The signing of the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) this summer has opened the door for Taiwan’s agricultural and fishery exports and energized the government.
At the same time, however, the Chinese government is setting up “innovation parks for Taiwanese farmers” and “experimental areas for cross-strait agricultural cooperation” with the intention of attracting skilled personnel, animal and plant species, technology and capital in an attempt to emulate the Taiwanese experience.
The resulting agricultural products would have the advantages of Taiwanese species, realistic pricing and stable supply. They would attract Chinese consumers far more than agricultural products from Taiwan, and the negative impact on Taiwanese farmers would by far surpass the advantages that would come from the import tax exemptions offered on 18 products.
A former high-level Taiwanese agricultural official said in a magazine interview that Taiwanese species raised or grown in China are still Taiwanese species and not cheap Chinese copies, and they should be part of Taiwan’s international marketing. Despite this, we still have not seen any government officials clarify the situation, and this will only serve to raise further questions among Taiwanese farmers.
The more time one spends in one of China’s innovation parks for Taiwanese farmers, the more depressing they become. Many outstanding domestic Taiwanese species — grouper, Taiwan tilapia, silver perch, sweet fish, Chinese soft-shelled turtle, abalone, orchids, black pearl wax apple, jinzuan pineapple, golden mango, Irwin mango, Gaoshan tea, Jinxuan tea, Cuiyu tea, pearl guava and Yuhebao, or Jade Purse, litchi — are already being planted and bred at an astonishing scale in these parks throughout China.
Many companies in these parks have very strict quality controls at every stage of the breeding and marketing process. In addition to being sold in local markets, companies also plan to use the existing international distribution network for large-sale exports of these agricultural and fishery products, and some of these companies are already supplying their products to well known international retailers, such as Walmart and Carrefour.
During a visit to these processing plants, I discovered that the machinery was quite modern and quality controls were in no way inferior to those in Taiwan. With the assistance of local governments and international certification institutions, these plants had obtained several international certificates for agricultural and fishery environmental safety, and they now meet the strict import inspection standards of the biggest developed countries, such as the US, Japan and the EU.
This will make them formidable competitors as the Taiwanese agricultural and fishery industries try to expand into international markets. The average domestic Taiwanese small-scale marketing company for agricultural products will be no match for these companies and their economies of scale. From an expert point of view, Taiwan does not have many advantages left in terms of species, technologies and processing. That is why the government must have an unambiguous and strict approach to dealing with farmers and Taiwanese businesspeople who want to invest in China.
Modern agricultural development is dependent on a biotechnological foundation, which offers high added value, is highly effective and has great development potential. As a result, once China get their hands on superior Taiwanese species, technologies, machinery and production and marketing experiences, they will be able to eliminate traditional agricultural production and move toward the overall goal of a well-off society.
This will also require huge investments in research and manpower, and technological development takes a long time and is associated with high risk. That is why China, in addition to actively training research and development personnel for agricultural biotechnology, is also beginning to reach into Taiwanese agricultural biotechnology. China is planning to import advanced Taiwanese agricultural biotechnology and products by offering preferential treatment in the hope that they will be able to quickly shrink the gap between Taiwan and China in these areas and raise the overall standard of the agricultural biotechnology field in China.
Unfortunately, Taiwan does not have any far reaching and comprehensive response measures that can be seen. Unilateral export of skilled personnel and technology will not be good for the long term prospects of Taiwanese agriculture. Crisis is akin to change, and once Taiwanese agriculture loses its competitiveness, how will we revive our farming communities?
Lee Wu-chung is a professor of agricultural economics at National Taiwan University.
TRANSLATED BY PERRY SVENSSON
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