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
KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun’s (鄭麗文) recent visit to Beijing and her upcoming visit to Washington will serve as a high-level test of her diplomatic mettle. In Beijing, Cheng was received with symbolic gestures, a warm reception, and high-level access. In Washington, she will receive far less pomp and far sharper questions about the KMT’s vision for the future of Taiwan. Her challenge will be to persuade Washington that the KMT’s engagement with China can coexist with strong deterrence. Cheng’s April 7-12 visit to mainland China coincided with an intense period of conflict in Iran. Despite the strategic significance of Cheng’s trip,
The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has sent the vast Asian chemicals industry into a tailspin. Deprived of the likes of Qatari natural gas and Saudi Arabian oil, the region’s fertilizer and plastics plants are slowing production or even shutting down. Everywhere except China, that is. In petrochemicals, China is unique. As well as a traditional industry that uses oil and gas as feedstock, it has parallel output that relies on its abundant domestic coal. Unsurprisingly, India and other regional powers want to copy and paste the Chinese method. This would not be easy — or climate friendly. The
US President Donald Trump recently repeated his claim that “Taiwan stole America’s chip industry,” reigniting public debate on the issue. As a former Taiwanese minister of economic affairs and an entrepreneur deeply involved in semiconductor supply chain development, I feel a responsibility to clarify this misunderstanding. From the perspective of global industrial evolution and the economic principle of comparative advantage, such a statement appears overly simplistic and risks obscuring the essence of the issue. The rise of Taiwan’s semiconductor industry was not built on “replacing America,” but rather emerged as a result of countries pursuing different development paths within the
Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto says he knows how to fix the problems facing Indonesia. Yet his economic mismanagement and authoritarian tendencies are steering the nation toward a familiar mix of currency instability and political chaos. The world’s fourth-most populous nation risks reversing the hard-won democratic and business reforms that came after the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997. At that time, the rupiah collapsed and the political upheaval that followed forced former president Haji Mohamed Suharto from power. Prabowo’s administration is ignoring similar warning signs. That disconnect was apparent in a national address on Wednesday, when Prabowo projected the swagger that has
RSS