Agriculture has always been at the center of trade disputes. Since the government believes joining regional trade groups is inevitable and agriculture is a hard-to-avoid issue in trade talks, it should first brainstorm, use detailed evaluations to create suitable responses and coordinate and integrate related ministries.
What it should not do is make estimates using adjusted economic models when much of the industrial data is incomplete, then use these estimates to set aside compensatory funds to appear as if it is doing its job.
Numbers are cold facts, while the feelings of our farmers are the exact opposite.
Agriculture in Taiwan is restricted by limitations, like natural and artificial resources and the government’s “land to the tiller” policy. Taiwanese farms are predominantly smaller-sized and family-run with an average actual farming area of 1.1 hectares. The output is so restricted that it is hard for them to bring about cost advantages that come with economies of scale. Larger Taiwanese farms seem small compared with the large farms overseas that sometimes span several thousand hectares.
For many years, agriculture in Taiwan has mainly relied on new crop varieties that have resulted from the hard work of the nation’s farmers, testing and research bodies, production technology, management skills and high-quality agricultural products. This has allowed them to win the praise of local and foreign consumers and to compete with international agricultural products that cost much less to produce.
Unfortunately, when interviewed by the media, top agricultural officials talk about how they support the transfer of Taiwan’s agricultural technology overseas and act as if the transfer of Taiwan’s core agricultural varieties and technology for nothing in exchange is nothing to worry about. Officials seem to believe that when overseas companies use the nation’s technology, they will not sell these products back to Taiwan, and that our domestic market will not be impacted. Trade talks result in such products being sold back to the Taiwanese domestic market, which will hurt local agriculture.
Officials avoid talking about how Taiwanese agricultural products need foreign markets to help readjust price and quantity and that foreign agricultural products possess various advantages over Taiwanese products, such as low production costs and a steady supply over long periods.
The heads of agricultural bodies have made ridiculous comments, such as that agriculture knows no borders and that since the US and Japan transferred technology to the nation in the past, Taiwan should transfer technology to other countries, as it now has the ability to do.
This also indirectly answers the question as to why the government has gained so little ground protecting the nation’s sensitive agricultural technology and product varieties. Little wonder that farmers suspect the government of trying to get rid of them and agriculture.
As investment in agriculture has become more popular globally, advanced countries and large multinational corporations have begun focusing on technology research and development, while stressing the importance of protecting intellectual property rights. What they are primarily concerned with are huge profits.
Would the Japanese government export special varieties of fruit like Aomori apples, its unique variety of mango known as “eggs of the sun” and Japanese cantaloupe then hand over the technology used in their production to other countries? Of course not. This would create competition for their farmers.
As soon as a foreign business finds an appropriate location, it can use cheaper natural resources from the local area, leverage the large consumer markets and then use Taiwan’s agricultural technology to produce a large volume of so-called “Taiwanese” agricultural products.
The products they produce will not only have more market competitiveness than Taiwanese agricultural products, they will also stifle the nation’s chances of exporting its own products.
If this were to happen, why would foreign companies make a huge effort to come to Taiwan to invest in and produce agriculture here?
If consumers overseas are able to easily enjoy Taiwan’s wide variety of agricultural products in their own countries, then how is the nation to attract them travel to Taiwan and try the its unique agricultural delicacies?
Keeping the best of Taiwan’s agricultural products in the country and using the tourism industry to attract large numbers of people will be one of the main ways Taiwanese agriculture will develop in the future.
Rice farmer Peng Ching-hsing (彭鏡興), founder of the renowned rice brand Tianheyu (天禾玉), also shares this opinion.
There are a few success stories with the internationalization of Taiwan’s agriculture, although citing these as proof that the current agricultural structure can stand the impact of trade liberalization is overly optimistic and not pragmatic enough.
The nation should improve the agricultural industry by taking inventory of Taiwan’s advantages, which include agricultural varieties and technological know-how, then bring the best of local agriculture to international trade talks backed by the government in order to carve out a bigger share of overseas markets.
This is the only way that agriculture can become a major industry in Taiwan.
Du Yu is a member of the Chen-Li task force for Agricultural Reform.
Translated by Drew Cameron
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations