Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) Minister Stephen Shen (沈世宏) unveiled his policies to the media on May 19. President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) also vowed to make all policies environmentally friendly at the opening ceremony of an annual NGO environmental conference on May 31.
After two weeks in power, the government leaders’ emphasis on domestic environmental protection is praiseworthy. Still, I have a few suggestions.
Shen said that, in the first six months of the administration, the EPA would push for 12 pieces of legislation, including an energy tax act, a greenhouse gas reduction act and a renewable energy development act.
However, the energy tax act and the renewable energy development act lie beyond the EPA’s authority. Because of the distribution of authority and responsibilities, the EPA is not likely to be able to push for these bills as it wishes without taking into consideration the position of the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Economic Affairs.
The 12 suggested drafts will merely be of symbolic value unless the different ministries can reach a consensus soon.
Passing the greenhouse gas reduction act would not be difficult given the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) legislative majority. However, the necessary legal framework for the proposed reduction act, which aims to set a time limit on reductions, is lacking. It should therefore be withdrawn and redrafted.
Furthermore, Shen has indicated that the future focus of policy will be on replacing orders and controls with economic incentives. However, any sort of economic incentive should be based on investigation into and understanding of pollution. Economic incentives are fine, but when regulations are broken and the environment is damaged, appropriate legal action should be taken.
Therefore, economic incentives cannot just be replaced by regulations; instead, economic incentives should be used to supplement regulations.
Shen should not overestimate the effects of economic incentives. Fees that are charged for air pollution control and recycling, clearance and treatment are all economic tools based on price restrictions. However, despite the hundreds of millions of NT dollars in fees levied each year, we have never been informed what tangible benefits these economic tools have for our environment.
Shen also stated that the debate surrounding the Suhua Freeway is not about the road itself, but more about the changes in the type of development Hualien will experience after it is completed. However, the debate should not merely be about whether the freeway will have a large impact on the environment, but also whether an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) should have been carried out when the idea was first proposed.
Ma’s environmentally friendly policies are not new and the correct term for such policies is Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). The Treaty of Maastricht, for example, states that the formulation and execution of all EU policies must be based on the principle of environmental protection.
A similar principle is mentioned in Article 26 of Taiwan’s Environmental Impact Assessment Act (環境影響評估法) that requires EIAs on policies that may affect the environment.
However, the evaluation of the SEA system is only an internal evaluation carried out by the government and at times involves the Cabinet examining and approving its own policies. Thus, all of Taiwan’s SEAs since 2000 have been flawed.
For Ma’s environmentally friendly policies to work, the legally binding power of SEAs must be strengthened.
Wang Yu-cheng is an assistant professor of law at National Cheng Kung University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG AND DREW CAMERON
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS