Skip to main content
Advertisement
Advertisement

Commentary

Commentary: Singapore must apply its characteristic prudence to AI investment

Global productivity has not accelerated significantly despite billions of dollars in automation spending, says NUS Business School’s Sumit Agarwal.

Commentary: Singapore must apply its characteristic prudence to AI investment

Office workers walking on the streets of the Central Business District. (File photo: iStock/3yephotography)

Listen
6 min
New: You can now listen to articles.

This audio is generated by an AI tool.

Read a summary of this article on FAST.
FAST

SINGAPORE: When Nvidia released an outstanding third-quarter earnings report last Wednesday (Nov 19), CEO Jensen Huang took the chance to address fears about overvalued AI stocks.

“There’s been a lot of talk about an AI bubble. From our vantage point, we see something very different,” Mr Huang said. He described how much Nvidia chips are sought after, citing that the company has US$500 billion in bookings for advanced chips through 2026.

AI is the hottest asset class of the decade. From Silicon Valley to Seoul, investors are pouring billions into anything labelled “AI-powered”. JPMorgan estimates that just 30 AI stocks account for over 40 per cent of the value of the S&P 500.

Chipmakers, data centre operators and startups that promise to redefine everything are commanding valuations that defy reason. Central banks such as the Monetary Authority of Singapore and the Bank of England have warned investors about the risk of sharp market corrections.

The narrative is irresistible: AI will transform every sector, from healthcare and finance to education and logistics, and no country or company can afford to miss out. But as history shows, when technology turns into theology, reason tends to take a backseat.

ECHOES OF TULIPS, RAILWAYS AND REAL ESTATE

In the 1630s, tulip bulbs in the Netherlands were so prized that a single flower could buy a canal-side house. When the market collapsed, fortunes vanished overnight, leaving behind one of the most famous lessons in speculative euphoria.

The human impulse to chase novelty and outsized returns has repeated itself through history, from the railway mania of the 1800s to the subprime mortgage crisis that led to the 2008 global recession.

Bubbles are rarely built on worthless ideas. Tulips are beautiful, railways were revolutionary, and housing is essential. What collapses is not the idea, but the illusion that value can only go one way.

Singapore sits at the centre of the AI gold rush. Its sovereign funds are major investors in AI-linked companies. It recently announced it will build its largest green data centre park on Jurong Island. The ambition to make Singapore an AI hub is visionary, but it comes with risks of over-investment, inefficiency and exposure to global volatility.

If global AI valuations correct sharply, the tremors could reach our financial markets and sovereign portfolios. Singapore’s success has always rested on anticipating cycles, not chasing them. This moment demands the same prudence.

THE PRODUCTIVITY PARADOX

For all the talk of AI-driven productivity, hard evidence remains thin. Global productivity has not accelerated significantly despite billions of dollars in automation spending. According to OECD, labour productivity growth has been weak since generative AI tools became publicly available in 2022, hovering at 0.4 per cent across OECD economies excluding Türkiye in 2024.

Much of what AI delivers so far is substitution, not transformation – replacing routine human tasks rather than amplifying human potential.

Consider customer service bots that frustrate users and escalate complex issues back to humans, doubling workloads rather than halving them. Or schools where students use ChatGPT to draft essays, only for teachers to spend twice as long verifying authenticity. Even warehouse robots require teams of technicians for oversight and maintenance.

As MIT economist David Autor notes, new technologies often reshape jobs rather than eliminate them. AI excels at prediction, but humans remain indispensable for judgment, empathy and context. Used wisely, AI can complement human capability; used rashly, it merely shifts work around without creating real productivity.

SUSTAINABILITY, THE MIRROR IMAGE OF AI

There is another global phenomenon unfolding in parallel – the pursuit of sustainability. It is the mirror image of the AI story.

Sustainability is slow-paced and often under-rewarded in markets. The benefits of cleaner air, resource resilience and intergenerational fairness unfold over decades, not quarters. Unlike the AI boom, sustainability struggles not from excess hype but from insufficient urgency.

