Singapore is doubling down on intellectual property as a strategic economic asset, arguing that patents, trademarks and other intangible rights are no longer peripheral legal matters but core drivers of growth, jobs and global competitiveness.

At a roundtable discussion held during the International Trademark Association’s 148th Annual Meeting at the Excel London, Kong Hwee Tan, chief executive of the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS), framed the country’s approach as practical and long-term: the government is pairing heavy investment in research with a national IP strategy to steer outcomes into commercial value and jobs.

“We have two major national frameworks that is placed side by side. One of these is research, innovation, enterprise – RIE 2030 – and the other one is the Singapore IP Strategy 2030,”he told the audience.

Tan used two contrasting national landmarks to illustrate Singapore’s mindset: the Marina Bay Sandsskyline and the subterranean Jurong Rock Caverns. The former is a global tourist icon; the latter is a pragmatic engineering response to energy security. The juxtaposition was meant to show how creative, long-term planning turns scarcity into strategic advantage – a mindset now being applied to intangible assets.

Tan pointed to data showing that IP-rich firms in Singapore punch well above their weight. “Although only 13.5% of our companies are patent intensive, these companies were contributing about 50% to our value add,” he said, underscoring why IP is being elevated from cost line to balance-sheet consideration.

Singapore’s strategy has two complementary pillars:

• RIE 2030 (Research, Innovation and Enterprise). Described as the engine and fuel of the ship Singapore, this five‑year funding cycle recently committed S$37 billion (US$29 billion) to research and innovation, channelled to universities, enterprises and R&D operations.
• Singapore IP Strategy 2030. Likened to the ship’s wheel, this strategy aims to make Singapore a regional IP hub, support enterprises in building IP portfolios, and ensure that workers benefit from an innovation-led economy.

Speakers stressed that money alone is not enough: policy design, ecosystem tools and industry partnerships are all needed to convert R&D into protected, monetizable assets. IPOS and partner agencies have launched practical tools, from grants and training to disclosure frameworks and valuation guidelines, to help firms, especially SMEs, translate innovation into defensible market positions.

“The value of intangible assets globally has exceeded US$65 trillion, apparently surpassing all physical assets that we can see otherwise. Yet, when you walk into an SME or MNC board room, you still see IP as a cost, but not so much as an asset,” said Dixon Soh, a director at CHP Law in Singapore and and former senior legal counsel at IPOS.

Welly Tantono, executive head of legal, compliance and information security at Singapore-based gaming-chair maker Secretlab, provided a startup-to-scale case study. The company’s IP awakening began with a cease-and-desist over a product name and evolved into a deliberate strategy of licensing, registering and enforcing rights across key markets.

Tantono described how IP enabled market access (platform storefronts often require trademark evidence), collaboration (licensing deals with major entertainment brands), and deterrence (visible patent or registration numbers discourage copycats). Her message was practical: IP investment is an enabler of growth, not merely a legal cost.

Panelists and attendees agreed on three recurring obstacles:

• Awareness and timing. Many SMEs only discover the importance of IP after a dispute. IPOS research shows only a minority of innovators actively manage IP strategies, leaving value unrealized.
• Capability gaps. Firms often lack personnel who can translate technical innovation into IP filings and commercial narratives. Patent and trademark practitioners themselves can be siloed by specialism.
• Resource constraints. Startups face trade-offs between immediate product development and the time‑consuming work of invention disclosure, filing and portfolio management.

Speakers urged early, pragmatic action: file basic protections early, prioritize filings by commercial markets, and use grants to de-risk experimentation. As one panellist put it, a modest trademark filing can be an inexpensive piece of insurance for a young company.

Speakers closed with a practical call to action: connect early with IP authorities and advisors, be strategic about what to protect, and integrate IP thinking into product, marketing and finance decisions.For policymakers, the message was to keep building tools that lower the cost and complexity of IP management for SMEs.

Singapore’s aim is clear, Tan said: to steer public investment in research into commercial outcomes that create jobs and sustainable value, and to make IP a visible, manageable asset rather than an invisible legal afterthought.

• By Gregory Glass in London