Posted by Tibodak sogan on December 09, 2003 at 12:28:19:
INTRODUCTION
The maxims that says, ?knowledge is power? is truer today than ever before. The knowledge-based economy or the K-economy has been a most popular buzzword in economic development and public policies in recent years. Some of the high-income OECD member countries are labelled knowledge economies as judged by their achievements in knowledge creation and the role that knowledge has played in the growth of these economies. Despite the huge literature on the subject, the meaning of the knowledge-based economy remains unclear and each country or expert seeks to define the terms rather loosely. For instance, the United States lacking strong evidence on the causes of the country?s rapid growth since the middle of 1990s choose to call itself the ?New Economy? instead of K-economy. This phenomenon sparked what is known as New Growth Theory among economists as opposed to the conventional production system alluded to in the production-based or P-economy system. Generally, knowledge has become an increasingly important variable in growth model building as the economy moves toward knowledge-based economy.
According to the Third Outline Perspective Plan, 2001-2010 (OPP3: 24),
?The knowledge-based economy is where the acquisition, utilisation and dissemination of knowledge provide the basis for growth. The development of a knowledge-based economy involves enhancing the value-added of all productive activities through knowledge utilisation, in addition to creating new knowledge industries.?
The knowledge based economy (KBE) will become the major driving force of the ?new economy? where knowledge will contribute significantly towards economic growth and wealth creation both for the country and the State. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) defined knowledge-based economies as ?those, which are directly based on the production, distribution, and use of knowledge and information,? (OECD Report, 1996).
In traditional economics, knowledge and technology were seen only as external influences on the standard factors of production ? labour, capital, material resources and entrepreneurship. With the increasing acknowledgement of knowledge as a key factor input in modern economy (the ?new economy?), the standard neo-classical economic models have been modified to take more direct account of knowledge. (See box 1 below for the types of knowledge)
Box 1. Types of Knowledge.
The OECD Report divides knowledge into four types:
1. Know-What refers to FACTS ? the point at which knowledge is closest to information. Legal experts, medical practitioners and engineers are experts, operating in complex areas, need a great deal of this type of knowledge.
2. Know-Why is scientific knowledge about the principles and laws of nature. It underlies technological advances and is usually produced in research laboratories and universities. Thus to access this knowledge requires collaboration with these organisations or recruit the scientifically trained personnel.
3. Know-How is the skill(s) or capability to do something. This type of knowledge is spread throughout organisations and community and can vary from judging the quality of new products to the recruitment of personnel or leaders or to operate complicated machine tools.
4. Know-Who involves knowing ?who knows what and who knows how to do what.? This is becoming more important crucial as it requires special relationships to access experts and their knowledge. This requires the community to be a strong networking among ourselves as well as with those around us to our benefits.
The first two types can be obtained from explicit sources, such as books, internets, and other published or written materials and generally have very high information content. However, the latter two types of knowledge involve high degrees of personal and tacit knowledge as are much more difficult to measure and codify.
Knowledge industries include services to the business and financial sector, capital-intensive manufacturing, education and health services, scientific research, and the telecommunication sector. Broadly speaking, all sectors of the economy become knowledge-based when strategies are adopted to increase productivity through the application of knowledge, rather than via increased inputs of capital and or labour. This would definite shift the economy growth focus on knowledge (intangibles) rather than the tangibles.
While the traditional factors of production such as labour, capital and natural resources and entrepreneurship, remain vital ingredients for productivity growth, knowledge will be the key driving growth, creating new value and providing the basis to maintain the country?s competitiveness.
The nucleus of the KBE is the human capital in that it provides the capacity to create, innovate, generate and exploit new ideas as well as apply technology and exercise superior entrepreneurial skills. Towards this end, the present industries will become more knowledge-intensive and new type of industrial set up will emerge. Thus, the economy will be characterised by knowledge-base activities and this require a new genre or breed of workforce or workers generally known as the knowledge workers. Other writers describe the knowledge workers by their characteristics; people who can analyse, synthesize, and evaluate information and use that information to solve problems of variable content. A third way of describing knowledge workers is by their skills and abilities ? people who are highly educated, creative, computer literate, and have portable skills that make it possible for them to move anywhere their intelligence, talent, and services are needed (Munk, 1998).
Admittedly, the above scenario posed several questions and challenges to the state of readiness and or preparedness of the Bidayuh community to enter the K-economy. Firstly we do not have the critical mass of qualified knowledge workers among the community to build a strong foundation of a K-economy. Secondly, level of awareness of the importance of the knowledge-based activities is still low. Thirdly, low level of education among the many workers from our community is in the brawn rather than the brain category. New technologies, which are taking over many of the routine and menial tasks - were performed in the workplace in a very different fashion than in the past. These new technologies are directing workers toward the more complex tasks that require thinking, understanding, assimilating new knowledge, and problem solving. These new inventions and technologies greatly changed the work scenario in modern work place. Knowledge workers use their intellect to convert their ideas into products (tangibles) and services or processes (intangibles) (Miller, 1998). In that context, and in this information revolution, ?the brains have become more valuable than brawn? (Gordon, 1997: 16).
According to Peter Drucker (1988), ?It is certain that the emergence of the knowledge worker and of the knowledge worker?s productivity as key question will, within a very few decades, bring about fundamental changes in the structure and nature of the economic system.? It is little wonder that knowledge workers pervade virtually in every facet of the workforce. It is therefore imperative that for the Bidayuh to be able to achieve the K-Bidayuh status, the whole structure of the Bidayuh society has to change and move forward. It has to be a strong caucus, a united community not parts, and pieces or in groups that must embraced the love for knowledge. The responsibility for preparing students and unskilled workers with the technical and cognitive skills required for knowledge work lies in the hands of educators, parents and community leaders. According to Boutwell (1997), the existing and future workforce must be prepared to meet the challenges posed by technology and new innovations.
