After visiting Taiwanese businesspeople based in Southeast Asia during the legislative recess, Mainland Affairs Council Chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) proposed turning the nation's abandoned industrial parks into "offshore special industrial zones" to differentiate them from other domestic industrial parks.
In response, Council for Economic Planning and Development Minister Ho Mei-yueh (
Is this true? It has been six years since the free-trade harbor zone project was initiated by the Civil Aeronautics Administration in 2002, beginning with Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport and followed by a few other ports.
The original plan was intended to create opportunities for "in-depth, value-added processing" through a cross-strait division of labor. In order to do this, the approved scope for the free-trade harbor zones was specially extended to include the "manufacturing" element.
In other words, the free-trade harbor zones also provide the same functions and characteristics as industrial development zones. This is why Ho proposed that it would be sufficient to add a few more elements to the existing free-trade harbor zones.
However, over the past six years, none of the free-trade harbor zones have brought any hopes of prosperity to the nation and some of them have even faced the embarrassing predicament of failing to attract enough investors.
What is the problem?
Although the concept of establishing free-trade harbor zones is a good one, there are two fatal problems with the idea.
First, so-called "in-depth, value-added processing" is an illusion. Taiwan is, in theory, ahead of China in certain industries and this would create a demand for such processing. However, in practice, with one-step technological solutions and entire industry chains transferring abroad, even if there were opportunities for in-depth, value-added processing here, they would be transient and could not constitute economies of scale.
Take the nation's notebook computer industry for example: Ninety-nine percent of factories are based in China. How could there be any opportunities for in-depth, value-added processing in Taiwan?
Second, and most importantly, free-trade harbor zones are suitable for commercial, not industrial, activities. It is both ridiculous and unfeasible to attempt to create industrial zones within business districts.
Yet we are trying to do this in our free-trade harbor zones. Is there a chance that they will be successful?
Every harbor zone includes air and sea transport infrastructure and the government is spending lots of money on developing this, but there is only a small hinterland supporting these zones, so rents cannot be cut.
How can industrial activities succeed in the zones, which are themselves commercial endeavors and located far away from manufacturing parks, thus making it difficult to form a supply chain and recruit capable staff?
The Council for Economic Planning and Development has always thought it possible to succeed simply by upgrading simple processing services in free-trade harbor zones. But they are on the wrong track.
Division of labor is a basic element for success in any special zone. Harbor zones are commercial districts and they shouldn't be mixed with industrial activities.
If they are mixed, the activities would be superficial and business would suffer. How, then, would it be possible for the special zones to succeed?
Mike Chang is an accountant.
Translated by Ted Yang
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
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
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.