The true challenge is to channel the ingenuity of AI toward sustainable outcomes rather than speculative ones. Imagine using AI to optimise urban cooling systems, predict flooding or monitor energy efficiency across housing estates. These are not headline-grabbing moonshots, but quietly transformative uses of technology that create genuine public value. 

If the AI bubble channels capital into sustainable innovations, it may yet prove a blessing. But if it inflates valuations detached from environmental or social outcomes, it will repeat the mistakes of past market meltdowns.

A CALL FOR RATIONAL EXUBERANCE

Singapore’s enduring advantage has always been its discipline – prudent regulation, long-term planning and willingness to temper excitement with evidence. 

For policymakers, that means prioritising sustainability and linking AI infrastructure to tangible productivity outcomes. For investors, it means valuing companies based on real, not hypothetical cash flows. And for firms and universities, it means embracing AI as a tool to advance sustainable growth, not merely as a badge of publicity.

AI will reshape the world, but hype must not outpace humility. As the Dutch discovered long ago, even the most beautiful tulip cannot bloom forever. The wisdom lies not in rejecting new flowers – but in knowing when their price, or their promise, has grown too bright to last.

Sumit Agarwal is the Low Tuck Kwong Distinguished Professor of Finance, Economics and Real Estate at the National University of Singapore (NUS) Business School, and the managing director of the Sustainable and Green Finance Institute at NUS. The opinions expressed are those of the writer and do not represent the views and opinions of NUS.

Source: CNA/el

Sign up for our newsletters

Get our pick of top stories and thought-provoking articles in your inbox

Subscribe here
Inbox
FAST
Advertisement

Commentary

Commentary: The US may be running the wrong AI race

China’s favouring of small and cheap models such as DeepSeek could prove to be the better bet, says John Thornhill for Financial Times.

Commentary: The US may be running the wrong AI race

Qwen and Alibaba logos are seen in this illustration taken Jan 29, 2025. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File Photo

LONDON: Surrounded by kick-boxing, piano-playing humanoid robots at a high-tech fair in Shenzhen last month, some tech influencers were asking: Can the West catch up with China?

That question would have sounded absurd two decades ago, but it is anything but today. This week, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute published its latest critical technology tracker, covering high-impact global research in 74 areas. It found that China now leads in 66 of those technologies, in fields as varied as computer vision, quantum sensors and nuclear energy, with the US ahead in the other eight. 

ASPI’s researchers highlighted a familiar story across many technologies. An early and overwhelming US lead in research output in the first decade of this century has been surpassed by China’s persistent long-term investment in fundamental research.

In 2005, China accounted for just 6 per cent of the world’s most highly cited research papers but that share had risen to 48 per cent this year. The comparable proportion of US publications fell from 43 per cent to 9 per cent. At a time when the US is defunding many federal science programmes, China is doing the opposite by “building the whole technology ecosystem”, says Jenny Wong-Leung, one of the report’s authors. 

ASPI’s findings accord with Nature’s latest ranking of research institutions, tracking articles across 145 science journals. In terms of research output, nine of the world’s top 10 research institutions are Chinese with only Harvard University in the top tier. China is now mass manufacturing research; it truly has become a scientific superpower.

A person receives a can of soda from a humanoid robot at an Agibot booth during the World Artificial Intelligence Conference in Shanghai, China, Jul 26, 2025. REUTERS/Go Nakamura

THE AI RACE

Published research, though, does not automatically translate into technological capability. Moreover, the location of research expertise does not always map with successful commercialisation of technology – as a long line of frustrated British scientists can attest. 

However, a separate report from the Special Competitive Studies Project in the US earlier this year also highlighted the striking progress that China has made in adopting many frontier technologies.