Globalisation
UNESCO?s World Communication Report (1997) provides a succinct definition of globalisation, ??which refers to the increasingly world-wide nature of industrial production and trade, caused by the rapid development of new information and communication technology, and the instant, planetary transmission of their content.? With globalisation, the world has become in important respects a single social system (the global village concept or the borderless world view), as a result of growing ties of interdependence, which now affect almost everyone. With globalisation the level of interdependence between countries and communities has strengthened considerably. The globalisation is the process of integration of the world community into a common system either in terms of economics or social. What this mean is the continued exposure of the community to diverse challenges be it economic, social, or political both within and externally. Some kinds of exposure may bring to the community positive rewards while others require us to be aware of dangers as these exposures may bring with them destabilising effects to the community over the long term. These threats are real and require us to be able to counter these challenges.
Unlike the past, the Knowledge community (K-Community) work of function in a totally different fashion as seen from the table below. The K-community or organisation is seen as more varied, distributed, dynamic and autonomous. Table 1, elucidate that there are vast differences between the Production-based economy (P-Economy) and the Knowledge-based economy. Most notable are the fact that the K-economy is more robust, very dynamic and is productivity driven. The community are highly mobile and operate within the context of a borderless world. The position of the K-economy is shown in Figure 1. The production system emphasize greater Knowledge content based on K-based activities that stressed on value creation. These value-creating K-activities may comprise among others, Research and Development (R&D), Product Design and Development, Software Development, Information Communication Technology (ICT), Edutaintment, Biotechnology, Innovation Services and a host of other intangibles. The component comprising the tangibles portion of production system are gradually shrinking as the K-society are developed. These tangible economy are manufacturing, agriculture, construction and others. New K-content and activities will emerged which will create a great spin-off for the community (the K-Bidayuh community?) and a better material wellbeing will be ensured.
Table 1.The Transformation of Traditional Community to Knowledge-Community
Traditional Community or Groups Knowledge-Community or Group
Homogenous
? Group of like-minded people
? Organisationally similar in economic activities and structure, Heterogeneous
? Diverse people or groups, specializations are the norms
? Organisationally disparate
(Cross-functional)
Stable
? Structure, participants are firmly established
? Slow to add and remove members Dynamic
? Change is integral to the community
? Membership is fluid, based on needs
Focussed on the Community or Organisation Focussed on Productivity
Centrally managed
? Connected through a hierarchy Distributed or widely dispersed
? May or may not be connected to hierarchy
Predefined Boundaries
? The community or group is predetermined
? Inflexible approach (start another group) Self-defined, Organic Community
? Knowledge defines the community or group
? Adaptive to tasks
Reliant on Technical Expertise for outside the community
? Complex to establish
? Sophisticated management, maintenance Self-sufficient with Technology
? Rapid adoption of S&T, R&D
? Learn as you go enhancements
? Life-long learning
Geographically Fixed
? Few locales ? Serian, Kuching, Bau and Lundu Highly Mobile community
? Anywhere, anytime
Figure 1.
Migration to K-Economy
K-Economy
Knowledge content
CHARACTERISTICS OF A KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY (K-COMMUNITY?)
Knowledge is information that is interpreted and used by decision makers to meet their goals. Generally, knowledge can be divided into two types; knowledge about technology (see Box 1) and knowledge about attributes or tacit knowledge. This refers to the type of knowledge gained from experience which confers positive benefits or competitive advantage to the person having it. A knowledge society is one in which. its members have gained a higher average standard of education in comparison to other societies and a growing proportion of its labour force are employed as knowledge workers. OPP3 (p.121) provide several key characteristics of a knowledge-based economy
i. has abundant resources ? knowledge never deplete and is timeless and weightless
ii. no location barriers
iii. a highly educated labour force
iv. a high level of per capita wealth
v. open cosmopolitan society attractive to global talent
vi. well connected to other knowledge nodes
vii. flatter organisational structures
viii. skills and knowledge are key assets
ix. information and communications technologies (ICTs) are pillars of the knowledge-
based economy.
CURRENT STATE OF BIDAYUH COMMUNITY
The main impediments or weaknesses of the Bidayuh of today are in poverty, shortage of qualified labour or knowledge-workers and concerns with the quality and numbers of educated Bidayuh. We have one of the highest level of school dropout?s rate, low literacy rate among parents especially in rural areas and low level of education. Currently there are large numbers of out-migration of youth to urban areas to seek employment opportunities in low paying and menial jobs in cities and towns in the State as well as outside. Generally, there is poor image of rural economic activities that do not attract the younger and able-bodied youth to stay. These phenomena posed serious challenges to move towards K-Bidayuh. Consequently, the community need to take stock and rethink new measures to correct these weaknesses within the community if we were to move forward with the rest of the larger society in the country.
As the economic growth, prosperity and productivity of Malaysia becomes increasingly driven by knowledge, the key to strengthening the Bidayuh community is in ensuring it is well integrated into the K-economy future. The successful transformation of the Bidayuh to the K-economy will largely depend on human resource development and the quality of the education system. The transformation of the economy will place increased demand on technological skills and the expertise as well as labour force with tact knowledge and a high level of thinking skill. The Bidayuh economy still centres on the extraction of natural resources, the so-called Production-based economy (P-economy) even though most of the villages are within the suburban. The majority of the Bidayuh?s economies are either peasantry in nature or workers in the businesses and commercials establishments.
An analysis of the performance of the Bidayuh achievements are found in Tables 2 to 5. Based on the 2000 Population Census, there are 112,795 Bidayuh who have been through formal education. Of particular interest is the number of those with tertiary education which totalled a mere 3,750 or 3.3 per cent of the total number. The figure shows that the Chines has the highest number of graduates at 6.4 per cent , followed by Malay (5.5 %), and other Bumi at 3.5 per cent. Bidayuh ranked fourth based on the number of graduates with tertiary education level. A deeper look at these tables shows that the level of educational attaintment is still below par with the Malays and Chines. Failure to improve on this situation means that the K-Bidayuh will remain a myth, not yet a reality.
STARTEGIES FOR K BIDAYUH (KNOWLEDGE SSOCIETY)
In order to prepare the Bidayuh community to become a knowledge-based society or K-Bidayuh, the following strategies are proposed and to be further deliberated upon.
