Taiwan is facing a long-term population crisis.
Taiwan's birth rate has dropped to 1.3 per 1,000 women, one of the lowest in the world. This is a number just high enough to sustain the population. Taiwan may see negative population growth in the future.
The low birth rate will lead to many serious social problems. Social institutions like schools will have to shut down. The economy will come to a halt because of a dramatic decrease in the labor force and consumption. The youth in the future will have to shoulder the heavy burden of elder care as society ages.
Although government officials and legislators have sensed the crisis, they blame individuals for the problem. Government officials first attributed the low birth rate to today's young people being unwilling to accept responsibility, so they wanted to levy a tax on being single. Then some legislators blamed homosexuals for the low birth rate.
These absurd comments highlight Taiwan's ignorance of social welfare. By condemning individuals, politicians neglect the importance of a social welfare system.
Do young people really not want to have children?
Obviously, the answer is that they do want to have children. According to surveys by demographers, less than 1 percent of married women in Taiwan do not want to have children. Less than 5 percent of them want to have only one child. Most of them think the ideal number of children is more than two.
In other words, the problem is not that young couples do not want to have children but the fact that they feel unable to fulfill their goal of rearing children.
So the real question we need to ask is, what factors dissuade them from having children?
There has been an interesting phenomenon in the West in recent years: countries with higher birth rates are the ones where a higher percentage of women work.
The key lies in whether the overall social and economic system guarantees real gender equality in the workplace and whether it provides inexpensive public services.
Women with higher levels of education have stronger desires to develop careers. Having children often means giving up one's career. If a country's costs for birth and education are too high, more women tend to give up having children in order to pursue their careers.
On the other hand, if a country allows women to take days off to look after their babies, women naturally will be more willing to have children.
Similarly, if a country leaves child care to the market, many families will not be able to afford the expense.
The reason that the birth rate in Taiwan has reached a record low is the lack of gender equality in the workplace and a child care system that is too oriented around the market. As long as some women are forced to give up having children in order to keep their jobs, the birth rate will decrease.
Similarly, because market-oriented child care consumes half of the income made by many young couples, they will also be dissuaded from having children.
In order to solve the low birth rate problem, the most fundamental steps to take are to establish a sound system securing women's positions at work and to provide inexpensive child care services.
Neither the pan-green nor pan-blue camp is thinking about this situation in the right way.
We are facing an immediate crisis. If the ruling and opposition parties do not deal with it by proposing social policies that young voters need, what we are going to encounter is a disappearing generation-to-come.
Chien Hsi-chieh is the executive director of the Peacetime Foundation of Taiwan.
Translated by Jennie Shih
Former US president Jimmy Carter’s legacy regarding Taiwan is a complex tapestry woven with decisions that, while controversial, were instrumental in shaping the nation’s path and its enduring relationship with the US. As the world reflects on Carter’s life and his recent passing at the age of 100, his presidency marked a transformative era in Taiwan-US-China relations, particularly through the landmark decision in 1978 to formally recognize the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as the sole legal government of China, effectively derecognizing the Republic of China (ROC) based in Taiwan. That decision continues to influence geopolitical dynamics and Taiwan’s unique
Having enjoyed contributing regular essays to the Liberty Times and Taipei Times now for several years, I feel it is time to pull back. As some of my readers know, I have enjoyed a decades-long relationship with Taiwan. My most recent visit was just a few months ago, when I was invited to deliver a keynote speech at a major conference in Taipei. Unfortunately, my trip intersected with Double Ten celebrations, so I missed the opportunity to call on friends in government, as well as colleagues in the new AIT building, that replaced the old Xin-yi Road complex. I have
On New Year’s Day, it is customary to reflect on what the coming year might bring and how the past has brought about the current juncture. Just as Taiwan is preparing itself for what US president-elect Donald Trump’s second term would mean for its economy, national security and the cross-strait “status quo” this year, the passing of former US president Jimmy Carter on Monday at the age of 100 brought back painful memories of his 1978 decision to stop recognizing the Republic of China as the seat of China in favor of the People’s Republic of China. It is an
After forcing through a slew of controversial amendments, the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on Tuesday last week rejected all seven Constiutional Court candidates nominated by President William Lai (賴清德), an event that triggered public concerns that it could lead to an unprecedented constitutional crisis and jeopardize Taiwan’s democracy. The opposition parties on Dec. 20 forced through three controversial amendments to the Public Officials Election and Recall Act (公職人員選舉罷免法), the Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures (財政收支劃分法) and the Constitutional Court Procedure Act (憲法訴訟法). The amendment to tighten the recall process has been