Uber’s arrival in Taiwan in 2013 sparked massive protests by taxi unions and professional drivers. The demonstrators demanded that the Investment Commission revoke Uber Taiwan’s investment license on grounds that the company engaged in “unfair competition.”
Policy commentary has thus far focused on fairness issues, internal market regulations, taxation and consumer protection, but has yet to broaden the discussion to evaluate Uber’s potential environmental effects and their implications for sustainable transport systems.
Are Uber and other similar transportation network companies (TNCs) — eg, Lyft and SideCar — climate friends or foes? This is an increasingly critical question as the services proliferate globally, but the answer is still unclear at this moment.
The ride-sharing platforms, unsurprisingly, insist on their positive effects on the environment. The companies claim that passengers are helping lower the carbon footprint left by the modern “driving alone” transportation model and reducing the desire for personal car ownership.
However, a recent study by London’s Department of Transport suggested the rise of ride-sharing apps, such as Uber, has played a part in worsening traffic congestion. In the past few years, the number of private-hire cars has increased by 26 percent, because some people use ride-sharing services to take trips that they would not have taken otherwise.
The transportation situation varies by city and nation. To formulate robust policy solutions, Taiwan first needs to collect data and carry out independent assessments on TNCs mobility, emissions and environmental effects within its own territory.
In terms of legal action and regulatory responses, Uber is involved in at least 173 lawsuits around the world. In October last year, the Court of Justice of the EU was requested by a Spanish judge to issue a preliminary ruling to declare Uber’s legal status either as a transportation company or a digital platform provider.
Given past litigious experiences, government authorities face two options. The first is to simply ban the market entry of Uber and other similar TNCs. This choice might deprive people of collaborative consumption benefits and trigger legal disputes. The second option is to allow Uber to compete at the same level with local taxi companies and harness the sharing services’ pro-environmental potential for promoting a more sustainable transportation system.
Regulatory reform processes from early-acting jurisdictions, such as the US states of California and Colorado and the city of Seattle, have offered insightful lessons. For example, California has set a minimum fuel-efficiency standard and model, engine and year restrictions on vehicles eligible for Uber drivers. The California regulators also require all TNCs to submit reports detailing their drivers, routes, passengers, payments and the services provided within each ZIP code.
These additional low-carbon requirements and compulsory reporting standards can be useful to balance the interests of public safety, environmental protection and flexibility for innovation in the transport sector.
Technological changes bring both challenges and opportunities. Transport policy should be politically and publicly acceptable. Besides the operation of the Investment Commission, Taiwan might need a cross-agency policy
making integration, especially between transport and environmental authorities, and take this chance to convene public consultations on the regulatory environment for app-based platforms and collaborative economy.
Yang Chung-han is a doctoral candidate researching international environmental law at the University of Cambridge in England.
China badly misread Japan. It sought to intimidate Tokyo into silence on Taiwan. Instead, it has achieved the opposite by hardening Japanese resolve. By trying to bludgeon a major power like Japan into accepting its “red lines” — above all on Taiwan — China laid bare the raw coercive logic of compellence now driving its foreign policy toward Asian states. From the Taiwan Strait and the East and South China Seas to the Himalayan frontier, Beijing has increasingly relied on economic warfare, diplomatic intimidation and military pressure to bend neighbors to its will. Confident in its growing power, China appeared to believe
After more than three weeks since the Honduran elections took place, its National Electoral Council finally certified the new president of Honduras. During the campaign, the two leading contenders, Nasry Asfura and Salvador Nasralla, who according to the council were separated by 27,026 votes in the final tally, promised to restore diplomatic ties with Taiwan if elected. Nasralla refused to accept the result and said that he would challenge all the irregularities in court. However, with formal recognition from the US and rapid acknowledgment from key regional governments, including Argentina and Panama, a reversal of the results appears institutionally and politically
In 2009, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) made a welcome move to offer in-house contracts to all outsourced employees. It was a step forward for labor relations and the enterprise facing long-standing issues around outsourcing. TSMC founder Morris Chang (張忠謀) once said: “Anything that goes against basic values and principles must be reformed regardless of the cost — on this, there can be no compromise.” The quote is a testament to a core belief of the company’s culture: Injustices must be faced head-on and set right. If TSMC can be clear on its convictions, then should the Ministry of Education
The Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) provided several reasons for military drills it conducted in five zones around Taiwan on Monday and yesterday. The first was as a warning to “Taiwanese independence forces” to cease and desist. This is a consistent line from the Chinese authorities. The second was that the drills were aimed at “deterrence” of outside military intervention. Monday’s announcement of the drills was the first time that Beijing has publicly used the second reason for conducting such drills. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leadership is clearly rattled by “external forces” apparently consolidating around an intention to intervene. The targets of