Singapore and the question of what it means to win the future

Parks, cultural institutions, and greenery are interwoven with skyscrapers and high-tech environments. For many visitors, the feeling is that the future is already here.

But the conversations during Vinnovas Sweden–Singapore Earth Week also showed something else. Beneath the well-organized surface, questions emerge that perhaps say more about the future than the innovations themselves and about the possibilities for a new generation of innovation collaboration.

Singapore and Sweden have similar challenges and complementary innovation ecosystems

Singapore is one of the world's fastest-aging societies. At the same time, mental health, stress and feelings of loss of purpose are increasing, especially among young people. Add to this climate change, where extreme heat risks changing the conditions for urban living environments.

Singapore is also, like Sweden, ecologically very unsustainable in terms of consumption-based emissions and ecological footprint per capita. Singapore is among the countries in the world with the highest ecological footprint per person, but even the Swedish lifestyle greatly exceeds the planet's long-term sustainable levels if scaled globally. We are also both highly export-dependent countries, whose exports are not yet compatible with global sustainability.

In this way, Sweden and Singapore share a fundamental challenge: how high-tech and successful societies can develop towards globally sustainable and humanly flourishing societies, which can export tomorrow's solutions.

At the same time, both countries are facing a rapid demographic transformation with a rapidly increasing the elderly population and very low birth rates. Sweden and Singapore are among the first societies in the world to be “super-aged societies”, where more than 20 percent of the population is over 65 years old.

This means that both countries need to think completely new about health, welfare, loneliness, skills provision and intergenerational relationships. How can aging become something people look forward to as an important and meaningful part of life rather than a burden?

At the same time, our countries complement each other in interesting ways when it comes to solutions. Sweden has strengths in trust, systems innovation, sustainability and social resilience. Singapore has strengths in long-term planning, urban governance and implementation capacity. Together, opportunities are created to develop next-generation solutions for “thriving life on a thriving planet”.

Unique opportunities in 2027

There is also a unique opportunity here linked to the IPCC launching its special report on cities in Singapore in March 2027. The report can help shift the focus from climate emissions alone to the broader role of cities as solution actors in an era of AI transformation, demographic change and increasing mental ill health. Inom Win the Future, a collaboration was carried out with Umeå on their world-leading work with seniors. This is the only case study from Sweden that is included in the IPCC's upcoming special report. Deeper collaboration between Sweden and Singapore could lay the foundation for international leadership on how next-generation innovation system and cities can develop in an emerging post-SDG agenda.

It's hard not to wonder what happens when societies become extremely successful at optimizing productivity, but less good at creating meaning, belonging, and human flourishing.

A post-productive society?

Many people today seem to accept the idea that AI, robotics and automation could fundamentally change the job market within a decade or two. Yet most initiatives are still primarily about productivity: faster processes, more efficient organisations and more output per individual.

Far fewer discussions are about what societies should optimize for when productivity can no longer be the sole overarching goal. What happens if work is no longer the primary source of identity and meaning? How do we build societies where people not only survive disruption, but can actually live good and meaningful lives?

Maybe we need to start talking about a post-productive society. Not anti-productive, but societies where productivity once again becomes a means rather than an end in itself.

From environmental pollution to mental pollution

In recent decades, the focus has been on physical pollution: emissions, waste and resource use. That work is crucial and far from finished. But perhaps the future discussion now also needs to be about “mental pollution”.

Not just as a medical concept, but as a way to describe environments where constant competition, acceleration, information overload and social comparison gradually affect people's psychological and existential well-being.

In hyper-efficient societies, humans risk being reduced to a function: productive citizen, resource of expertise, or data point in an optimized system. This creates impressive results but also new forms of vulnerability. This is especially evident among young generations who have grown up in a world where the future is simultaneously presented as technologically unlimited and ecologically threatened.

From "win the future" to "flourishing lives for all"

During the trip, several conversations returned to the need to broaden the concept of the future itself. Many innovation system are still built around competitiveness, growth and “winning the future”. But if the future is simultaneously characterized by climate stress, demographic change and increasing mental illness, that logic is no longer enough.

Perhaps the next phase of development needs to be about flourishing lives for all, societies where technological development is balanced against human well-being, cultural meaning, resilience and planetary boundaries.

This does not mean that innovation is becoming less important. Quite the opposite. But the aim of innovation may need to be redefined. The question is not just how we build smarter systems, but also what kind of people and societies the systems help us become.

Perhaps the true leadership of the future will not be determined by which societies optimize productivity and technological capacity the fastest, but by which ones are the first to succeed in creating societies where people and communities can flourish in the long term, ecologically, socially and mentally.

This text has also been published on the Vinnova website as a blog post (July 2026).
By: Andreas Johansson och Dennis Pamlin, RISE.