The story about former minister of agriculture and current Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) vice presidential candidate Su Jia-chyuan’s (蘇嘉全) purchase of farmland and construction of a “farmhouse” seems to have run its course. Both those accusing Su and those defending him are concentrating solely on the legality of the issue and whether it constitutes an abuse of power.
However, this is hardly the point, as it would be better to debate the policy side of things in the lead up to the presidential election. We should be asking whether the DPP, if it wins the election, would continue to apply the Agricultural Development Act (農業發展條例), allowing farmland to be sold to people who are not farmers and for “farmhouses” to be constructed on that land.
Up until now, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has avoided asking these two questions. This is because the previous KMT administration passed an amendment to that act that brought to a close the era of exclusive ownership and use of farmland for farmers. As a consequence, many members of both the governing and opposition parties have bought farmland on which they plan to put a “farmhouse,” if they haven’t done so already.
Pricing land in Taiwan purely based on the value of agricultural yield would not make it worth selling. The relaxing of rules over the exclusive agricultural use of farmland was originally done to help the farmers who owned the land. However, there were still some fundamental contradictions inherent in the policies governing the deregulation of land use. How, for example, is a person who is not a farmer and purchases farmland supposed to ensure it remains available for agricultural use?
Currently, the market price for farmland is derived from the value of “farmhouses” and of any illegal factories built on it. The way to resolve this is to take any farmland unsuitable for agricultural purposes and put it to different and more efficient use, as long as it is legal and not harmful to the environment. The profit derived from this change of land use could then be used to subsidize land that would be able to contribute positively to food security.
The Council of Agriculture classes 300,000 hectares of farmland in Taiwan as “premium,” representing 12 percent of the 2.5 million hectares of agricultural land in the wider definition, or a third of the close to 900,000 hectares classified as arable land. Implementing measures based on finding this balance of profit and loss is the only approach that makes any real sense.
The amendments made to the Agricultural Development Act prior to the 2000 election were the result of a compromise between the government and the opposition, but they contained the internal contradictions mentioned above. Peng Tso-kwei (彭作奎), chairman of the Council of Agriculture at the time, resigned because of these changes, knowing full well that they were unworkable, although he failed to propose a more viable alternative policy.
There was a vigorous debate over agricultural development policy by government officials and academics at the time, but they have chosen not to raise the issue again during this latest scandal. Self-interest is at play here. Politicians across the spectrum are unwilling to bring up the subject of “farmhouses” because they have no idea how far things would go if they pursue the issue, and how much it might affect their own election prospects.
In the run-up to the election I imagine we are going to hear a lot about who “loves Taiwan” and who is “selling out” Taiwan. It is funny how these parties love the land of Taiwan so much, but have yet to come up with an effective agricultural land policy.
Hua Chang-i is a retired professor.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
Ursula K. le Guin in The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas proposed a thought experiment of a utopian city whose existence depended on one child held captive in a dungeon. When taken to extremes, Le Guin suggests, utilitarian logic violates some of our deepest moral intuitions. Even the greatest social goods — peace, harmony and prosperity — are not worth the sacrifice of an innocent person. Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), since leaving office, has lived an odyssey that has brought him to lows like Le Guin’s dungeon. From late 2008 to 2015 he was imprisoned, much of this
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and