A new Oxford Economics report commissioned by Sir Tom Hunter draws a striking comparison: Scotland and Singapore. It’s a provocative pairing – and one that certainly challenges traditional thinking when it comes to socioeconomic and business aspiration in this country.

For years, Scotland has looked to Scandinavian and Nordic models of governance and socio-economic policy – with its generous welfare systems, high levels of trust, and strong public services – as a benchmark for inclusive prosperity. 

However, there’s a case to be made that the region’s high tax rates and rigid regulatory frameworks can limit incentives for early-stage founders and complicate scaling. There’s a lot more to that discourse, but it’s a reasonable starting point for someone as wildly successful as Hunter to look at models that have more business palatability

Lessons From Singapore for Scotland’s Economy looks to a city-state known for its low taxes, high innovation and tightly coordinated economic planning. Singapore’s GDP per capita was once less than a quarter of the UK’s. Today, it is one of the highest in the world.

Beyond high-level economic policy, the report laments Scottish education standards that have fallen steadily for two decades. “Our health outcomes are now the worst in Europe – and among the worst globally,” writes Hunter in the report’s foreword.

He goes on to say that “demographically, the country faces a ticking time bomb, with the number of over-85s set to double in the next two decades while the working-age population shrinks.”

While Hunter says Scotland must be “truly radical, bold and ambitious,” there’s a nuance that must be taken when comparing our lot with Singapore’s, as well as a good faith interpretation of the report in that it’s not advocating for wholesale imitation, but an opportunity to learn – and to build a path suited to Scotland’s own values, scale and strengths. 

The goal is to reignite economic ambition, with Singapore offered not as a model to follow – as there’s elements there that range from unfeasible to problematic – but as a lens through which to question Scotland’s current approach.

Lessons in Innovation, Investment and Intent

At the heart of the Singapore model is clarity – in planning, in education, and in industrial policy. 

The report highlights how Singapore maintains long-term economic strategies with cross-government coordination. Its five-year “Research, Innovation and Enterprise” plans focus public investment on high-potential sectors, and the results are clear: it routinely tops global education, skills and innovation rankings. 

Students in Singapore outperform Scottish students in maths, science and reading on OECD PISA scores. Its public sector works hand-in-hand with business to commercialise ideas and scale exports.

Singapore also invests heavily in public infrastructure. The IMD World Competitiveness report ranks it fourth globally for infrastructure quality – far ahead of the UK. A core example is housing: 79% of Singaporean households live in public Housing & Development Board (HDB) flats, and 88% of all households own their homes. 

Scotland, by contrast, has a homeownership rate of 61%. Singapore’s coordinated transport spending, high-density housing and urban mobility systems are cited as foundations of growth.

But this is where scale matters. Comparisons between a compact city-state and a geographically large, rural-diverse nation like Scotland quickly become difficult to reconcile.

Singapore’s landmass is smaller than the Isle of Skye – Scotland is nearly 180 times larger. 

Dense urban planning allows Singapore to concentrate spending for rapid, visible gains. For Scotland, spread-out communities and rugged terrain make infrastructure challenges fundamentally different – especially for housing, transport and broadband. 

The lesson, then, isn’t in copying the specific outcomes, but in emulating the coherence and intent behind them.

Can Scotland Replicate a low tax, high growth model?

Another point of difference is fiscal policy. Singapore’s tax take is just under 16% of GDP; in the UK, it’s 37%. The highest personal tax rate in Singapore is 24%, compared to 48% in Scotland. Corporate tax is similarly lean. 

Sir Tom Hunter sees this as a major lever for growth. In his view, “the most important lever we have to incentivise entrepreneurs and business is tax.” Lower rates, he argues, could boost innovation, inward investment and even, over time, government revenues.

Whether this kind of fiscal shift is viable in Scotland – with its devolved powers and social expectations – is debatable. But the challenge to rethink tax as a strategic rather than static tool is worth consideration. 

In Singapore, low tax is not a race to the bottom; it is paired with a pro-investment public sector, digital government, and high-quality regulation.

Grassroots Approach

Control over key levers – skills development, R&D investment, housing, infrastructure – lies within the Scottish Government’s remit, according to Hunter.

According to the report, Singapore’s success relied not just on fiscal incentives but on building innovation clusters, enabling foreign investment, and fostering high-value domestic industry. 

It’s a proactive rather than reactive model – something Scotland’s new Green Industrial Strategy and international investment plans are beginning to emulate.

Streamlining regulations, reducing red tape, and accelerating approvals could also bolster Scotland’s business environment. 

The report notes that Scotland’s share of inward investment fell in the years leading up to 2021. While new trade and investment strategies are in place, further simplification of processes – following Singapore’s lead – could enhance Scotland’s competitiveness.

The issue of skills is perhaps the most urgent. 

Scotland has long recognised the value of STEM education and set related targets. Yet, according to the report, persistent skills shortages point to a disconnect between the education system and industry needs – both in sector focus and qualification levels. 

In contrast, Singapore aligns its education with strategic sectors like STEM, law, and finance, offering scholarships and grants to steer students into these fields. Strong ties between academia and business also enable company-funded grants and apprenticeships. 

For Scotland, a more targeted strategy – linking education incentives to the needs of key industries – could help close the skills gap and support growth in priority areas.

Recommended reading

• Data Security Holding Back Growth for UK Financial Services Firms
• Futures Institute Launches Compassion in Financial Services Hub
• UK Finance Chiefs Bet Big on AI – Is The Workforce Ready?

Similarly, access to finance is a disproportionate concern and one of the economic factors that the Scottish Government has agency in addressing.

Hunter is adamant: tinkering won’t work. “The status quo is completely unacceptable. Change needs to come – and it needs to be radical.”

“Let’s unite to build and deliver a growth strategy for Scotland,” he said. “It’s not outrageous to think we could reclaim our place on the global stage once again—but only if we are truly radical, bold and ambitious.”

What Doesn’t Translate – and Why

While the report is clear that there’s lessons to be learned from Singapore and doesn’t suggest that whole systems are subsumed into our political apparatus, it doesn’t single out areas where’s differences that are hard to reconcile – many of these differences, it could be argued, have played a role in the city-states success in a manner that can’t replicated here. 

Singapore is a centralised, one-party state that Freedom House categorises as “Partly Free.” Dissent is managed. Media is state-aligned. Public protest is heavily restricted. 

These controls allow for long-term consistency, but they are antithetical to Scotland’s democratic norms, civil society and plural politics.

There are demographic and social differences too. Singapore’s economic rise has relied on importing large numbers of foreign workers – around 40% of the workforce are migrants. Many live in tightly controlled dormitories and face conditions that would be politically and ethically untenable in Scotland. The city-state also operates a lean welfare state based on forced savings and co-payment, with limited social redistribution.

None of this aligns easily with Scottish values. Scotland’s economy is shaped by different choices – a relatively strong welfare state, regional diversity, environmental priorities, and deep-rooted civic participation.

A New Narrative – Not a New Template

Singapore is not a model for Scotland to mimic.

But, as the report states, there’s lessons to be learned. 

It is a reminder that small nations can think big. It shows what’s possible with a focused strategy, public-private alignment and a relentless push for innovation.

If Scotland can combine that ambition with its own democratic values and social priorities, the result could be a hybrid worth striving for.