(a). Increase awareness of the greater importance of education among the Bidayuh parents, community leaders, teachers, and the children themselves. The need to acquire knowledge is more acute in the present context that it was in the past. This is necessitated by the changing work environment and the new breed of knowledge workers, the so-called ?gold-collar? workers as opposed to the ?blue-collar? and ?white-collar? workers of today. Job demand, job specifications and needs will change and favour the knowledge worker who will command better wages, salaries and hence would improve their standard of living over the long haul. Higher education in a knowledge-based economy consists of three key elements namely;
i. Emphasize on Academic excellence - Special emphasis should be placed on academic excellence in order to capitalise on the new knowledge and be at the frontiers of change.
ii. Popularisation of higher education among the Bidayuh - in a K-economy, higher education is no longer a luxury limited to the rich and the elite of the society as it was in the past. Higher education is not only required for the continuous growth of the economy, but is also demanded for the people to become just more knowledgeable. The current figure is rather dismal and more should be encouraged to take up further studies.
iii. Life-long learning or continuous learning will be the norm in a K-economy as knowledge is not static but rather a volatile and fragile ?commodity? that necessitate continuous ?maintenance?. Continuous or lifelong learning ? efforts must be made to learn some of the new skills and techniques. Learning should be an integral part of our culture of excellence; it is part and parcel of our daily activities. Develop and inculcate the ?Bidayuh as a learning community? in order to generate a rising wall of awareness among the community of the importance of knowledge in the new economy. Lifelong learning will become increasingly vital in the K-economy where knowledge and skills need to be continuously updated and upgraded. Thus it is crucial that the workforce possesses the ability to adapt and adjust to the changing demands of technological advances in the K-economy, Efforts must be undertaken to retrain and reskill the workforce through the various vocation and other groups.
b. Human resource development is pervasive: education and training must be the
community?s priority at all levels or segments of the society.
c. An efficient infrastructure must be operational or put in place, particularly in
information and communications technology (ICT) (info structure)
d. Increase the popularity of learning Sciences instead of the liberal arts among the Bidayuh children. This will enable them to be at the forefront of future changes affecting the community
e. Innovation and knowledge are fundamentals to the economic development, growth and future competitiveness, and the survival of the community. Central to this strategy must be put in place a good system of networking and partnership both within the community and the society in the larger context. As competition is the ultimate driver of innovation, this calls or more dynamism in the business community among the Bidayuh and greater mobility of knowledge-based on an effective use of information and Communication Technology (ICT) to enable increased interconnectivity between knowledge workers through virtual networking. Hence, the digital divide or gap must be bridged by establishing the requisite infostructure for the Bidayuh community. (Action plan ? each District of Kampong to have the necessary set up?)
f. As has been stressed earlier on, in a knowledge society, it is humans and human capital ? their visions, abilities, commitment, and dedication that are most important to ensure the positive development of the Bidayuh community rather than the limited physical resources and issues of the past. Empowering the Bidayuh to apply their intelligence, experience, and imagination to leverage data and information into Knowledge Society or community requires dynamic leadership, a ?can do? (Bidayuh Boleh) attitude, and a holistic approach to the community?s development.
g. Increase Internet access and usage and basic computer skills to the Bidayuh community in rural areas. (Internet Desa of the Pos Malaysia), and the e-Bario programme (Unimas) are good examples to follow.
h. Remove inhibitors and detractors as impediments to Learning and knowledge seeking.
CONCLUSION
In a knowledge-based economy, the community?s growth and continued survival will be depend on our ability to create, disseminate and apply knowledge in the workplace. This is the chief means of survival in the globalise ?new economy? of the current 21st century. Undoubtedly, the major contributions of knowledge was not only the production of economic values per se, but also to the production of cultural or humanistic values or social values. There are still strong challenges facing us in our journey towards the K-Bidayuh. But with a strong will and a firm resolve nothing is insurmountable. The New Bidayuh spirit and together with the ?can do? attitude the K-Bidayuh will succeed, slowly but surely.
REFERENCES
APEC Economic Committee. (2000). ?Towards Knowledge-based Economies in
APEC. [available at http://www.isr.gov.au/industry/neweconomy/]
Department of Statistics Malaysia. (2002). Education and Social Characteristics of the Population, Population and Housing Census of Malaysia 2002. Kuala Lumpur: Dept of Statistics.
Bender, C.E. (1997). ?Profits without People.? Phi Delta Kappan, 79 (2): 104-111. (October)
Drucker, P. (1988). ?The Coming of The New Organization,? Harvard Business Review, (January-February) :45-53.
Drucker, P. (1997). ?The Future that Has Already Happened.? Harvard Business Review, 75 (5): 20-24. (September-October)
Kelly. J. (1998). ?Those Who Can ? Those Who Cannot: Winners and Losers in the Digital Age.? Vital Speeches of the Day, 65 (3): 89-92. (November 15)
Miller, W.C. (1998). ?Fostering Intellectual Capital.? HR Focus, 75 (1): 9-10. (January)
Munk. N. (1998). ?The New Organization Man.? Fortune 137 (5): 62-74. (March 16)
UNESCO/ 1997. World Communications Report.
Table 1.2
Sarawak: Highest Level of Educational Attainment by Ethnic Groups, 2000.
