Ecology and economics
Once again, we have a so-called expert talking from inside his expert bubble. In a single paragraph, Tyler Cowen dismisses all the achievements of organic and ecological farming (tinyurl.com/org-farm-3w) because organic production systems in some circumstances have lower food outputs than industrial agricultural systems (“World hunger is the problem left behind,” Sept. 21, page 9).
Cowen, who is tellingly a professor of economics, thus commits the cardinal sin of so many economists in that he disregards any external effects, the so-called “externalities,” one system has on another. To dismiss all these external effects, many detailed in literally thousands of scientific publications, in one paragraph is an extraordinary achievement of intellectual limitation.
However, due to a general lack of inter-disciplinary education, it is nowadays an almost universal ability among so-called experts to blind themselves to the effects one system has on another. Agricultural economists, often educated in only in economics and nothing else, therefore have no appreciation for the many harmful side effects of conventional, industrial farming and the many beneficial side effects of organic, ecological farming.
The detrimental effects of the industrial agricultural system on other interrelated systems are well-documented: climate change caused by carbon, methane and nitrous oxide emissions (tinyurl.com/cc-agricult); the exhaustion of water resources (tinyurl.com/agricu-water); water and soil pollution, soil erosion (tinyurl.com/c2yma7k), food poisoning (“Tests reveal pesticides on food: Greenpeace Taiwan,” Sept. 15, page 3); and, perhaps most worryingly, an extinction crisis endangering more than half of all species (Science, Vol. 307, p550). There are other, less well-established problems possibly linked to industrial agriculture: the collapse of pollinator populations vital to many branches of agriculture; decreasing fertility, not just in humans, but in many other species; and the obesity crisis, brought about by an overly cheap carbohydrate and meat-based diet. In addition, food prices are being driven upward because biofuels are replacing foods.
Ecological agriculture, on the other hand, attempts to limit detrimental effects on other systems by applying sustainability principles (for Asian examples, see the works of Masanobu Fukuoka and Franklin Hiram King listed in Wikipedia).
So, contrary to Cowen’s assertion, we will not avert world hunger by destroying all other environmental systems through unsustainable agriculture. Most experts agree that bringing together the best elements of ecological and industrial farming is the optimal, forward-thinking solution (tinyurl.com/cl5mprm), but this can only happen if the so-called experts are willing to learn a little bit of ecology.
It might therefore be a useful intellectual exercise for many of these so-called experts to occasionally crack open a scientific journal with a name other than Agricultural Economics or The Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization. How about broadening your horizons by reading Ecological Economics, The Journal of Sustainable Agriculture or Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment? The information is there — it can be read, or it can be ignored.
To ignore it is to block out large parts of reality and remain blissfully unaware of the interconnectedness of the world, so please do not be surprised if somebody calls you narrow-minded.
Flora Faun
Taipei
Taiwanese wake-up call
Former premier Frank Hsieh of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has decided to visit China.
Why? What does he need to find out? That every second word of the Chinese officials is a lie?
I have lived there, so he can come and ask me.
Is the DPP now trying to copy the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)? Why should people vote for the DPP next time?
It does not really matter, right? It is the difference between bitten by a cat or by a dog.
I hope people will vote wisely in future and vote for a party that is concerned about Taiwanese and not worried about what the Chinese government thinks.
Taiwan should treat China as its equal.
Why does the US not want to supply Taiwan with the new fighter jets it has requested?
Because Washington is afraid Taiwan will pass on the military technology to China.
If this continues, Taiwan will continue to fall further and further behind the other “Asian Tigers.”
Wake up, Taiwan.
Gerry Floor
Greater Taichung
Labubu, an elf-like plush toy with pointy ears and nine serrated teeth, has become a global sensation, worn by celebrities including Rihanna and Dua Lipa. These dolls are sold out in stores from Singapore to London; a human-sized version recently fetched a whopping US$150,000 at an auction in Beijing. With all the social media buzz, it is worth asking if we are witnessing the rise of a new-age collectible, or whether Labubu is a mere fad destined to fade. Investors certainly want to know. Pop Mart International Group Ltd, the Chinese manufacturer behind this trendy toy, has rallied 178 percent
My youngest son attends a university in Taipei. Throughout the past two years, whenever I have brought him his luggage or picked him up for the end of a semester or the start of a break, I have stayed at a hotel near his campus. In doing so, I have noticed a strange phenomenon: The hotel’s TV contained an unusual number of Chinese channels, filled with accents that would make a person feel as if they are in China. It is quite exhausting. A few days ago, while staying in the hotel, I found that of the 50 available TV channels,
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
There is no such thing as a “silicon shield.” This trope has gained traction in the world of Taiwanese news, likely with the best intentions. Anything that breaks the China-controlled narrative that Taiwan is doomed to be conquered is welcome, but after observing its rise in recent months, I now believe that the “silicon shield” is a myth — one that is ultimately working against Taiwan. The basic silicon shield idea is that the world, particularly the US, would rush to defend Taiwan against a Chinese invasion because they do not want Beijing to seize the nation’s vital and unique chip industry. However,
RSS