The areca nut, also known as betel nut, has some medicinal uses. It is claimed to be useful for leucoderma, leprosy, stoke, cough, fits, worms, anemia, dental and oral hygiene and obesity. It also has ceremonial uses in some cultures. More commonly it is used as a stimulant or a recreational drug. Many Web sites proclaim its virtues and say little or nothing about its possible adverse effects.
As reported in a Taipei Times article, betel nuts are addictive and are classified as a carcinogen (“Government losing battle with betel nut addiction,” Oct. 31, page 4).
It is believed to cause cancer of the jaw, esophagus and salivary glands. The incidence of jaw cancer is about 30 times higher in users than in abstainers, and it is said to be more than 100 times higher in users of betel nuts, tobacco and alcohol than in abstainers.
Betel nut use is a substantial problem for Taiwan at several levels. The National Health Insurance Administration (NHIA) has stated that “oral, salivary gland and jaw bone diseases” are the second-most expensive set of diseases in Taiwan, costing NT$41.3 billion (US$1.37 billion) last year — only kidney diseases are more expensive.
That amounts to an annual cost of about NT$1,800 per person, so it is a concern from an economic view.
Beyond the health issue, there are three other potential problems arising from Taiwanese betel nut use.
The first problem is ecological: Betel nut cultivation requires meticulous weeding of the undergrowth. Since these farms are often on steep mountainsides, deforestation and frequent weeding markedly increase the risk of mudslides after heavy rains or typhoons.
The second one is environmental: The multitude of booths that sell the product use very bright LED lights to attract customers, contributing to light pollution.
The third is safety-related: Heavy users of betel nut are believed to include truck and bus drivers and workers who have to move heavy loads. If chewing a large number of betel nuts per day affects mental alertness, then that might affect driving and working skills related to safety.
In addition, the bright lights and betel nut girls used to attract customers to retail outlets might distract drivers from seeing traffic lights and hazards.
As the Taipei Times article says, the government has offered a subsidy of as much as NT$250,000 per hectare to persuade betel nut farmers to convert to other crops, but that has resulted in a meager conversion rate.
Only 435 hectares out of 42,940 hectares dedicated to betel nut cultivation have been switched to other crops since the subsidy program was initiated in 2014.
No data could be found on how many hectares have been deforested or converted from other uses to start new betel nut farms; it is even possible that the subsidy has led to the creation of more new farmland than the 435 hectares lost.
The carrot approach does not seem to be working. Perhaps Taiwan should consider using a stick rather than a carrot.
Taxes and other measures on tobacco have been effective in curbing smoking, both in Taiwan and in other nations, and have led to a leveling and later decline in the incidence of lung cancer.
Taiwan has increased the tax on cigarettes from NT$11.8 per pack to NT$31.8 per pack, signaling that taxation is succeeding. The tax is about 30 percent of the cost of a pack of 20 cigarettes.
Taxes on alcohol have also been used in many countries to try and control the ravages of alcohol abuse.
Could the government consider assessing a tax on betel nut trees?
Information online suggests that a bag of 20 betel quids costs about NT$30 and that one tree produces about 500 nuts per year. If that is correct, then, based on the size of the registered planting areas and the estimated number of trees and their yield, a tax of NT$200 per tree would translate into a tax of about NT$8 per pack of 20.
The tax would then amount to 21 percent of the retail price. The increase in retail cost would be 40 percent, which should encourage users to limit their use and deter non-users from starting.
It would produce revenue of about NT$850 million or about 2 percent of the cost to the NHIA for diseases that are largely due to betel nut use.
Such a stick would have other benefits. It takes five years from the time a palm is planted to the time the fruit can be harvested. The stick would deter creation of new plantations, because the tax could be assessed from the date of germination onward.
By contrast, the carrot might encourage people to start plantations with the expectation that two or three years later they could declare that they are converting to other uses and expect a subsidy.
The stick might also reduce the urge to cut hardy trees from slopes to make room for a crop that is believed to be second only to rice in profitability per hectare, thereby helping with potential ecological issues — the carrot does not.
The administrative burden of determining the location and number of trees could be minimized by having farm owners report the location, size and tree density before the first tax installment is due. Heavy fines and higher taxes could be imposed on farmers who do not self-report. Thereafter, drones and aerial photography could be employed to locate non-compliant plantations.
There are some issues with using the stick.
The first problem is how to deal with Aboriginal tribes who use betel nuts for ceremonial purposes. If it is truly ceremonial, the use would not amount to much, compared with the 200 nuts per day of regular users, so the tax burden would be very low. If, however, the tribal harvests were mostly exported for sale outside the tribe, what could be done would depend on the laws that protect tribal rights.
The second one is that if the stick were successful, the thousands of people engaged in the sale of betel nuts would find it difficult to make ends meet.
Emilio Venezian is a former visiting professor at Feng Chia University.
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
A recent Taipei Times editorial (“A targeted bilingual policy,” March 12, page 8) questioned how the Ministry of Education can justify spending NT$151 million (US$4.74 million) when the spotlighted achievements are English speech competitions and campus tours. It is a fair question, but it focuses on the wrong issue. The problem is not last year’s outcomes failing to meet the bilingual education vision; the issue is that the ministry has abandoned the program that originally justified such a large expenditure. In the early years of Bilingual 2030, the ministry’s K-12 Administration promoted the Bilingual Instruction in Select Domains Program (部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫).
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) earlier this month said it is necessary for her to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and it would be a “huge boost” to the party’s local election results in November, but many KMT members have expressed different opinions, indicating a struggle between different groups in the party. Since Cheng was elected as party chairwoman in October last year, she has repeatedly expressed support for increased exchanges with China, saying that it would bring peace and prosperity to Taiwan, and that a meeting with Xi in Beijing takes priority over meeting
Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs spokesman for maritime affairs Rogelio Villanueva on Monday said that Manila’s claims in the South China Sea are backed by international law. Villanueva was responding to a social media post by the Chinese embassy alleging that a former Philippine ambassador in 1990 had written a letter to a German radio operator stating that the Scarborough Shoal (Huangyan Island, 黃岩島) did not fall within Manila’s territory. “Sovereignty is not merely claimed, it is exercised,” Villanueva said. The Philippines won a landmark case at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016 that found China’s sweeping claim of sovereignty in
RSS