Ethnic Groups Highest Level of Education Attained
Total Pre School Primary Lower Secondary Upper Secondary Vocational / Technical Trade & Technical Skills Ins. Post Secondary Tertiary
Unknown
Malay 336,122 13,436
(4.0) 128,123
(38.1) 72,849
(21.7) 72,107
(21.5) 2,885
(0.9) 1,406
(0.4) 8,310
(2.5) 18,629
(5.5) 16,377
(4.9)
Iban 361,125 9,637 (2.7) 164,930
(45.7) 89,163
(24.7) 58,891
(16.3) 2,265
(0.6) 722
(0.2) 6,632
(1.8) 7,706
(2.1) 21,179
(5.9)
Bidayuh 112,795 3,177
(2.8) 46,462
(41.2) 28,460
(25.2) 23,641
(21.0) 804
(0.7) 351
(0.3) 2,713
(2.4) 3,750
(3.3) 3,437
(3.0)
Melanau 78,414 3,481
(4.4) 34,708
(44.3) 17,896
(22.8) 15,220
(19.4) 573
(0.7) 254
(0.3) 1,674
(2.1) 2,518
(3.2) 2,090
(2.7)
Other Bumi. 73,808 2,181
(3.0) 30,176
(40.9) 18,197
(24.7) 13,933
(18.9) 498
(0.7) 341
(0.5) 1,483
(2.0) 2,568
(3.5) 4,429
(6.0)
Chinese 426,10 15,656
(3.7) 137,186
(32.1) 103,703
(24.3) 96,454
(22.6) 2,973
(0.7) 1,786
(0.4) 12,674
(3.0) 27,528
(6.4) 29,650
(6.9)
Others 5,387 202
(3.7) 1,715
(31.8) 1,092
(20.3) 1,147
(21.3) 48
(0.9) 31
(0.6) 189
(3.5) 687
(12.8) 276
(5.1)
Total * Malaysians 1,395,261 47,791
(3.4) 54,302
(3.9) 313,163
(22.4) 267,460
(19.2) 10,460
(0.7) 4,550
(0.3) 33,675
(2.4) 63,386
(4.5) 79,438
(5.7)
Notes: * Excluding Non-Malaysian Citizens totalling 60,885.
Figures in parentheses ( ) are the percentages for each category by ethnicity.
Source: Extracted form Population and Housing Census of Malaysia, 2000 (Education and
Social Characteristics of the Population) Table 3.12. pp. 261-270.
Table 1.3
Sarawak: Bidayuh Highest Level of Educational Attainment by Age Groups, 2000.
Age Groups Highest Level of Education Attained
Total Pre School Primary Lower Secondary Upper Secondary Vocational / Technical Trade & Technical Skills Ins. Post Secondary Tertiary
Unknown
112795 3177 46462 28460 23641 804 351 2713 3750 3437
0 ? 14 34,821 3,177 24128 7606 - - - - - -
15 - 24 26473 - 3371 6425 12668 382 198 1295 1449 685
25 - 34 22925 - 4535 8020 6690 234 92 994 1266 1094
35 - 44 17654 - 7382 4701 3387 150 55 325 716 749
45 ? 54 7946 - 4955 1332 783 35 5 87 275 474
55 ? 64 2213 - 1613 281 98 2 1 12 34 172
65 and above 763 - 568 95 15 1 - - 10 74
Notes: * Excluding Non-Malaysian Citizens totalling 60,885.
Figures in parentheses ( ) are the percentages for each category by ethnicity.
Source: Extracted form Population and Housing Census of Malaysia, 2000 (Education and
Social Characteristics of the Population) Table 3.12. pp. 265.
Table 1.4
Sarawak: Total Population by School Attendance and Ethnicity, 2000.
Ethnic Groups
Total Population
(%) Total Pop. 1 Ever Been to School
Total (%)
Lit. rate2 Currently Schooling (%) Completed Schooling (%) Not yet Schooling (%) Never Attended School (%)
Malay 456,393 23 336,122 74 126,896 28 209,226 46 72,900 16 47,371 10
Ibans 586,548 30 361,125 62 135,509 23 225,616 38 91,210 16 134,213 23
Bidayuh 161,873 8 112,795 70 43,448 27 69,347 43 22,757 14 26,321 16
Melanau 109,882 6 78,414 71 30,029 27 48,385 44 15,228 14 16,240 15
Other Bumi. 114,165 6 73,808 65 27,326 24 46,482 41 18,908 17 21,449 19
Total Bumiputera 1,428,861 73 962,264 67 363,208 25 599,056 42 221,003 15 245,594 17
Chinese 512,426 26 427,610 83 142,022 28 285,588 56 55,416 11 29,400 6
Others * 7,722 0.40 5,387 70 1,966 25 3,421 44 1,662 22 672 9
Total Malaysians* 1,949,008 100 1,395,261 72 507,196 26 888,065 46 278,081 14 275,666 14
Notes: * Excluding Non-Malaysian Citizens totalling 60,885.
1 These figures refer to the percentage of the ethnic groups to the total Malaysian
Population.
2 These figures refer to literacy rate among the respective ethnic groups.
Source: Extracted form Population and Housing Census of Malaysia, 2000 (Education and
Social Characteristics of the Population) Table 2.12. pp. 113-120.
Table 1.5
Bidayuh: Schooling Attendance by Age Group, 2000.
Age Groups
Total
(%) of Total Pop. Ever Been to School
Total (%) Currently Schooling (%) Completed Schooling (%) Not yet Schooling (%) Never Attended School (%)
161,873 100 112,795 70 43,448 26.84 69,347 42.8 22,757 14.1 26,321 16.3
0-14 58,370 36.1 34,821 60 33,764 57.84 1,057 1.8 22,757 39.0 792 1.4
15 -24 27,615 17.1 26,473 96 9,367 33.92 17,106 61.9 - 0.0 1,142 4.1
25 ? 34 25,457 15.7 22,925 90 201 0.79 22,724 89.3 - 0.0 2,532 9.9
35 ? 44 22,257 13.7 17,654 79 86 0.39 17,568 78.9 - 0.0 4,603 20.7
45 ? 54 13,801 8.5 7,946 58 18 0.13 7,928 57.4 - 0.0 5,855 42.4
55 ? 64 7,409 4.6 2,213 30 7 0.09 2,206 29.8 - 0.0 5,196 70.1
65 and above 6,964 4.3 763 11 5 0.07 758 10.9 - 0.0 6201 89.0
Total 161,873 100 112,795 70 43,448 26.84 69,347 42.8 22,757 14.1 26,321 16.3
Notes: * Excluding Non-Malaysian Citizens totalling 60,885.
Source: Extracted form Population and Housing Census of Malaysia, 2000
(Education and Social Characteristics of the Population) Table 2.12. pp. 115
Chapter Eleven
K-Bidayuh: Strategies to Weather The Impacts of Globalisation.
