There has been much debate over how to cure Taiwan of its current economic malaise. One topic that has not yet received sufficient attention is the constraints placed upon higher education.
The causal relationship between talent outflows and falling incomes is hardly news, but the problem is that it is not just professionals seeking higher salaries overseas; graduates are now putting off looking for a job at home.
Worried about what they are hearing about domestic opportunities, Taiwanese are abandoning ship and jostling for placements abroad to further their studies.
The systemic problem of Taiwan’s professional jobs market is pushing young Taiwanese to go overseas to study.
According to a report on salaries and benefits in the Asia-Pacific region published last year by a management consulting company, senior management in Taiwan command less than half of what they could expect to be paid in Singapore, and 70 percent of what they would get in Beijing.
The problem does not stem from a lack of outstanding teaching staff in Taiwanese universities, so why are teaching and research staff of the caliber to be found in Taiwan’s teaching institutions seemingly unable to champion higher education in the nation, to bring about a change in the country’s economic fortunes, promote industrial development, cultivate talent and increase Taiwan’s competitiveness?
The answer is that the Ministry of Education is strangling the development of universities at almost every turn and at every level, from departmental evaluations, the hiring and promotion of teaching staff to student enrollment and tuition fees.
The ministry’s preoccupation with clamping down on corruption and other shenanigans in universities has created a moribund culture of gray socialism in which nobody is expected to stand out and where ambition is discouraged. There is a systemic apathy that is stifling talent.
Let us look at cooperation between industry and academia, and at business incubation centers. Here, universities operate as bases for basic research and knowledge hatcheries. Knowledge transfer is increasingly regarded as the third function that universities perform, supplementing the more traditional roles of teaching and research. Many of the world’s internationally renowned universities now encourage commercialization and application within the wider society of research findings and specialist knowledge, in the interests of meeting the demands of increasingly multicultural communities and improving people’s quality of life over the long term.
A few years ago, the Hong Kong government allocated resources to universities to promote knowledge transfer to bring ideas and innovation down from the ivory towers of academia so they could both benefit a larger group of people while generating extra revenue for the universities.
However, in Taiwan, there are so many restrictions on knowledge transfer, making it difficult to apply research findings within the wider society, or getting them to generate profits that could reduce universities’ reliance on the state budget.
Higher education is a cradle for cultivating talent, an incubator for a creative economy. Unfortunately, Taiwan’s higher education is hostage to excessive bureaucracy. Staff suffer from low morale and research findings hardly ever see the light of day. Taiwanese higher education is in dire need of thorough reform. After all, if higher education remains in its current state, how is it to help the economy lift itself out of the doldrums?
Jason Yeh is an associate professor of finance at the Chinese University of Hong Kong.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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