According to the SCSP’s staff assessment, the US is still leading in semiconductors, synthetic biology and quantum computing while China dominates in advanced batteries, 5G and commercial drones. But the most contested, and arguably most consequential, area is artificial intelligence.

President Donald Trump has said that the US will do “whatever it takes” to lead the world in AI. And the big US tech companies, including OpenAI, Alphabet, Microsoft, Meta and Amazon, are making colossal investments to fulfil that ambition. OpenAI alone is planning to invest US$400 billion over the next few years to build out its Stargate data centres across the US.

Last month, the Trump administration launched the Genesis Mission to boost the private AI sector by sharing the public data sets and computing resources of the country’s 17 national laboratories.

“We’re essentially pitting our private capitalists against this nation state of China. The stakeholders here have two very different sets of resources, attributes, strengths and weaknesses,” says David Lin, a senior adviser to the SCSP.

DIFFERENT AI MODELS

But the US and China are also adopting very different approaches to adopting AI. The big US companies mostly favour massive, proprietary, “closed-weights” models, such as ChatGPT and Gemini, which may be best suited to achieving generalisable intelligence.

By contrast, Chinese AI companies favour smaller, cheaper (and arguably less safe) “open-weights” models, such as DeepSeek and Alibaba’s Qwen, that can be more readily adapted by developers.

In part, China is making a virtue of necessity because US export restrictions have denied it access to the state-of-the-art silicon chips needed to build the most powerful foundation models. But it also reflects China’s priority in rapidly diffusing the technology.

Michael Power, the former global strategist of the investment firm Ninety One, reckons the US is making a “catastrophic strategic error” in betting so heavily on giant closed AI models.

“China’s model is turning out to be far more effective in terms of usable compute in the real world,” Power tells me, especially considering the country’s lower energy costs. Even Sam Altman, OpenAI’s chief executive, has expressed his personal concern that “we have been on the wrong side of history here”.

A recent study by MIT and Hugging Face found that Chinese open models have now overtaken comparable US models in terms of global adoption. Many US companies, including Airbnb, have become fans of the “fast and cheap” Qwen. In this critical area too the question arises: Can the West catch up with China?

Source: Financial Times/el

Sign up for our newsletters

Get our pick of top stories and thought-provoking articles in your inbox

Subscribe here
Inbox
FAST
Advertisement

World

OpenAI declares ChatGPT 'code red' over stiff competition

As CEO Sam Altman focuses on his tech rivals, other OpenAI projects like advertising will be delayed.

OpenAI declares ChatGPT 'code red' over stiff competition

Sam Altman, co-founder and CEO of OpenAI, testifies before a Senate committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington on May 8, 2025. (Photo: AP/Jose Luis Magana)

Read a summary of this article on FAST.
FAST

SAN FRANCISCO: OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has declared a company-wide "code red" on as the company's ChatGPT technology faces stiff competition from other big tech rivals, especially Google, US media reported.

In a memo to staff on Monday (Dec 2), Altman told employees that the company was "at a critical time for ChatGPT," and that resources must be devoted to fending off the new competition to its chatbot, the reports said.

Altman said that other projects would now be delayed, including a plan to introduce advertising to the chatbot.

According to the memo reported in The Information and Wall Street Journal, Altman said "code red" meant OpenAI would also delay progress with other products such as AI agents, which aim to automate tasks related to shopping and health.

With a half-a-trillion-dollar valuation, OpenAI is the world's most valuable private company.

Major investors are eager to take shares in the company, but questions are growing on how it can generate revenues that will match the huge costs of delivering AI to its hundreds of millions of users, the vast majority of whom use the service for free.

Google last month debuted its latest Gemini AI model, capping a dramatic turnaround since it was caught off guard by ChatGPT's launch three years ago and mocked for early blunders in its chase of OpenAI.

OpenAI did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

Source: AFP/fs

Sign up for our newsletters

Get our pick of top stories and thought-provoking articles in your inbox

Subscribe here
Inbox
FAST