Nicholas Amin
INTRODUCTION
The maxims that says, ?knowledge is power? is truer today than ever before. The knowledge-based economy or the K-economy has been a most popular buzzword in economic development and public policies in recent years. Some of the high-income OECD member countries are labelled knowledge economies as judged by their achievements in knowledge creation and the role that knowledge has played in the growth of these economies. Despite the huge literature on the subject, the meaning of the knowledge-based economy remains unclear and each country or expert seeks to define the terms rather loosely. For instance, the United States lacking strong evidence on the causes of the country?s rapid growth since the middle of 1990s choose to call itself the ?New Economy? instead of K-economy. This phenomenon sparked what is known as New Growth Theory among economists as opposed to the conventional production system alluded to in the production-based or P-economy system. Generally, knowledge has become an increasingly important variable in growth model building as the economy moves toward knowledge-based economy.
According to the Third Outline Perspective Plan, 2001-2010 (OPP3: 24),
?The knowledge-based economy is where the acquisition, utilisation and dissemination of knowledge provide the basis for growth. The development of a knowledge-based economy involves enhancing the value-added of all productive activities through knowledge utilisation, in addition to creating new knowledge industries.?
The knowledge based economy (KBE) will become the major driving force of the ?new economy? where knowledge will contribute significantly towards economic growth and wealth creation both for the country and the State. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) defined knowledge-based economies as ?those, which are directly based on the production, distribution, and use of knowledge and information,? (OECD Report, 1996).
In traditional economics, knowledge and technology were seen only as external influences on the standard factors of production ? labour, capital, material resources and entrepreneurship. With the increasing acknowledgement of knowledge as a key factor input in modern economy (the ?new economy?), the standard neo-classical economic models have been modified to take more direct account of knowledge. (See box 1 below for the types of knowledge)
Box 1. Types of Knowledge.
The OECD Report divides knowledge into four types:
1. Know-What refers to FACTS ? the point at which knowledge is closest to information. Legal experts, medical practitioners and engineers are experts, operating in complex areas, need a great deal of this type of knowledge.
2. Know-Why is scientific knowledge about the principles and laws of nature. It underlies technological advances and is usually produced in research laboratories and universities. Thus to access this knowledge requires collaboration with these organisations or recruit the scientifically trained personnel.
3. Know-How is the skill(s) or capability to do something. This type of knowledge is spread throughout organisations and community and can vary from judging the quality of new products to the recruitment of personnel or leaders or to operate complicated machine tools.
4. Know-Who involves knowing ?who knows what and who knows how to do what.? This is becoming more important crucial as it requires special relationships to access experts and their knowledge. This requires the community to be a strong networking among ourselves as well as with those around us to our benefits.
The first two types can be obtained from explicit sources, such as books, internets, and other published or written materials and generally have very high information content. However, the latter two types of knowledge involve high degrees of personal and tacit knowledge as are much more difficult to measure and codify.
Knowledge industries include services to the business and financial sector, capital-intensive manufacturing, education and health services, scientific research, and the telecommunication sector. Broadly speaking, all sectors of the economy become knowledge-based when strategies are adopted to increase productivity through the application of knowledge, rather than via increased inputs of capital and or labour. This would definite shift the economy growth focus on knowledge (intangibles) rather than the tangibles.
While the traditional factors of production such as labour, capital and natural resources and entrepreneurship, remain vital ingredients for productivity growth, knowledge will be the key driving growth, creating new value and providing the basis to maintain the country?s competitiveness.
The nucleus of the KBE is the human capital in that it provides the capacity to create, innovate, generate and exploit new ideas as well as apply technology and exercise superior entrepreneurial skills. Towards this end, the present industries will become more knowledge-intensive and new type of industrial set up will emerge. Thus, the economy will be characterised by knowledge-base activities and this require a new genre or breed of workforce or workers generally known as the knowledge workers. Other writers describe the knowledge workers by their characteristics; people who can analyse, synthesize, and evaluate information and use that information to solve problems of variable content. A third way of describing knowledge workers is by their skills and abilities ? people who are highly educated, creative, computer literate, and have portable skills that make it possible for them to move anywhere their intelligence, talent, and services are needed (Munk, 1998).
Admittedly, the above scenario posed several questions and challenges to the state of readiness and or preparedness of the Bidayuh community to enter the K-economy. Firstly we do not have the critical mass of qualified knowledge workers among the community to build a strong foundation of a K-economy. Secondly, level of awareness of the importance of the knowledge-based activities is still low. Thirdly, low level of education among the many workers from our community is in the brawn rather than the brain category. New technologies, which are taking over many of the routine and menial tasks - were performed in the workplace in a very different fashion than in the past. These new technologies are directing workers toward the more complex tasks that require thinking, understanding, assimilating new knowledge, and problem solving. These new inventions and technologies greatly changed the work scenario in modern work place. Knowledge workers use their intellect to convert their ideas into products (tangibles) and services or processes (intangibles) (Miller, 1998). In that context, and in this information revolution, ?the brains have become more valuable than brawn? (Gordon, 1997: 16).
According to Peter Drucker (1988), ?It is certain that the emergence of the knowledge worker and of the knowledge worker?s productivity as key question will, within a very few decades, bring about fundamental changes in the structure and nature of the economic system.? It is little wonder that knowledge workers pervade virtually in every facet of the workforce. It is therefore imperative that for the Bidayuh to be able to achieve the K-Bidayuh status, the whole structure of the Bidayuh society has to change and move forward. It has to be a strong caucus, a united community not parts, and pieces or in groups that must embraced the love for knowledge. The responsibility for preparing students and unskilled workers with the technical and cognitive skills required for knowledge work lies in the hands of educators, parents and community leaders. According to Boutwell (1997), the existing and future workforce must be prepared to meet the challenges posed by technology and new innovations.
