Under the service trade agreement signed with China last month, Taiwan would open up service sectors such as agricultural product processing and storage, and set up free economic zones in the hope of attracting overseas investment.
Agricultural officials keep telling farmers to be less conservative and more open-minded, but has the government given farmers a level playing field and taught them how to face these new trade challenges?
The big problem for Taiwan’s farming is in the low prices of agricultural products. Successive governments have held prices down out of concern for national food security, commodity price stability and industrial and commercial development. As such, prices are not decided by the market and farmers’ incomes have been consistently lower than the national average.
With incomes not matching effort, many farmers have left the countryside. This impedes new knowledge and new techniques, making farming less efficient or able to meet new challenges.
Past governments imposed various restrictions on the purchase and sale of farmland, leaving each farming household with an average of only about 1.1 hectares of land. Farmers can hardly compete with large-scale farming as practiced overseas. Also key to maintaining stable production and marketing is authorities having a firm grasp of the actual production situation. Yet they are unable to grasp the nation’s basic agricultural data, let alone plan production or establish early-warning mechanisms.
Lacking information, farmers make decisions based on current product prices and on what they see their neighbors planting. The inability to make rational predictions, means imbalances between production and sales occur almost every year, while many farmers live in hardship.
Under such circumstances, how can Taiwan open up its agriculture to compete with better-prepared countries?
Logistics is a very important link in the farm product supply chain, involving the processing, packing, storage and transport of agricultural products all the way up to consumers. In line with the “smiling curve” theory of added value, the supply of seeds and saplings at one end of the agricultural supply chain and branding and services at the other, are important for adding value to products and making the sector more competitive. They generate much greater profits than those earned by frontline farmers engaged in production.
Research shows only about 24 percent of the consumer purchase price of products goes into farmers’ or fishermen’s pockets, while 75 percent goes to the downstream stages of processing, transport, marketing, sales, hospitality and tourism, and to the upstream stage of agricultural inputs.
Therefore, helping farmers on the front line obtain a share of these profits is imperative to increasing their incomes and motivation to stay in the business.
Japan promotes such policies to ensure sustainable agriculture and fisheries industries as it faces the challenges of entering international trade organizations. The policies are centered on producers, encouraging farmers, people in fishing and forestry workers to do their own processing and sales. This can create local business opportunities and new kinds of business, making these sectors more competitive globally.
Yet Taiwan’s government intends to allow overseas companies, especially from China, to engage in agricultural product logistics and related services in Taiwan. In the end, the nation will likely lose its autonomy regarding all stages of agriculture, including production, processing, techniques, and marketing.
Furthermore, China’s agricultural product logistics is beset by many problems. For example, its basic transport and communication infrastructure is weak; most farming is done by small-scale individual household producers; it has insufficient equipment for transport, storage, and loading and unloading of agricultural products; the planning and distribution of farm product markets are irrational; and agricultural technology is not widely applied. All this makes it hard for Taiwan’s farming sector to link up with China’s and free trade will pose even tougher challenges.
Officials and academics often seriously underestimate the value of agriculture simply because it accounts for less than 2 percent of GDP.
In theory, free trade gives every country equal opportunities and rights to pursue its best interests, but the reality is rather different. Large economies manipulate free-trade negotiations to force others to accept their products. In view of this reality, agriculture should not be made entirely dependent on market forces.
There are many challenges ahead for Taiwan. Are we ready to face them?
Du Yu is chief executive officer of the Chen-Li Task Force for Agricultural Reform.
Translated by Eddy Chang
For the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), China’s “century of humiliation” is the gift that keeps on giving. Beijing returns again and again to the theme of Western imperialism, oppression and exploitation to keep stoking the embers of grievance and resentment against the West, and especially the US. However, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that in 1949 announced it had “stood up” soon made clear what that would mean for Chinese and the world — and it was not an agenda that would engender pride among ordinary Chinese, or peace of mind in the international community. At home, Mao Zedong (毛澤東) launched
The restructuring of supply chains, particularly in the semiconductor industry, was an essential part of discussions last week between Taiwan and a US delegation led by US Undersecretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy and the Environment Keith Krach. It took precedent over the highly anticipated subject of bilateral trade partnerships, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) founder Morris Chang’s (張忠謀) appearance on Friday at a dinner hosted by President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) for Krach was a subtle indicator of this. Chang was in photographs posted by Tsai on Facebook after the dinner, but no details about their discussions were disclosed. With
To say that this year has been eventful for China and the rest of the world would be something of an understatement. First, the US-China trade dispute, already simmering for two years, reached a boiling point as Washington tightened the noose around China’s economy. Second, China unleashed the COVID-19 pandemic on the world, wreaking havoc on an unimaginable scale and turning the People’s Republic of China into a common target of international scorn. Faced with a mounting crisis at home, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) rashly decided to ratchet up military tensions with neighboring countries in a misguided attempt to divert the
Astride an ascended economy and military, with global influence nearing biblical proportions, Xi Jinping (習近平) — general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), chairman of the Central Military Commission and president of the People’s Republic of China — is faithfully heralded, in deeds and imagery, as a benevolent lord, determined to “build a community of common destiny for all mankind.” Rather than leading humanity to this Shangri-La through inspirational virtue a la Mahatma Gandhi or Abraham Lincoln, the CCP prefers a micromanagement doctrine of socialism with Chinese characteristics as the guiding light. A doctrine of Marxist orthodoxy transplanted under a canvas