Chi Po-lin’s (齊柏林) documentary Beyond Beauty: Taiwan From Above (看見台灣) and Lin Hwai-min’s (林懷民) latest work for Cloud Gate Dance Theatre (雲門舞集), Rice (稻禾), which both focus on environmental preservation and the loss of Taiwan’s villages, have given rise to widespread debate and reflection.
Chi’s camera lays bare the past degradation of the nation before the eyes of its people. The level of waste has resulted in an aversion toward mountain products and services: vegetables, tea and bed-and-breakfast establishments. The Cabinet has set up a task force dedicated to preventing further loss of usable farmland in an attempt to rectify the damage.
Regrettably, the Lanyang Plain (蘭陽平原) and the coastal areas of Taoyuan County, which Chi’s film portrays, are home to a lot of good farmers who are being put out of business by luxury villas and small corrugated steel shacks — “dog cages” set up on agricultural land to facilitate the construction of residential houses — without the government or the public showing any concern.
Lin’s Rice gives a detailed description of the decline and struggles of villages. He calls for visionary plans for land use to deal with the disappearance of rural Taiwan lest the beautiful East Rift Valley, which is where the premiere of the Cloud Gate performance took place, becomes a blemish on the landscape, with every stretch of what was previously farmland covered in luxury villas.
Upon leaving the movie theaters, people should think about how to protect farmland from being lost to such development.
There is probably not more than 500,000 hectares of unaffected farmland left, and the nation can only supply about 33 percent of its own grain.
Over the past 13 years, 270,000 hectares of farmland has been converted. This includes land — still registered as farmland — approximately 15 times the size of Xinyi District (信義) in Taipei, but on which luxury villas called “agricultural dwellings” have been built. An even larger area has been used for the illegal construction of factories, night markets and other non-agricultural uses.
According to last year’s agricultural report issued by the Council of Labor Affairs, 810,000 hectares of land is registered as farmland, but the agricultural census data for last year show that after deducting the 270,000 hectares used — be it legally or illegally — for non-agricultural purposes, the land area available for farmers is only 540,000 hectares, including 210,000 hectares of fallow land.
The amendment to the Agricultural Development Act (農業發展條例) in 2000 relaxed restrictions on land division and the construction of farmhouses. This was when the loss of farmland began. Today only 330,000 of 810,000 hectares of farmland is being used to grow crops. The rate of change has not slowed and now only a little more than 500,000 hectares of usable farmland remains. In another 13 years, it will probably all be gone.
Following the amendment of the agriculture act, people who were not farmers bought land in suburban areas and registered themselves as farmers. They then built huge farmhouses, either to live in themselves or to sell for a profit. About 63 percent of the council’s budget was used to subsidize insurance for these bogus farmers: the Old-Age Farmers’ Welfare Allowance Program and other programs. In addition to being unjust and unfair, this has had a big impact on the flow of funds for policy implementation.
The best way to protect farmland is to amend the act; stipulating that newly purchased farmland must be used for farming, not residences. However, amending the law is a time consuming process, instead the government could take immediate action by abolishing the Regulations Governing Agricultural Dwelling Houses (農業用地興建農舍辦法), which is managed by the Ministry of the Interior’s Construction and Planning Agency, and by not allowing the construction of farmhouses on newly purchased farmland for a period of three to five years to help preserve what little farmland remains.
If this does not happen, it will be too late for future generations to try to rescue farmland by setting up a task force after watching the sequel to Beyond Beauty.
Peng Tso-kwei is a chair professor at Asia University and chairman of the Taiwan Society of Rural Planning.
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Taiwan’s business-friendly environment and science parks designed to foster technology industries are the key elements of the nation’s winning chip formula, inspiring the US and other countries to try to replicate it. Representatives from US business groups — such as the Greater Phoenix Economic Council, and the Arizona-Taiwan Trade and Investment Office — in July visited the Hsinchu Science Park (新竹科學園區), home to Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) headquarters and its first fab. They showed great interest in creating similar science parks, with aims to build an extensive semiconductor chain suitable for the US, with chip designing, packaging and manufacturing. The