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
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to