While consumer goods prices are going up in Taiwan, we have heard at the same time that the wholesale price for pigs has fallen to below NT$50 per kg, which is below the lower limit of the usual price range.
The government responded with several measures — slaughtering swine and freezing them for storage, organizing promotions, increasing the amount of pork products sold overseas, increasing the culling rate for stud sows and reducing breeding volumes — but these are apparently not having the desired result.
The government needs to investigate the root causes of the problem and come up with a more considered approach.
The nation’s system for supply and distribution of farm produce has long been criticized as haphazard and uncoordinated, leading to periodic imbalances in supply and demand.
The government has announced that an early warning mechanism for price fluctuations involving major agricultural products has been put in place. This mechanism is intended to stabilize supply, yet dramatic drops in price for produce such as pigs and garlic still occur. Clearly, the mechanism has not been implemented properly.
There are several reasons for the continued fall in pig prices. Since prices remained stable for several years, pig farmers decided to breed more pigs, thereby increasing supply.
The government did not respond in time, failing to issue price warnings, take measures to reduce supply, or secure an overseas market for the excess.
The result was that supply far outstripped demand; a situation which was exacerbated by officials revealing that some swine had been fed the leanness-enhancing feed additive ractopamine, causing a further drop in demand.
We are still waiting for an effective answer to the problem of the uncoordinated supply of agricultural and fishing products and the resultant low prices which have hit farmers so badly.
Farmers and fishermen alike have lost confidence in the government’s ability to fix the problem. We live in a market economy, and farmers are free to choose what and how much they produce, but that does not mean the government cannot employ certain policy tools to influence their behavior and so avoid this kind of thing from happening.
At the heart of the problem is the lack of a complete database of farming production figures. There is no way of determining just how much each farm is producing, no way of planning how to distribute and sell this produce or to issue price warnings, no way to stabilize farm produce prices and no way to stabilize farmers’ incomes. Japan, the US and the EU all know how important it is to establish this kind of database and strictly regulate it.
Within a regulated a database system, any farmer that wants to apply for a government subsidy has to submit accurate figures on what and how much they have planted, how much acreage they have used, where they sourced the seeds, and who they intend to sell to. All of this information can be used as a foundation for agricultural reform and also ensure that farmers’ rights are protected.
Regrettably, with the transfers of political power happening in the nation, and the many changes of ministers running the Council of Agriculture the establishment of this database has been largely ignored in favor of much more populist, voter-friendly measures such as handing out farmer subsidies with no control.
It is a situation analogous to the laying of underground sewage pipes — essential, yet hardly vote-winning. There is little interest in things like statistics or carrying out fundamental research.
The government departments that should have access to information on domestic agricultural production and annual yields of farming products are still largely in the dark.
They are like the proverbial blind men describing the elephant, each feeling the shape of a single isolated part.
Local governments in particular, lacking access to statistics on labor counts and running costs, submit to the central government annual agricultural production reports of dubious accuracy, making the so-called early warning mechanisms virtually useless.
All of this contributes to the disjuncture between production levels of, and demand for, agricultural produce in Taiwan, and explains why it is such a common problem.
Without accurate figures, simplifying natural disaster response and implementing measures that will benefit farmers — such as targeted agricultural subsidies, an agricultural insurance system, and planned production — is all the more difficult.
Agriculture in this country has long not been afforded the respect or attention it deserves.
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has already secured his second term, and is no longer under pressure from the electorate.
In Ma’s mind, agriculture has long been just another obstacle to international trade talks that could simply be removed at any time by simply ignoring it.
Past chairmen of the Council of Agriculture, which is supposed to protect the agricultural industry, have acted in opposition to the intent of their superiors in order to protect the interests of farmers, and thus win their gratitude.
However, this type of official is quite rare these days, having been replaced by a bunch of “yes men” who care more about their official positions than the well-being of farmers, making farming impossible and creating much public anger.
The government is soon to embark on a series of international trade talks. Farmers will not only have to contend with the problem of arbitrary supply, they will also have to be prepared for an onslaught of cheap, imported agricultural products flooding the market.
Du Yu is a member of the Chen-Li Task Force for Agricultural Reform.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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