In recent years, the government has suffered in the midst of an economic downturn, an outdated organization and outdated legislation. In addition, there is also insufficient coordination between central government agencies, and local government policy implementation is coercive.
As a result, the public often feels that government land expropriation is more akin to forcible land enclosure. This even led farmers to gather for an overnight demonstration on Ketagalan Boulevard in downtown Taipei, while other farmers staged protests locally.
The fact is that, with the exception of the early export processing zones and the Hsinchu Science Park, Taiwan’s industrial zoning policy has been a failure. The reason for this is the lack of a national land development plan, a basic land utilization plan, an industrial zoning plan and a concrete economic development plan — deficiencies exacerbated by incapable civil servants, insufficient information and bad timing. These factors have all combined to establish innumerable industrial parks without industrial transformation.
Once the investment environment deteriorates and enterprises begin to move out of Taiwan, much of the land and many of the factories in the industrial zones or science parks will become idle. Unfortunately, officials have not studied how to bring about industrial transformation or effectively utilize the land. Instead, they have proposed the development of the third and fourth stages of the Hsinchu Science Park, the Central Taiwan Science Park and the Southern Taiwan Science Park.
The land for some other sites, such as the planned science park in Jhunan Township’s (竹南) Dapu Borough (大埔), in Miaoli County, have been obtained by forcible expropriation of farmland.
Moreover, the authorities in charge of Taiwan’s industrial zones are unwilling to compromise. Despite the laws governing land expropriation, the government’s methods remind us of the land enclosure movement in Britain, or even communist nationalization. For example, the National Science Council is in charge of science parks, and the Industrial Development Bureau of the Ministry of Economic Affairs is in charge of industrial zones.
However, local governments also have the power to expropriate land to establish industrial zones. With authorities carrying out such chaotic and unregulated expropriation and with confusing legislation that gives no consideration to the willingness of farmers to give up their land or the fundamental conditions required for establishing industrial zones, it seems the only goal of officials is to follow instructions from further up the hierarchy or to build interest groups to prioritize their own political careers.
Taiwan’s economic development strategy should focus on research and development-oriented parks, which do not require much land. This means that officials must start thinking along new lines. They should not make the mistake of believing that developing a few hundred hectares of land for industrial or science parks will guarantee industrial upgrading or innovation.
Forced expropriation of farmland makes farmers nervous, depressed and brings some of them to suicide, or its brink.
At the same time, industrial upgrading is problematic, which creates a situation where more conglomerates profit from land speculation, while cities and counties nationwide compete to rent out their farmland for industrial use. This is worrisome indeed.
Tsay Tzong-shi is a professor in the Department of Economics at Chinese Culture University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
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
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.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath