Ever since President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) and her administration took office, they have had to deal with a multitude of problems. A global economy in disarray, highly uncertain and confrontational regional politics, falling levels of domestic investment, a bottleneck in the transformation of the manufacturing industry, difficulty expanding into international markets and a continued overreliance on China as an export market.
Tsai’s government has been searching for a new way out for the economy. The “new southbound policy” — to pivot export trade toward South and Southeast Asia — and its “five innovative industries policy” to promote creative industries have both been keenly anticipated.
At a recent meeting at the Ministry of Economic Affairs, Premier Lin Chuan (林全) announced that the government would open a series of service centers, one for each of the 18 countries covered by the “new southbound policy,” and instructed the Financial Supervisory Commission to set up a “southbound center” financing platform for Taiwanese businesses in need of capital injections.
Lin also said that governments at all levels would have to divide responsibilities in a specialized manner as the Cabinet sets out a plan for how state machinery would be used to implement the policies, establish key performance indicators and do promotional work.
Although the government has talked up the promotion of four important areas requiring development — economic and trade cooperation, pooling of resources, personnel exchanges and linking up the regions — personnel exchanges seems to be the only feasible one of these four plans.
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co chairman Morris Chang (張忠謀) has said that although the government’s “five innovative industries policy” is commendable, “it must not overlook industries — such as the semiconductor industry — that have been promoted by previous administrations.”
If the government focuses purely on the promotion of “new industries,” even if they are successful, they would still be unable to compensate for a decline in traditionally strong industries, Chang said.
In other words, given the hole in the government’s policy, it would be extremely dangerous if it were to give consideration only to new industries without maintaining the development of existing ones.
Innovation is important, but innovative industries can be broadly broken down into two types: disruptive innovation and incremental innovation. The former, despite being a global success story in recent years, is time-consuming and requires high levels of investment, while the success rate is low.
On the other hand, with incremental innovation, although advancement is slight, the accumulated advances build up into significant progress over time. This helps to create a space between the incremental innovator and its competitors, which over time allows the innovator to build up a competitive advantage.
When mulling the “new southbound policy” and the “five innovative industries policy,” perhaps thoughts should be focused on how to best furnish Taiwanese businesses with a competitive advantage, based on the principle of incremental innovation and complemented by disruptive innovation and the integration of new and old industries. This should be the basis for a specific and focused southbound policy.
The government must provide assistance to those companies that already sell their products to ASEAN members to help them increase their competitiveness and expand market share. This would provide a rapid boost to Taiwan’s economy.
Furthermore, through the government’s strategy of opening service centers to deal with each of the 18 countries covered by the policy, existing industries will in the short term be able to increase exports, increase market share and expand exports to countries covered by the “new southbound policy.”
In the medium term, it can use the access created by businesses as a springboard to push forward industries within the new economy.
By following this two-pronged strategy, the government would be able to make a success of its southbound policy, while at the same time establish specific key performance indicators to quantify success and failure.
Sung Wen-lung is vice president of the Chinese Business Incubation Association.
Translated by Edward Jones
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then