Globalisation
UNESCO?s World Communication Report (1997) provides a succinct definition of globalisation, ??which refers to the increasingly world-wide nature of industrial production and trade, caused by the rapid development of new information and communication technology, and the instant, planetary transmission of their content.? With globalisation, the world has become in important respects a single social system (the global village concept or the borderless world view), as a result of growing ties of interdependence, which now affect almost everyone. With globalisation the level of interdependence between countries and communities has strengthened considerably. The globalisation is the process of integration of the world community into a common system either in terms of economics or social. What this mean is the continued exposure of the community to diverse challenges be it economic, social, or political both within and externally. Some kinds of exposure may bring to the community positive rewards while others require us to be aware of dangers as these exposures may bring with them destabilising effects to the community over the long term. These threats are real and require us to be able to counter these challenges.
Unlike the past, the Knowledge community (K-Community) work of function in a totally different fashion as seen from the table below. The K-community or organisation is seen as more varied, distributed, dynamic and autonomous. Table 1, elucidate that there are vast differences between the Production-based economy (P-Economy) and the Knowledge-based economy. Most notable are the fact that the K-economy is more robust, very dynamic and is productivity driven. The community are highly mobile and operate within the context of a borderless world. The position of the K-economy is shown in Figure 1. The production system emphasize greater Knowledge content based on K-based activities that stressed on value creation. These value-creating K-activities may comprise among others, Research and Development (R&D), Product Design and Development, Software Development, Information Communication Technology (ICT), Edutaintment, Biotechnology, Innovation Services and a host of other intangibles. The component comprising the tangibles portion of production system are gradually shrinking as the K-society are developed. These tangible economy are manufacturing, agriculture, construction and others. New K-content and activities will emerged which will create a great spin-off for the community (the K-Bidayuh community?) and a better material wellbeing will be ensured.
Table 1.The Transformation of Traditional Community to Knowledge-Community
Traditional Community or Groups Knowledge-Community or Group
Homogenous
? Group of like-minded people
? Organisationally similar in economic activities and structure, Heterogeneous
? Diverse people or groups, specializations are the norms
? Organisationally disparate
(Cross-functional)
Stable
? Structure, participants are firmly established
? Slow to add and remove members Dynamic
? Change is integral to the community
? Membership is fluid, based on needs
Focussed on the Community or Organisation Focussed on Productivity
Centrally managed
? Connected through a hierarchy Distributed or widely dispersed
? May or may not be connected to hierarchy
Predefined Boundaries
? The community or group is predetermined
? Inflexible approach (start another group) Self-defined, Organic Community
? Knowledge defines the community or group
? Adaptive to tasks
Reliant on Technical Expertise for outside the community
? Complex to establish
? Sophisticated management, maintenance Self-sufficient with Technology
? Rapid adoption of S&T, R&D
? Learn as you go enhancements
? Life-long learning
Geographically Fixed
? Few locales ? Serian, Kuching, Bau and Lundu Highly Mobile community
? Anywhere, anytime
Figure 1.
Migration to K-Economy
K-Economy
Knowledge content
CHARACTERISTICS OF A KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY (K-COMMUNITY?)
Knowledge is information that is interpreted and used by decision makers to meet their goals. Generally, knowledge can be divided into two types; knowledge about technology (see Box 1) and knowledge about attributes or tacit knowledge. This refers to the type of knowledge gained from experience which confers positive benefits or competitive advantage to the person having it. A knowledge society is one in which. its members have gained a higher average standard of education in comparison to other societies and a growing proportion of its labour force are employed as knowledge workers. OPP3 (p.121) provide several key characteristics of a knowledge-based economy
i. has abundant resources ? knowledge never deplete and is timeless and weightless
ii. no location barriers
iii. a highly educated labour force
iv. a high level of per capita wealth
v. open cosmopolitan society attractive to global talent
vi. well connected to other knowledge nodes
vii. flatter organisational structures
viii. skills and knowledge are key assets
ix. information and communications technologies (ICTs) are pillars of the knowledge-
based economy.
CURRENT STATE OF BIDAYUH COMMUNITY
The main impediments or weaknesses of the Bidayuh of today are in poverty, shortage of qualified labour or knowledge-workers and concerns with the quality and numbers of educated Bidayuh. We have one of the highest level of school dropout?s rate, low literacy rate among parents especially in rural areas and low level of education. Currently there are large numbers of out-migration of youth to urban areas to seek employment opportunities in low paying and menial jobs in cities and towns in the State as well as outside. Generally, there is poor image of rural economic activities that do not attract the younger and able-bodied youth to stay. These phenomena posed serious challenges to move towards K-Bidayuh. Consequently, the community need to take stock and rethink new measures to correct these weaknesses within the community if we were to move forward with the rest of the larger society in the country.
As the economic growth, prosperity and productivity of Malaysia becomes increasingly driven by knowledge, the key to strengthening the Bidayuh community is in ensuring it is well integrated into the K-economy future. The successful transformation of the Bidayuh to the K-economy will largely depend on human resource development and the quality of the education system. The transformation of the economy will place increased demand on technological skills and the expertise as well as labour force with tact knowledge and a high level of thinking skill. The Bidayuh economy still centres on the extraction of natural resources, the so-called Production-based economy (P-economy) even though most of the villages are within the suburban. The majority of the Bidayuh?s economies are either peasantry in nature or workers in the businesses and commercials establishments.
An analysis of the performance of the Bidayuh achievements are found in Tables 2 to 5. Based on the 2000 Population Census, there are 112,795 Bidayuh who have been through formal education. Of particular interest is the number of those with tertiary education which totalled a mere 3,750 or 3.3 per cent of the total number. The figure shows that the Chines has the highest number of graduates at 6.4 per cent , followed by Malay (5.5 %), and other Bumi at 3.5 per cent. Bidayuh ranked fourth based on the number of graduates with tertiary education level. A deeper look at these tables shows that the level of educational attaintment is still below par with the Malays and Chines. Failure to improve on this situation means that the K-Bidayuh will remain a myth, not yet a reality.
STARTEGIES FOR K BIDAYUH (KNOWLEDGE SSOCIETY)
In order to prepare the Bidayuh community to become a knowledge-based society or K-Bidayuh, the following strategies are proposed and to be further deliberated upon.
