It may be fairly said that the living environment in Taiwan is quite behind in comparison with other advanced countries. The phenomenon may be partly attributed to our lack of funding in the past to develop public facilities and a beautiful environment, along with the inability of such developments to catch up with the rapid rate of economic growth.
Even more important may be our emphasis on personal interests over public affairs. Taiwan's development has made production closely associated with personal interests to rapidly grow and become very internationally competitive. Since our overall living environment does not benefit any one person individually, it is not only not being improved, but also often subjected to destruction. We do a pretty good job in managing our own personal property or solving problems ourselves. However, we often do poorly in dealing with issues that require joint resolution or effort. This explains why we often see one beautiful looking store in a ramshackle building located on a poorly maintained street.
This development tactic may have at least helped us obtain a rapid growth in production and income, as well as immediately put us ahead of other developing countries during the earlier phase of our economic development. However, it has not only caused the pollution and destruction of the environment, but also the inappropriate development of urban areas and construction which actually restricts future development. Even from a purely production-oriented standpoint, this type of development has become harmful.
Developed countries must necessarily focus on high-technology industries where a large amount of skilled manpower is needed. On the other hand, high-income and well-educated technological talents of course hope to obtain a better quality of life. In view of the high international mobility of technological talents, it would be difficult for a country with a poor living environment to attract and keep talent. If the quality of our living environment is not only worse off than other advanced countries, but also worse off than the wealthy residential communities in developing countries, we may lose our capability to rapidly develop high-technology industries as a result of the outflow of talent. Therefore, improving the quality of our living environment accomplishes a lot more than direct improvement of the quality of people's lives. Instead, it promotes industrial development and growth.
Improving our living environment also works to maintain a balanced distribution of income, which, in turn, leads to further social stability. This then works to further improve our living environment. Public facilities and our overall living environment are things all of us can enjoy for free or at a low cost. Therefore, they could work to significantly improve the quality of life for the middle and lower income families.
For example, if a park is very beautiful, everyone would get to enjoy it. Without a park, only the wealthy could have a similar enjoyment in private gardens, amusement parks that charge for admissions and perhaps other countries. Many projects to improve the environment, such as cleaning and straightening parks and the sidewalks, require non-skilled workers. Therefore, improving our living environment also improves non-skilled workers' employment opportunities, and reduces the unemployment and income-reduction problems of these workers resulting from their replacement by low-wage workers in developing countries.
As you can see, we have every reason to work hard to improve our environment.
Chen Po-chi is a professor of economics at National Taiwan University.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations