ensure that we have sustainable, tech-enabled farms. Consumers have to play a part too — in being more conscious about the provenance of our food. I suspect it’s a bit of a chicken and egg issue (pardon the agricultural pun) where locally-produced food tends to be priced higher, hence putting off some consumers, yet preventing local producers from scaling up and achieving greater economies of scale that could help ease the cost pressures. And it is hard to gloss over the fact that not everyone has the luxury of choosing to eat locally grown food if there are more affordable options for our daily necessities. Where we have the means, however, let’s support local. I am looking forward to more collaborations between F&B service providers and our local farms, to showcase our own local produce and raise greater awareness.
(The same goes for other non-food essential supplies, like surgical masks. It was frightening to read about how Trump had invoked the Defense Protection Act to compel 3M to export masks made in its Singapore hub to the US. While 3M — to its great credit — stood up against this, it does beg the question of whether we are adequately self-sufficient in times of crisis. The threat is so real.)
Food delivery
Speaking of food, you may be quite familiar with the on-going debate over the commissions charged by food delivery platforms like Grab, Foodpanda and Deliveroo. While Grab has attempted to provide a visual explanation of where the commissions go, we continue to hear the #savefnbsg movement loud and clear, with alternative, commission-free platforms springing up as well as calls to simply get off your arse and pick up your food yourself!
I will not rehash the arguments raised by Grab, or by supporters of the local F&B scene, especially our hawkers. I think both points of view have their merits (cop-out?). One of the more insight analyses I have read also distinguished between the Covid-19 situation now where F&B players are wholly dependent on online sales versus the pre-Covid situation where sales on platforms were mainly for augmentation — with a large proportion of sales still coming through people dining in. It does beg the question of whether these food delivery platforms ought to “play their part” during these exceptional times.
But hey, speaking of playing one’s part, I am obliged to ask you — as a reader and as a consumer — how do you price the convenience of having freshly cooked food delivered to your doorstep? Or have we removed ourselves from the equation? Does it make a material difference to you when you have to pay a $5 delivery fee for a serving of chicken rice versus a fancy poke bowl? Why? The point I am trying to make is this — I do think food delivery platforms face unavoidable overheads, be it to pay the delivery riders or the engineers/strategists at the backend who work to optimise delivery algorithms for efficiency. So what’s our fair share of this?
Predictions: When Covid-19 blows over, I think the calls to boycott food delivery platforms will die out. When we return to life as per normal and no longer have the time to cook our own meal or pick up our own orders (because we now have to factor in commuting time to work!), we will remember the convenience that these platforms offer. I can only hope that their investors continue to hold them accountable for ensuring that their overheads are kept low, and that they can find themselves on the path towards profitability.
Lifestyle services
F&B service providers are not the only parties that have suffered in this pandemic. The retail sector, already struggling to stay afloat with the onslaught of e-commerce, is now hanging by a thread. The whole gamut of players in the lifestyle sector are now in for a rough time, particularly those that are deemed non-essential. It is also important to recognise that each of these sectors like F&B and retail encompass businesses of varying shapes and sizes. In F&B alone, for example, we have a dizzying array of hawker fare, casual bistros, fast food, fine dining across different cuisine types, so I am cautious of making any sweeping commentaries, but here are some thoughts anyway.
Clearly, businesses that are quick to go digital will have a better chance of riding the waves of this crisis. But to survive in the digital space is no easy feat. For retailers, it is arguably an even more competitive space — first to gain mindshare, and then to contend with other retailers who are just a click of a button away for the consumer. For F&B, you lose the whole experiential aspect of dining, and full control over the taste and quality of your food as it makes its way through the delivery journey. Navigating the digital space requires new skill sets, which may be hard to acquire as quickly as this virus has hit. In this article on Joseph Barratt, founder and CEO of Trouble Brewing and Mutant Communications, he talks about leaping in action to completely change their business model overnight, from an offline B2B brewery to an online B2C direct sales business. The reality was that the new business model could not compensate for the revenue lost, but I like what he said about how “it has changed the narrative from ‘are we going to survive this?’ to ‘how can we come out the other side in the best possible position?’”.