(a). Increase awareness of the greater importance of education among the Bidayuh parents, community leaders, teachers, and the children themselves. The need to acquire knowledge is more acute in the present context that it was in the past. This is necessitated by the changing work environment and the new breed of knowledge workers, the so-called ?gold-collar? workers as opposed to the ?blue-collar? and ?white-collar? workers of today. Job demand, job specifications and needs will change and favour the knowledge worker who will command better wages, salaries and hence would improve their standard of living over the long haul. Higher education in a knowledge-based economy consists of three key elements namely;
i. Emphasize on Academic excellence - Special emphasis should be placed on academic excellence in order to capitalise on the new knowledge and be at the frontiers of change.
ii. Popularisation of higher education among the Bidayuh - in a K-economy, higher education is no longer a luxury limited to the rich and the elite of the society as it was in the past. Higher education is not only required for the continuous growth of the economy, but is also demanded for the people to become just more knowledgeable. The current figure is rather dismal and more should be encouraged to take up further studies.
iii. Life-long learning or continuous learning will be the norm in a K-economy as knowledge is not static but rather a volatile and fragile ?commodity? that necessitate continuous ?maintenance?. Continuous or lifelong learning ? efforts must be made to learn some of the new skills and techniques. Learning should be an integral part of our culture of excellence; it is part and parcel of our daily activities. Develop and inculcate the ?Bidayuh as a learning community? in order to generate a rising wall of awareness among the community of the importance of knowledge in the new economy. Lifelong learning will become increasingly vital in the K-economy where knowledge and skills need to be continuously updated and upgraded. Thus it is crucial that the workforce possesses the ability to adapt and adjust to the changing demands of technological advances in the K-economy, Efforts must be undertaken to retrain and reskill the workforce through the various vocation and other groups.
b. Human resource development is pervasive: education and training must be the
community?s priority at all levels or segments of the society.
c. An efficient infrastructure must be operational or put in place, particularly in
information and communications technology (ICT) (info structure)
d. Increase the popularity of learning Sciences instead of the liberal arts among the Bidayuh children. This will enable them to be at the forefront of future changes affecting the community
e. Innovation and knowledge are fundamentals to the economic development, growth and future competitiveness, and the survival of the community. Central to this strategy must be put in place a good system of networking and partnership both within the community and the society in the larger context. As competition is the ultimate driver of innovation, this calls or more dynamism in the business community among the Bidayuh and greater mobility of knowledge-based on an effective use of information and Communication Technology (ICT) to enable increased interconnectivity between knowledge workers through virtual networking. Hence, the digital divide or gap must be bridged by establishing the requisite infostructure for the Bidayuh community. (Action plan ? each District of Kampong to have the necessary set up?)
f. As has been stressed earlier on, in a knowledge society, it is humans and human capital ? their visions, abilities, commitment, and dedication that are most important to ensure the positive development of the Bidayuh community rather than the limited physical resources and issues of the past. Empowering the Bidayuh to apply their intelligence, experience, and imagination to leverage data and information into Knowledge Society or community requires dynamic leadership, a ?can do? (Bidayuh Boleh) attitude, and a holistic approach to the community?s development.
g. Increase Internet access and usage and basic computer skills to the Bidayuh community in rural areas. (Internet Desa of the Pos Malaysia), and the e-Bario programme (Unimas) are good examples to follow.
h. Remove inhibitors and detractors as impediments to Learning and knowledge seeking.
CONCLUSION
In a knowledge-based economy, the community?s growth and continued survival will be depend on our ability to create, disseminate and apply knowledge in the workplace. This is the chief means of survival in the globalise ?new economy? of the current 21st century. Undoubtedly, the major contributions of knowledge was not only the production of economic values per se, but also to the production of cultural or humanistic values or social values. There are still strong challenges facing us in our journey towards the K-Bidayuh. But with a strong will and a firm resolve nothing is insurmountable. The New Bidayuh spirit and together with the ?can do? attitude the K-Bidayuh will succeed, slowly but surely.
REFERENCES
APEC Economic Committee. (2000). ?Towards Knowledge-based Economies in
APEC. [available at http://www.isr.gov.au/industry/neweconomy/]
Department of Statistics Malaysia. (2002). Education and Social Characteristics of the Population, Population and Housing Census of Malaysia 2002. Kuala Lumpur: Dept of Statistics.
Bender, C.E. (1997). ?Profits without People.? Phi Delta Kappan, 79 (2): 104-111. (October)
Drucker, P. (1988). ?The Coming of The New Organization,? Harvard Business Review, (January-February) :45-53.
Drucker, P. (1997). ?The Future that Has Already Happened.? Harvard Business Review, 75 (5): 20-24. (September-October)
Kelly. J. (1998). ?Those Who Can ? Those Who Cannot: Winners and Losers in the Digital Age.? Vital Speeches of the Day, 65 (3): 89-92. (November 15)
Miller, W.C. (1998). ?Fostering Intellectual Capital.? HR Focus, 75 (1): 9-10. (January)
Munk. N. (1998). ?The New Organization Man.? Fortune 137 (5): 62-74. (March 16)
UNESCO/ 1997. World Communications Report.
Table 1.2
Sarawak: Highest Level of Educational Attainment by Ethnic Groups, 2000.
