Democratic Progressive Party Legislator William Lai (賴清德), who is running in the Greater Tainan mayoral election next month, has said that he will establish an agricultural think tank if elected, adding that he encourages the establishment of farming schools where agricultural techniques can be exchanged in local communities.
Nowadays, when talk of profit dominates politics, the idea of incorporating the wisdom of our older generation of farmers into policy is indeed a welcome change.
The nation’s traditional farmers were around long before chemical pesticides started being used. In days gone by, our farmlands were beautiful, our waters were clean and we had an abundance of fauna. We need to remember these times for if that precious knowledge is not quickly collated and passed on, I am afraid that future generations of Taiwanese will get used to the dilapidated farming villages we already have and they will be unable to develop any real love for our land.
Much more valuable than this, however, is the understanding farmers have of our ecosystems. In the past, our farmers relied on the good bacteria that existed in vast quantities in our land as they made organic fertilizer, softened up the soil and helped the land absorb nutrients.
However, the way chemical fertilizer has been abused over the last 50 years has seen our farmlands deteriorate with only pests and bad bacteria left on them.
As soon as farmers cannot afford these two types of supplies, whose manufacture is oil-reliant, our agricultural production will collapse. This is not something that will go away as we approach the post-petroleum era. It will lead to a recurring disaster.
In 2005, the UN brought together 800 experts and academics in a collaborative effort called the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development. The results were released in a report two years ago. Of particular note is the report’s conclusion that Agricultural Ecology, or Agroecology, should be the basis of agricultural industries and agriculture. This, it says, is the best way to deal with future food crises, not the genetic modifying technology controlled by large corporations.
However, we cannot rely solely on the academic world, especially since academia in Taiwan is not particularly strong in this area. What we need is for researchers and farmers to work together: It is the farmers who truly understand their local natural ecosystems, as they work on the land day in, day out. This is also the reason why participatory research has become so popular overseas in the last few years.
Talk, however, is cheap, and actually getting ourselves in a position in which we can collate the collective knowledge of traditional farmers, especially regarding their understanding of weeds and insects, is something else entirely.
The only people capable of doing this job would be those with a strong background in biological testing. I would therefore like to suggest Lai immediately bring together biology teachers and volunteers in the fields of ecosystems and environmental protection to work together in this meaningful job.
I also hope that the Council of Agriculture and political leaders do not play politics with something as important as this, for learning from our older generation of farmers should be a concerted, nationwide undertaking.
Warren Kuo is a professor at National Taiwan University’s Department of Agronomy.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means
RSS