The government has successfully amended the law to relax legal restrictions on beef imports containing residue of ractopamine. Considering the entire process surrounding this heated dispute, President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration really needs to take a moment to reflect and make improvements.
The government has repeatedly promised to ensure clear labeling of beef products so that consumers can avoid buying and eating certain products. This may seem feasible enough, but with the abundance of marketing channels and an inefficient government, implementation will prove difficult and it will be pretty much impossible for the public to put their minds at ease.
If the government wants to control every domestic distribution link for beef containing the leanness-enhancing drug, it must enforce strict labeling of beef so that consumers have a choice, it must also implement a system for tracking beef products, issue heavy fines to retailers and suppliers violating regulations and should ensure repeat violators are held criminally liable. These measures are necessary if the government wants to regain the public’s trust. More importantly, they are all in line with international standards.
Since the UN’s Codex Alimentarius Commission voted to pass maximum residue levels (MRLs) of ractopamine and the government has guaranteed that beef and pork will be handled separately, it would be difficult for farmers to regain the openness of the past simply by taking to the streets to voice their dissatisfaction.
Apart from waiting for the next election to show the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) the consequences of not listening to majority opinion, the farming industry could use the way in which controls on beef were relaxed as a bargaining chip during upcoming international trade negotiations. If Taiwan’s farmers do not want to be exploited, they have to break away from this protectionist government and the temptation of China’s policy-driven purchases of Taiwan’s surplus agricultural products. Taiwan’s farmers need to become self-reliant.
As cheaper foreign agricultural products put more pressure on the domestic agriculture market because of free-trade agreement talks, coupled with the government’s habitual use of short-term subsidies to save farmers, Taiwan’s agriculture industry is facing a gradual demise. The only choice farmers have is to rely on themselves to survive with dignity. The power of the individual certainly has its limits, but the power of dozens or hundreds of farmers working together would definitely be a force to be reckoned with, and it would also alter the tragic fate Taiwan’s farmers have been assigned to for so long, while also shaking up things in Taiwan’s agricultural policy department.
Food safety concerns have already become a sort of global mindset and this offers a critical opportunity for Taiwanese agriculture that has been restricted by its small-scale operations for so long. Taiwan’s farmers have traditionally fended for themselves at the individual level, with some engrossed in a pursuit of their own ideals, making it difficult to deal with competition from large-scale farmers. Farmers need to be intrepid in freeing themselves from the shackles of a reliance on the government when dealing with outside competition and make food safety a universal motto for Taiwan’s farming industry.
Taiwanese must take the initiative to meet this goal and bring farmers together. The most suitable candidates for the job include farmers and agricultural experts who have been given outstanding farming awards, or local entrepreneurs who have useful ideas and are passionate about helping. These people should also be regularly exchanging their experiences and what they have learned about production and marketing, as well as researching, discussing and inviting experts to help with certain problems, for example, blight or epidemics.
The most important thing is to clamp down on the use of illegal drugs, growth hormones, antibiotics and preservatives and follow the withdrawal period regulations for legal drugs.
Since there is no real consensus about modes of production and related concepts, it is inevitable that the process of negotiation and compromise will be an arduous one, but for the sake of survival there must be a sense of reciprocity and mutual support. As soon as there is enough positive feedback from the public, consumers will undoubtedly be willing to pay higher prices for safer agricultural products.
Once this happens, Taiwan’s farmers can become self-reliant and set themselves apart from foreign producers of cheap agricultural goods tainted by food safety concerns and then regain their dignity by finally ceasing to expect the government to step in and show concern. This is an entirely realistic goal. Just look at the farmers in Montville, Maine, who came together several years back and voted to adopt a town ordinance banning the use of genetically modified plants. It is just a matter of people coming together and making an effort.
So much significant change in the world starts out small and gradually catches on. Instead of staying angry and growing impatient, farmers should have more confidence in themselves.
By standing up for reliable safety and quality anything is possible.
Lee Wu-chung is a professor of agricultural economics.
Translated by Kyle Jeffcoat
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS