Many people were shocked last week by the Swiss-based International Institute for Management Development (IMD) report that showed that Taiwan had for the first time been outranked by China in terms of competitiveness.
The latest World Competitiveness Yearbook, which ranks 55 countries on their ability to maintain an environment conducive to business, dropped Taiwan from 17th to 18th in the past year, whereas China jumped three spots to 15th.
Critics in Taiwan said the IMD report sent an urgent warning and lashed out at the government for the nation's underperformance. Government officials said the survey was not a true reflection of the country's standing in the global economy. The business sector, meanwhile, had mixed reactions about the report, saying the local environment was still far from competitive because of over-regulation and bureaucratic barriers.
Given the variety of reactions, one wonders if the IMD report should be cause for alarm.
It isn't. Regardless of whether they are conducted by the IMD or by World Economic Forum (WEF), competitiveness assessments are not an exact science. Rather, they are a measurement comprised of economic statistics and, to some extent, how people perceive a country's businesses environment.
It is impossible, therefore, to say for sure which assessment is best. In the WEF report released last September, for instance, Taiwan fared much better than China. Despite having dropped five spots, Taiwan was ranked 13th, while China was 54th.
Taiwan's standing in the "economic performance" category -- one of the four major categories in the IMD yearbook -- showed a marked improvement over last year, climbing nine places to No. 16. This was mainly the result of a steady growth in the nation's economy -- at approximately 4 percent yearly -- with a strong showing in terms of domestic price stability, low unemployment, expanding international trade and improving fiscal policy.
A nice surprise was Taiwan's performance in the "government efficiency" category, where it had not fared particularly well in the past. This year, Taiwan climbed three spots to No. 20. This improvement boosted the nation's overall competitiveness, ranking one spot behind Finland but ahead of the UK's 20th, Japan's 24th and South Korea's 29th.
Moreover, Taiwan is part of a group of 40 economies that are "closing the gap" with the US, which ranked first, the IMD report said. This group includes Australia, China, Denmark, Hong Kong, India, Russia, Sweden and Switzerland.
Nonetheless, factors such as a loss of attractiveness for foreign direct investment, weakened social coherence, political instability and policy inconsistency were highlighted in the yearbook as hindrances to Taiwan's overall performance.
Spending on highways and other infrastructure projects is being held back because the government's 2007 budget has been in limbo for months, a result of political deadlock. The resignation of Premier Su Tseng-chang (
What the nation should worry about is its ranking in the "business efficiency" category, in which it dropped from sixth in 2005, 13th last year and 17th this year. This regression shows that more effort will be needed to reinvigorate a domestic business environment characterized by low investment and low consumption.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with