A special draft bill for implementing the Forward-looking Infrastructure Development Program is under review in the Legislative Yuan. This ambitious development plan aims to enhance the nation’s global competitiveness and economic growth for the next 30 years.
The government’s strategy is to harness both public and private investment for infrastructure construction and low-carbon transition. Public investment under the program would be about NT$882.49 billion (US$29.2 billion) and would raise an extra NT$1.78 trillion in private investments over the next seven years.
The program is expected to raise the nation’s real GDP by NT$975.90 billion while creating 40,000 to 50,000 new jobs.
However, in terms of both form and substance, the draft bill, which contains only 11 relatively short provisions, is seemingly not solid enough to support such a large-scale program.
Commentaries also raise concerns about the program’s provisions to spur industrial innovation, its negative environmental and social effects, and public participation in decisionmaking.
Since the Green Economy Report published by the UN Environment Programme in 2011, governments and analysts have been exploring why and how state intervention could be beneficial to both the economy and the environment.
International lessons have demonstrated that, to achieve a “green” paradigm shift, nations should see environment, investment and innovation as one issue.
It is well-known that Denmark has a first-mover advantage in wind turbine technologies, though it is not a world leader in the availability of wind resources.
Denmark managed to accurately forecast the patterns of wind technologies and global markets at least one decade before its competitors and successfully pursued world technological leadership in the field.
Since the 1980s, Danish environmental regulations drove its industries to develop frontier-level technologies and channeled the investments not only in infrastructure and production, but in natural, human and knowledge-based capital.
This case illustrates that environmental policies can also be vigorous economic policies if the government is able to see further than others and competently allocate scarce resources.
Adequate regulatory safeguards are crucial to keep investment activities within acceptable boundaries.
Though Premier Lin Chuan (林全) promised that all projects in the program would be scrutinized by the existing legal frameworks, fierce public discontent toward nationwide land expropriations and onshore wind turbines have challenged the legitimacy and transparency of the “top-down” and expertise-dominated planning systems.
Undemocratic and unfair development decisions will provoke further social inequalities and threaten the effects of low-carbon investments.
Now is a good time for the nation to trace the new international trends regarding public participatory mechanisms, such as Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration, the EU’s Aarhus Convention and the UK’s new National Infrastructure Assessment, which would be helpful to clarify the opportunities and limitations in Taiwan’s domestic legal frameworks.
The decision to invest in pro-environmental innovation is not a bad bet, but all too often, discussion of infrastructure development is limited to economics and engineering.
The authorities should take some time to rethink both the synergistic and safeguarding aspects of the environment-economy nexus, and consolidate the program with the nation’s broader environmental, technological and industrial policies.
Yang Chung-han is a doctoral candidate at the University of Cambridge and a member of the Taipei Bar Association.
China took advantage of the vacuum left behind when US carriers stayed out of the western Pacific Ocean due to COVID-19 outbreaks on several US Navy warships. The Chinese government is solidifying its hold on artificial islands in the South China Sea by moving in missiles and surveillance equipment, and formalizing its occupation by creating two municipal districts in the region under Hainan Island’s Sansha — Xisha District on Woody Island (Yongxing Island, 永興島) to administer the Paracel Islands (Xisha Islands, 西沙群島) and Nansha District on Fiery Cross Reef (Yongshu Reef, 永暑島) to administer the Spratly Islands (Nansha Islands, 南沙群島) —
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) yesterday wrapped up its annual party conference-cum-national decision-making forums in Beijing: the National People’s Congress (NPC) and National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), known colloquially as the “two meetings.” They are normally tightly choreographed affairs, designed to project an image of stability and unassailable strength, but several events leading up this month’s sessions provided strong indications that all is not well in the state of Denmark. The first sign of major discontent came in March, at the height of the COVID-19 crisis in China, when an article by real-estate tycoon Ren Zhiqiang
French firm DCI-DESCO in April won a bid to upgrade Taiwan’s Lafayette frigates, which has strained ties between China and France. In 1991, France sold Taiwan six Lafayette frigates and in 1992 sold it 60 Mirage 2000 fighter jets. To prevent arms sales between the nations, China negotiated an agreement with France and in 1994 in a joint statement, France promised that there would be no future arms sales to Taiwan. From China’s point of view, the DCI-DESCO deal constitutes a breach of the agreement, but the French stance is that it is not selling Taiwan new weapons, but instead providing a
Chung Yuan ChristiaN University is clearly in bed with the People’s Republic of China. This can be the only explanation why the school’s authorities have done their utmost to shield a student, who lodged a complaint against an associate professor, and then used thuggish tactics to compel the teacher to issue two separate apologies to China. The original complaint, filed by an unnamed Chinese student, was for remarks by associate professor Chao Ming-wei (招名威) during a class on the origin of COVID-19. A second complaint was filed by the same student after Chao, during an apology, stated that he was a