Ecology and economics
Once again, we have a so-called expert talking from inside his expert bubble. In a single paragraph, Tyler Cowen dismisses all the achievements of organic and ecological farming (tinyurl.com/org-farm-3w) because organic production systems in some circumstances have lower food outputs than industrial agricultural systems (“World hunger is the problem left behind,” Sept. 21, page 9).
Cowen, who is tellingly a professor of economics, thus commits the cardinal sin of so many economists in that he disregards any external effects, the so-called “externalities,” one system has on another. To dismiss all these external effects, many detailed in literally thousands of scientific publications, in one paragraph is an extraordinary achievement of intellectual limitation.
However, due to a general lack of inter-disciplinary education, it is nowadays an almost universal ability among so-called experts to blind themselves to the effects one system has on another. Agricultural economists, often educated in only in economics and nothing else, therefore have no appreciation for the many harmful side effects of conventional, industrial farming and the many beneficial side effects of organic, ecological farming.
The detrimental effects of the industrial agricultural system on other interrelated systems are well-documented: climate change caused by carbon, methane and nitrous oxide emissions (tinyurl.com/cc-agricult); the exhaustion of water resources (tinyurl.com/agricu-water); water and soil pollution, soil erosion (tinyurl.com/c2yma7k), food poisoning (“Tests reveal pesticides on food: Greenpeace Taiwan,” Sept. 15, page 3); and, perhaps most worryingly, an extinction crisis endangering more than half of all species (Science, Vol. 307, p550). There are other, less well-established problems possibly linked to industrial agriculture: the collapse of pollinator populations vital to many branches of agriculture; decreasing fertility, not just in humans, but in many other species; and the obesity crisis, brought about by an overly cheap carbohydrate and meat-based diet. In addition, food prices are being driven upward because biofuels are replacing foods.
Ecological agriculture, on the other hand, attempts to limit detrimental effects on other systems by applying sustainability principles (for Asian examples, see the works of Masanobu Fukuoka and Franklin Hiram King listed in Wikipedia).
So, contrary to Cowen’s assertion, we will not avert world hunger by destroying all other environmental systems through unsustainable agriculture. Most experts agree that bringing together the best elements of ecological and industrial farming is the optimal, forward-thinking solution (tinyurl.com/cl5mprm), but this can only happen if the so-called experts are willing to learn a little bit of ecology.
It might therefore be a useful intellectual exercise for many of these so-called experts to occasionally crack open a scientific journal with a name other than Agricultural Economics or The Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization. How about broadening your horizons by reading Ecological Economics, The Journal of Sustainable Agriculture or Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment? The information is there — it can be read, or it can be ignored.
To ignore it is to block out large parts of reality and remain blissfully unaware of the interconnectedness of the world, so please do not be surprised if somebody calls you narrow-minded.
Flora Faun
Taipei
Taiwanese wake-up call
Former premier Frank Hsieh of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has decided to visit China.
Why? What does he need to find out? That every second word of the Chinese officials is a lie?
I have lived there, so he can come and ask me.
Is the DPP now trying to copy the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)? Why should people vote for the DPP next time?
It does not really matter, right? It is the difference between bitten by a cat or by a dog.
I hope people will vote wisely in future and vote for a party that is concerned about Taiwanese and not worried about what the Chinese government thinks.
Taiwan should treat China as its equal.
Why does the US not want to supply Taiwan with the new fighter jets it has requested?
Because Washington is afraid Taiwan will pass on the military technology to China.
If this continues, Taiwan will continue to fall further and further behind the other “Asian Tigers.”
Wake up, Taiwan.
Gerry Floor
Greater Taichung
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
RSS