Taiwan’s environment is a sensitive topic, as seen by the controversy over the transformation of the 202 Munitions Works in Taipei City’s Nangang District (南港) into a biotech park. When this biotech park for Academia Sinica was being planned, I was responsible for seeking government approval to build a new synchrotron radiation facility called the Taiwan Photon Source (TPS), in Hsinchu. I therefore know a bit about what the government was thinking concerning the development of Taiwan’s science parks.
The recent completion of Taiwan’s high speed rail has greatly shortened the time needed for business to be conducted along the west coast. Even more importantly, now that Hsinchu Science Park, Central Taiwan Science Park and Southern Taiwan Science Park have all been linked for daily round-trip operations, the government hopes that the high speed rail can be used to enhance the creativity and vitality of Taiwan’s biotech industry.
When the site of the new TPS facility was being negotiated with the Council for Economic Planning and Development and the Environmental Protection Administration, planning was already underway for the high speed rail line to be extended to the 202 Munitions Works site. At that time, Academia Sinica had also just finished building the National Clinical Core for Genomic Medicine. If these facilities were coupled with the proposed biotech park, the Nankang area would become an innovative think tank for Taiwan’s pharmaceutical industry.
The government also hoped that the cutting-edge biotech facilities developed at TPS could become the heart of research and development operations. The research findings made in the north could then be transmitted to Kaohsiung Biotechnology Park with the aid of the high speed rail network.
The proposal for the construction of TPS experienced many setbacks, but we eventually managed to settle its location in Hsinchu, next to National Tsing Hua University and National Chiao Tung University. It should be stressed that without these two leading research universities, the synchrotron would not be able to perform the central, leading role it was designed to do. Similarly, if Academia Sinica’s National Clinical Core for Genomic Medicine does not have a biotech park nearby, it will not be able to perform as an innovative think tank-like organization. Luckily, construction has already started on the TPS, with a construction budget of NT$7 billion (US$218 million). Let us hope that the issue of the 202 Munitions Works can also be settled as soon as possible.
Academia Sinica at Nangang has gathered together a group of 200 to 300 holders of doctorates in biotechnology, after years of effort. In the past two years, Academia Sinica president Wong Chi-Huey (翁啟惠), has talked about the future of a biotech park at Academia Sinica. He envisions using the new park as an opportunity to invite a new generation of Taiwanese students studying abroad back to Taiwan, as the addition of these biotech experts would inject new vitality into Taiwan’s biotech industry. The history of science and technology has shown us that in many innovation parks in advanced nations, research staff often make the greatest discoveries when they least expect to, with innovative ideas springing forward in an environment where research staff can chat freely.
For this to happen, a culture of interaction is vital. The National Clinical Core for Genomic Medicine at Academia Sinica already has some of the world’s finest laboratories, as well as many world-class research centers. It would be best if the future biotech park could be built at the site of the 202 Munitions Works, as it is situated next door to Academia Sinica. In this regard, we should remember those Taiwanese students who studied overseas and returned to Taiwan in the 1970s and 1980s. These returnees mostly settled in the Hsinchu Science and Industrial Park. An industry cluster was created there, and it was this cluster effect that gave birth to Taiwan’s extremely successful semiconductor industry.
Lately, Wong has said that South Korea’s patent rights for pharmaceutical manufacturing are already way ahead of Taiwan’s. Over the past decade, I have often traveled between South Korea, Japan and Taiwan and have noticed that we are falling behind these countries, as we lack the strategic foresight and vigor to forge a new path forward.
The differences between Japan, South Korea and Taiwan can be seen in the innovation and research park that is being developed on a mountain range in the suburbs of Sejong City, South Korea, to commemorate the rulers of the Yi dynasty who laid the foundations for scientific research in that country 600 years ago. Here in Taiwan, however, people are still arguing over where to build our new biotech park.
The construction of modern science and technology parks can absolutely coexist with the natural environment, the Harima Science Garden City of Japan’s Hyogo Prefecture being a prime example. Given the high level of environmental awareness Taipei residents have, we should have the utmost confidence that the 9.6 hectare piece of land the 202 Munitions Works stands on can be developed in harmony with its natural surroundings. In addition, biotechnology is a form of green technology characterized by low levels of pollution that can benefit the health of humankind and contribute to the biodiversity of our planet.
As countries around the world are investing large amounts of money getting biotech experts to help them with the development of their industries, we are running out of time to lay the foundations for the next 50 years of Taiwan’s economic development.
Keng Liang is the former director of the National Synchrotron Radiation Research Center.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS