President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) often claims his administration is consistent and reliable, but its policies with regard to agriculture have changed a lot since he came to power in 2008. During his first term, Ma and his team of agriculture officials made great efforts to uphold farmers’ rights and interests, insisting that his administration would not allow the import of 830 categories of Chinese agricultural products. They also promised to be vigilant in preventing Taiwanese agricultural know-how from spreading abroad.
Now, however, the situation is very different. Officials at the Council of Agriculture (COA) have publicly stated that the government’s earlier concerns about the leaking of agricultural know-how abroad and a ban on Taiwanese farmers investing in China have in fact led, bit by bit, to agricultural techniques being lost. These officials have hinted that, following the signing of the cross-strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement in 2010, restrictions on investment in Chinese agriculture will be greatly relaxed and that the government will consider allowing Taiwanese farmers to transfer agricultural know-how abroad as complete packages.
If these proposed policy changes go ahead, they will have a huge impact on the future viability and development of Taiwanese agriculture. In fact the impact will be far greater than if the 830 categories of farm produce that have so far been banned were allowed to be imported. The government must now come clean and ensure that Taiwanese farmers and fishermen understand the implications.
Taiwan’s water and land resources are limited. The -average size of a Taiwanese farm is less than 1 hectare, so it is very hard for farmers to compete with big farms in other countries which often cover dozens or even hundreds of hectares. They are at a clear disadvantage in terms of economies of scale.
The state provides farmers with subsidies and relief and imposes import restrictions. Apart from these, Taiwanese farmers depend on continued improvements in crop variety, productive know-how and overall product quality to stand up to competition from overseas, which uses lower production costs to compete by offering lower prices.
The problem is that new techniques and varieties are not so easy to come by. It takes considerable time, energy, manpower and money to make these things happen and sometimes it also takes a bit of luck to make a particular technique or variety into a viable commodity and to become profitable. That being the case, the state should protect these assets and not allow them to be transferred abroad willy-nilly, where they can fall into the hands of potential competitors.
The Spice Wars of old are a well-known example of how that can happen. Utilizing hard-won achievements in research and development to bring greater wealth to Taiwanese farmers, so that they no longer have to rely on non-farming income to get by, as they do now for 80 percent of their income, remains an important mission for the government.
In national defense, there are military secrets and in information technology there are scientific secrets. Does agriculture not also have its core techniques that should be kept secret?
When discussing the transfer overseas of agricultural science and technology, government officials often talk about how Taiwan has unique conditions, such as its water, soil, climate and so on, which are not things that other countries can copy. They say this means that even if people take Taiwanese crop varieties abroad to plant, that will not result in farm products of the same quality, so we do not need to worry too much about this.
It is not a good idea to delude oneself in this way. China may have certain disadvantages in terms of its environment, its lack of know-how and its lack of experience that make it difficult to compare its farm products with those produced in Taiwan. However, Taiwanese farmers have been traveling all over China to plant crops and raise animals for a long time now.
Taiwanese scientists and technicians have gone to work in China too, coordinating with Chinese research establishments and often fully supported by local governments. They have scored successes with some Taiwanese varieties, including high-mountain tea, Irwin mangoes, black pearl wax apples, phalaenopsis (moth) orchids and aquatic products such as Taiwan porgies, eels, koi, groupers and abalone. Production techniques for these varieties are quite well developed in China and further research, development and improvement are going on all the time. Even if only 5 to 10 percent of Chinese suppliers of any particular product succeed in matching Taiwanese quality, their total productive capacity still adds up to hundreds or even thousands of times what Taiwan can produce. Furthermore, China’s production costs for any given product are usually lower than Taiwan’s. When the time comes, it will be hard for the nation to maintain its competitive advantage.
It is becoming more common for varieties and agricultural know-how to be taken by Taiwanese investors to China and there have been many instances of Taiwanese investors losing out in the face of local competition.
At one time Ma stressed that all his government wanted to do was sell more Taiwan-grown fruit, but now agricultural know-how is also on sale. Taiwanese farmers should be asking how they are going to get by in future if the nation’s productive techniques are sold off lock, stock and barrel to China.
Every time someone new takes over as minister of agriculture, they bring their own set of ideas and methods, hoping to make their mark on history. This tends to produce a lack of consistency in government policy, with the result being that the prospects for Taiwan’s agriculture remain murky. It is entirely reasonable to ask where the farming sector is headed.
For the sake of our children and grandchildren, the government must lay out a roadmap for Taiwanese agriculture to survive and prosper in a changing world.
Du Yu is chief executive officer of the Chen-Li Task Force for Agricultural Reform.
Translated By Julian Clegg
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers