Last weekend, I visited some friends in Yunlin. Leaving Taipei, the scenery along the highway gradually changed from densely populated residential areas to large paddy fields that had just been harvested. Any traveler would be happy to see rolling fields of green as they pass by, but the owners of this land want these fields to be turned into land for construction because they see it as a way to get the cash rolling in. From this perspective, it is difficult to understand why farmers in Dapu Borough (大埔), Miaoli County, have recently protested the expropriation of their land.
Nobody would believe that Taiwan could face a food shortage, especially when they see all the different varieties of foods available.
As wheat, corn and bean production decreases around the world, so long as farmers are willing to plant rice, we can be sure that we will at least have rice to fill our stomachs, even if we can’t buy food at high prices on international markets.
However, all hardworking farmers are not necessarily altruists who want to provide food for everyone. Many of them perhaps have no other choice but to make a living through agriculture. Therefore, when discussing whether we should protect agriculture, keep farmland, or give extra assistance to farmers, we would perhaps be able to arrive at a more objective view if we put ourselves in the shoes of other people.
Farmland expropriation in Dapu does not revolve around a single issue. It also involves the way in which the government overlooked public opinion when the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) was signed, as well as the dissatisfaction that was caused when the Rural Revitalization Act (農村再生條例) was passed.
I am sure most people would be quite happy if they could sell off a piece of farmland for a price several times higher than the going market rate.
However, land expropriation involves the government forcing land owners to sell their land at a rate decided by the government.
Those unwilling to have their land expropriated worry about disrespecting their ancestors, and they also worry about whether the compensation offered by the government will be adequate to support their families.
The ECFA early harvest list added 18 agricultural products that will receive tariff-free treatment when exported to China.
However, will the farmers who produce other agricultural products benefit from this? Will the NT$150 billion (US$4.7 billion) compensation that was part of the Rural Revitalization Act really reach rural districts and farmers?
If the government’s planned policies do not offer reasonable compensation to those affected and are not implemented smoothly, even more protests could follow. The government’s claim that they followed “standard procedure, and so had no softer approach” in the expropriation of farmland shows a lack of empathy toward farmers.
The government did nothing to help the situation and only served to further infuriate the farmers.
I have a friend who wants to find about 200 hectares of farmland to plant lychees for export. At a time when most people do not hold high hopes for agriculture, this should be encouraged by the government. However, my friend has had to work alone and without government help trying to find people to assist him in purchasing and renting land.
The government cannot wait to tear up rice fields about to be harvested, showing complete disregard for agriculture. In the case of my friend, the disregard is due to the fact that lychees make a far smaller contribution to the economy than wafer foundries and panel production.
A few friends in Yunlin form a complete supply chain for the sale of animal feed, breeding, slaughtering and processing. They often make more than NT$100 million in annual income, which shows that agriculture is not necessarily as bad as people believe it to be. In addition, they also enjoy the sort of freedom that can only be enjoyed by living in rural districts.
A diverse society should protect the rights of people to work in all types of industries and respect different lifestyles.
Without farmland there can be no agriculture, without agriculture there will be no farmers and without farmers, we would have no rural districts.
The government should take the agriculture issues that lie behind the farmland expropriation seriously.
Lei Li-fen is a professor in the Department of Agricultural Economics at National Taiwan University.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
Labubu, an elf-like plush toy with pointy ears and nine serrated teeth, has become a global sensation, worn by celebrities including Rihanna and Dua Lipa. These dolls are sold out in stores from Singapore to London; a human-sized version recently fetched a whopping US$150,000 at an auction in Beijing. With all the social media buzz, it is worth asking if we are witnessing the rise of a new-age collectible, or whether Labubu is a mere fad destined to fade. Investors certainly want to know. Pop Mart International Group Ltd, the Chinese manufacturer behind this trendy toy, has rallied 178 percent
My youngest son attends a university in Taipei. Throughout the past two years, whenever I have brought him his luggage or picked him up for the end of a semester or the start of a break, I have stayed at a hotel near his campus. In doing so, I have noticed a strange phenomenon: The hotel’s TV contained an unusual number of Chinese channels, filled with accents that would make a person feel as if they are in China. It is quite exhausting. A few days ago, while staying in the hotel, I found that of the 50 available TV channels,
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
There is no such thing as a “silicon shield.” This trope has gained traction in the world of Taiwanese news, likely with the best intentions. Anything that breaks the China-controlled narrative that Taiwan is doomed to be conquered is welcome, but after observing its rise in recent months, I now believe that the “silicon shield” is a myth — one that is ultimately working against Taiwan. The basic silicon shield idea is that the world, particularly the US, would rush to defend Taiwan against a Chinese invasion because they do not want Beijing to seize the nation’s vital and unique chip industry. However,
RSS