Ethnic Groups Highest Level of Education Attained
Total Pre School Primary Lower Secondary Upper Secondary Vocational / Technical Trade & Technical Skills Ins. Post Secondary Tertiary
Unknown
Malay 336,122 13,436
(4.0) 128,123
(38.1) 72,849
(21.7) 72,107
(21.5) 2,885
(0.9) 1,406
(0.4) 8,310
(2.5) 18,629
(5.5) 16,377
(4.9)
Iban 361,125 9,637 (2.7) 164,930
(45.7) 89,163
(24.7) 58,891
(16.3) 2,265
(0.6) 722
(0.2) 6,632
(1.8) 7,706
(2.1) 21,179
(5.9)
Bidayuh 112,795 3,177
(2.8) 46,462
(41.2) 28,460
(25.2) 23,641
(21.0) 804
(0.7) 351
(0.3) 2,713
(2.4) 3,750
(3.3) 3,437
(3.0)
Melanau 78,414 3,481
(4.4) 34,708
(44.3) 17,896
(22.8) 15,220
(19.4) 573
(0.7) 254
(0.3) 1,674
(2.1) 2,518
(3.2) 2,090
(2.7)
Other Bumi. 73,808 2,181
(3.0) 30,176
(40.9) 18,197
(24.7) 13,933
(18.9) 498
(0.7) 341
(0.5) 1,483
(2.0) 2,568
(3.5) 4,429
(6.0)
Chinese 426,10 15,656
(3.7) 137,186
(32.1) 103,703
(24.3) 96,454
(22.6) 2,973
(0.7) 1,786
(0.4) 12,674
(3.0) 27,528
(6.4) 29,650
(6.9)
Others 5,387 202
(3.7) 1,715
(31.8) 1,092
(20.3) 1,147
(21.3) 48
(0.9) 31
(0.6) 189
(3.5) 687
(12.8) 276
(5.1)
Total * Malaysians 1,395,261 47,791
(3.4) 54,302
(3.9) 313,163
(22.4) 267,460
(19.2) 10,460
(0.7) 4,550
(0.3) 33,675
(2.4) 63,386
(4.5) 79,438
(5.7)
Notes: * Excluding Non-Malaysian Citizens totalling 60,885.
Figures in parentheses ( ) are the percentages for each category by ethnicity.
Source: Extracted form Population and Housing Census of Malaysia, 2000 (Education and
Social Characteristics of the Population) Table 3.12. pp. 261-270.
Table 1.3
Sarawak: Bidayuh Highest Level of Educational Attainment by Age Groups, 2000.
Age Groups Highest Level of Education Attained
Total Pre School Primary Lower Secondary Upper Secondary Vocational / Technical Trade & Technical Skills Ins. Post Secondary Tertiary
Unknown
112795 3177 46462 28460 23641 804 351 2713 3750 3437
0 ? 14 34,821 3,177 24128 7606 - - - - - -
15 - 24 26473 - 3371 6425 12668 382 198 1295 1449 685
25 - 34 22925 - 4535 8020 6690 234 92 994 1266 1094
35 - 44 17654 - 7382 4701 3387 150 55 325 716 749
45 ? 54 7946 - 4955 1332 783 35 5 87 275 474
55 ? 64 2213 - 1613 281 98 2 1 12 34 172
65 and above 763 - 568 95 15 1 - - 10 74
Notes: * Excluding Non-Malaysian Citizens totalling 60,885.
Figures in parentheses ( ) are the percentages for each category by ethnicity.
Source: Extracted form Population and Housing Census of Malaysia, 2000 (Education and
Social Characteristics of the Population) Table 3.12. pp. 265.
Table 1.4
Sarawak: Total Population by School Attendance and Ethnicity, 2000.
Ethnic Groups
Total Population
(%) Total Pop. 1 Ever Been to School
Total (%)
Lit. rate2 Currently Schooling (%) Completed Schooling (%) Not yet Schooling (%) Never Attended School (%)
Malay 456,393 23 336,122 74 126,896 28 209,226 46 72,900 16 47,371 10
Ibans 586,548 30 361,125 62 135,509 23 225,616 38 91,210 16 134,213 23
Bidayuh 161,873 8 112,795 70 43,448 27 69,347 43 22,757 14 26,321 16
Melanau 109,882 6 78,414 71 30,029 27 48,385 44 15,228 14 16,240 15
Other Bumi. 114,165 6 73,808 65 27,326 24 46,482 41 18,908 17 21,449 19
Total Bumiputera 1,428,861 73 962,264 67 363,208 25 599,056 42 221,003 15 245,594 17
Chinese 512,426 26 427,610 83 142,022 28 285,588 56 55,416 11 29,400 6
Others * 7,722 0.40 5,387 70 1,966 25 3,421 44 1,662 22 672 9
Total Malaysians* 1,949,008 100 1,395,261 72 507,196 26 888,065 46 278,081 14 275,666 14
Notes: * Excluding Non-Malaysian Citizens totalling 60,885.
1 These figures refer to the percentage of the ethnic groups to the total Malaysian
Population.
2 These figures refer to literacy rate among the respective ethnic groups.
Source: Extracted form Population and Housing Census of Malaysia, 2000 (Education and
Social Characteristics of the Population) Table 2.12. pp. 113-120.
Table 1.5
Bidayuh: Schooling Attendance by Age Group, 2000.
Age Groups
Total
(%) of Total Pop. Ever Been to School
Total (%) Currently Schooling (%) Completed Schooling (%) Not yet Schooling (%) Never Attended School (%)
161,873 100 112,795 70 43,448 26.84 69,347 42.8 22,757 14.1 26,321 16.3
0-14 58,370 36.1 34,821 60 33,764 57.84 1,057 1.8 22,757 39.0 792 1.4
15 -24 27,615 17.1 26,473 96 9,367 33.92 17,106 61.9 - 0.0 1,142 4.1
25 ? 34 25,457 15.7 22,925 90 201 0.79 22,724 89.3 - 0.0 2,532 9.9
35 ? 44 22,257 13.7 17,654 79 86 0.39 17,568 78.9 - 0.0 4,603 20.7
45 ? 54 13,801 8.5 7,946 58 18 0.13 7,928 57.4 - 0.0 5,855 42.4
55 ? 64 7,409 4.6 2,213 30 7 0.09 2,206 29.8 - 0.0 5,196 70.1
65 and above 6,964 4.3 763 11 5 0.07 758 10.9 - 0.0 6201 89.0
Total 161,873 100 112,795 70 43,448 26.84 69,347 42.8 22,757 14.1 26,321 16.3
Notes: * Excluding Non-Malaysian Citizens totalling 60,885.
Source: Extracted form Population and Housing Census of Malaysia, 2000
(Education and Social Characteristics of the Population) Table 2.12. pp. 115
Thank you for submitting your article to bidayuh dotcom. bidayuh dotcom do not edit the contents of this article. bidayuh dotcom have the right to remove any material posted found not fit or being request to remove.
If you like the article or would like to comment please send your email to the author.