Agriculture has seen its importance in Taiwan subside significantly in the past 50 years, accounting for just 1.5 percent of the nation’s GDP in 2008, compared with 32.2 percent in 1952. Nonetheless, the sector is still crucial to Taiwan in terms of food security and conservation.
Nowadays, when visiting any farming village around the country, one only sees aging farmers, old facilities and a sizable amount of land lying fallow. According to the government’s census data, full-time farming households made up about 21 percent of the total population in 2007, down from 40 percent in 1955, and only 740,000 people were employed by the sector in 2007, compared with 1.67 million in 1955.
A major problem for Taiwan’s agricultural sector is the small scale of farming. Official data show that in 2006 the average farm size in Taiwan was 1 hectare, compared with 1.6 hectares in Japan, 20 hectares in the EU and 190 hectares in the US. Moreover, among all farming households in this country, only 25 percent own a farm larger than 1 hectare. Given this abundance of small farms and resulting lack in economies of scale, and in the face of pressure from global trade liberalization, efforts to pursue higher productivity and competitiveness for Taiwan’s agriculture sector would seem to be fruitless.
The Farm Villages Revival Act (農村再生條例) — which aims to renew about 4,000 farm and fishing villages around the country over 10 years and passed its third reading in the legislature on Wednesday — has failed to address these issues, which prompted several groups of farmers to stage an overnight sit-in protest in front of the Presidential Office yesterday.
Under the law, the government will allocate NT$150 billion (US$4.67 billion) over a period of 10 years to construct rural infrastructure projects, renovate individual farmhouses, proceed with cultural preservation and ecological conservation, develop leisure farming and nurture local talent.
The law also stipulates that organizations in farming villages will have the ability to propose renewal plans to authorities, and only farmers and fishermen are eligible to apply for funding and participate in the revival projects.
However, this has not eased concern that business groups might collude with major rural organizations to control revival projects, or that idle farmland will fall into the hands of land speculators. Not to mention that owners of small farms and their tenants will have to compete with four major rural groups — farmers’ associations, fishermen’s associations, irrigation associations and agricultural cooperatives, which have close links with grassroots politicians — for government funding.
While these concerns are indeed important, the major problem with the legislation lies with the fact that the government is pursuing infrastructure construction rather than industrial upgrading to address Taiwan’s agricultural problems.
Yunlin County Commissioner Su Chih-fen (蘇治芬) rightly pointed out on Wednesday that the law only aims to provide farmers and fishermen with a better living environment and does nothing to offer them better means to earn a living, and that it does not address any of the agricultural sector’s overarching challenges.
Now that the law has been passed, the government and all taxpayers need to make sure that the funds are used and distributed properly and that effective oversight mechanisms are established.
Unfortunately, despite the passage of the Farm Villages Revival Act, Taiwan is still in dire need of a policy which can help farmers lower production costs and adopt modern practices in marketing, assist them to integrate resources and farmlands to boost economic scale and eventually enhance their production efficiency and competitiveness.
US aerospace company Boeing Co has in recent years been involved in numerous safety incidents, including crashes of its 737 Max airliners, which have caused widespread concern about the company’s safety record. It has recently come to light that titanium jet engine parts used by Boeing and its European competitor Airbus SE were sold with falsified documentation. The source of the titanium used in these parts has been traced back to an unknown Chinese company. It is clear that China is trying to sneak questionable titanium materials into the supply chain and use any ensuing problems as an opportunity to
It’s not every month that the US Department of State sends two deputy assistant secretary-level officials to Taiwan, together. Its rarer still that such senior State Department policy officers, once on the ground in Taipei, make a point of huddling with fellow diplomats from “like-minded” NATO, ANZUS and Japanese governments to coordinate their multilateral Taiwan policies. The State Department issued a press release on June 22 admitting that the two American “representatives” had “hosted consultations in Taipei” with their counterparts from the “Taiwan Ministry of Foreign Affairs.” The consultations were blandly dubbed the “US-Taiwan Working Group on International Organizations.” The State
The Chinese Supreme People’s Court and other government agencies released new legal guidelines criminalizing “Taiwan independence diehard separatists.” While mostly symbolic — the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never had jurisdiction over Taiwan — Tamkang University Graduate Institute of China Studies associate professor Chang Wu-ueh (張五岳), an expert on cross-strait relations, said: “They aim to explain domestically how they are countering ‘Taiwan independence,’ they aim to declare internationally their claimed jurisdiction over Taiwan and they aim to deter Taiwanese.” Analysts do not know for sure why Beijing is propagating these guidelines now. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), deciphering the
The Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercises, the largest naval exercise in the region, are aimed at deepening international collaboration and interaction while strengthening tactical capabilities and flexibility in tackling maritime crises. China was invited to participate in RIMPAC in 2014 and 2016, but it was excluded this year. The underlying reason is that Beijing’s ambitions of regional expansion and challenging the international order have raised global concern. The world has made clear its suspicions of China, and its exclusion from RIMPAC this year will bring about a sea change in years to come. The purpose of excluding China is primarily