Predictions: I do think it is the bigger players that have sufficient reserves that will survive this crisis. It might take time to rebuild smaller enterprises. For microenterprises or mom&pop shop types, the pandemic might well sound a death knell. And so we will lose that diversity of businesses in our landscape, but I hope it is something that can be brought back over time. The Government has taken some steps to reduce costs and ease credit for businesses during this pandemic, but I suspect more of such support measures will be required during the recovery period — whether it is to provide a lifeline to those hanging by a thread, or to provide a more fertile environment for new businesses to grow again.
Next, this is less of a prediction but an encouragement for businesses to really take this time to think of new capabilities and skills they would need to acquire, particularly if they were to start from a clean slate. It will be a steep learning curve that feels like an almost impossible undertaking in these times, but taking the time to do so might pay off significantly in the long run. I would also add that the need to rethink capabilities and skills had always existed, even before Covid-19, and perhaps it takes a crisis to now compel us into action.
Working from home
For those of us who have the privilege of continuing to work from home, this extended circuit-breaker is a wonderful opportunity for experimentation over the future of work. I know the reality isn’t always as sexy as it sounds — we’ve all attended video- or tele-conference meetings fraught with IT mishaps, miscommunications in the absence of visual cues. Not to mention the distraction of your partner doing a video-conference at the same time, or your child / pet requiring your attention every other minute. The results have been mixed, and the narratives aren’t so straightforward. Here at 2359, we have colleagues on various flexible working arrangements, including a few who work entirely remotely to be able to juggle family or other commitments. Overall, I think the inconveniences we are experiencing are not insurmountable, and being able to leverage technological tools to carry on with our day-to-day functions and meetings holds great potential for each and every one of us to achieve Our version of work life harmony. And so I think there is great value for all companies and organisations to review your day-to-day work and really ask ourselves — can we do this differently?
Predictions: The right mix of work from home arrangements and face-time will vary of course, but now is the best time for us to figure out what is the right balance to strike. When done across the board, there could be tremendous implications in terms of how we can take the right steps towards achieving work life harmony — a phrase that is often quoted in larger conversations about how we can raise the fertility rate in Singapore.
Caring for the vulnerable
I want to end this piece on a more reflective note. At 2359, we speak about wanting to make a positive impact on people’s lives. Technology and digitalisation can come across as scary buzzwords — what with fears of machines replacing humans, or the sheer inaccessibility of the digital space to certain segments of our society.
There is some truth to this. When the Government rolled out the use of Singpass to apply for the Temporary Relief Fund, how accessible was this to the elderly? When schools had to switch to home-based learning, we saw a tremendous effort by the community to ensure that students from less privileged backgrounds were not left behind — whether it was in terms of owning devices like laptops and tablets, or even having Wifi connectivity at home (if there is a place they can call home).
And when we talk about upskilling workers to equip them with digital skills, how do we ensure that there is real access to such upskilling opportunities? Time taken to attend course also means time away from wage-paying work, so we must go beyond the rhetoric of the SkillsFuture movement and ensure that training and development opportunities remain truly accessible.
Predictions: The Covid-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected more vulnerable segments of the population, and it is timely for us to reflect on whether there ought to be more universal support in both good and bad times, such that everybody, regardless of their circumstances, can play a role in our shift towards becoming a Smart Nation? Beyond individuals, a similar argument can apply for businesses, particularly small or micro enterprises — how do we adapt our approach in reaching out to them and in providing solutions for them so that they can well and truly go digital?
Conclusion
I cannot wait for Covid-19 to disappear, but that might be wishful thinking on my part. It will be a collective effort by the Government, businesses and wider society to look out for another, so we can emerge stronger from this crisis. I invite you to share your thoughts as well, and we at 2359 would love to engage with you further on this.
