Non-Oil GDP Share: 70.5% ▲ +9.5pp vs 2017 | QS Ranking — SQU: #334 ▲ ↑28 places | Fiscal Balance: +2.8% GDP ▲ 3rd surplus year | CPI Rank: 50th ▲ +20 places | Global Innovation Index: 69th ▲ +10 vs 2022 | Green H₂ Pipeline: $30B+ ▲ 2 new deals 2025 | Gross Public Debt: ~35% GDP ▲ ↓ from 44% | Digitalised Procedures: 2,680 ▲ of 2,869 target | Non-Oil GDP Share: 70.5% ▲ +9.5pp vs 2017 | QS Ranking — SQU: #334 ▲ ↑28 places | Fiscal Balance: +2.8% GDP ▲ 3rd surplus year | CPI Rank: 50th ▲ +20 places | Global Innovation Index: 69th ▲ +10 vs 2022 | Green H₂ Pipeline: $30B+ ▲ 2 new deals 2025 | Gross Public Debt: ~35% GDP ▲ ↓ from 44% | Digitalised Procedures: 2,680 ▲ of 2,869 target |
Encyclopedia

Oman's Economic Competitiveness vs Singapore's Economic Competitiveness: Comparison

Comparing Oman's Economic Competitiveness and Singapore's Economic Competitiveness in the context of Oman and GCC development

Overview

Singapore is frequently cited as a benchmark for small, resource-limited economies that have achieved world-class competitiveness. While the comparison with Oman involves very different contexts, Singapore’s development model offers relevant lessons for Vision 2040.

Oman’s Economic Competitiveness

Oman ranks approximately 50th to 60th on global competitiveness indices, with strengths in macroeconomic stability and infrastructure, and weaknesses in innovation capacity, labour market flexibility, and business dynamism. Oman’s competitiveness is partly resource-based, relying on hydrocarbon revenues and strategic geographic location. Institutional quality is improving under Vision 2040 reforms but remains below advanced economy standards.

Singapore’s Economic Competitiveness

Singapore consistently ranks in the top three globally on competitiveness indices. Its success rests on exceptional governance, a world-class education system, rule of law, openness to trade and investment, and continuous institutional innovation. Singapore’s port is the world’s second-busiest, its financial centre is globally significant, and its workforce is among the most skilled. Singapore achieved this without natural resources, relying entirely on human capital and institutional quality.

Key Differences

Singapore’s advantages stem from institutional quality, human capital, and openness, all of which can be developed over time. Oman has natural resource advantages that Singapore lacks but has not yet matched Singapore’s institutional efficiency or innovation capacity. Singapore’s population is similar in size to Oman’s, suggesting that small-nation governance advantages could apply to both. Singapore’s development took four decades of sustained policy focus.

Verdict / Bottom Line

Oman cannot replicate Singapore’s model directly, but specific elements are highly relevant: meritocratic public service, education excellence, regulatory efficiency, and a genuine welcome for foreign talent and capital. Oman’s natural advantages in energy, minerals, and geography, combined with Singapore-style institutional quality, could create a uniquely competitive position.