Some people blameD the flood disaster in southern Taiwan since Aug. 23 on the failure of flood prevention infrastructure. Their reason was that although the government has spent NT$430 billion (US$13.97 billion) over the years on prevention, flooding still occurs.
Although government officials have said that the actual amount spent is NT$187 billion, that does not answer the question of whether the infrastructure has failed or not.
The phrase “failed flood prevention” has become the focus of a war of words and the center of political conflict. If people cannot decide whether flood prevention is a failure or a success, they will never be able to improve it.
Perhaps the central and local governments could publicize the following information to clarify the issue so that people can end the war of words.
First, the government should publicize all flood prevention plans. For severely flooded areas, it should show which of the areas have been involved in flood prevention planning and which have not, and explain why areas that have been included in a flood prevention plan continue to be flooded.
With regard to the areas prone to flooding that are not included in a flood prevention plan, the public needs to know why no preventive measures have been taken.
Second, the government should systematically organize flood prevention plans.
In the past, such large-scale flooding seldom occurred in southern Taiwan, so a more reasonable way to deal with the issue would be for the central and local governments to work together and divide the responsibilities between them.
The ideal approach to reorganizing previous flood prevention plans would be to examine different areas — prone to flooding or not — to see what efforts have been made by the central and local governments, and provide comprehensive information about the effectiveness of those efforts.
Third, the government should acknowledge that there are limitations to flood prevention technology.
Science and technology certainly play vital roles in curbing flooding, but there are always limitations. Therefore, it is essential to let the public know of the difficulties the prevention plans face, thus facilitating breakthroughs and improvements.
Fourth, flood prevention information should be easily accessible by the public.
If the government discloses all flood prevention plans, but they are not easily accessible, it will not be very different from not publicizing the information at all.
To make flood prevention information public-friendly is not difficult: The government could set up a dedicated flood prevention Web site devoted to sorting all plans in a clear and easily understandable manner, perhaps divided into central, municipal and township governments or into the different drainage areas.
Then members of the public and experts would be able to access the information relevant to them.
This approach would also be a way of encouraging public participation and supervision of the government.
Given that information about flood prevention is not sufficiently comprehensive, systematic or public-friendly, it is difficult to judge whether flood prevention has failed or not.
The only thing that can be said for certain is that the distribution of flood prevention-related information has failed.
If people want to build a sustainable future for flood prevention in Taiwan they need more scientific evidence, less political jargon and more information combined with rational debate and dialogue.
Yang Yung-nane is a political science professor at National Cheng Kung University.
Translated by Chang Ho-ming
The bird flu outbreak at US dairy farms keeps finding alarming new ways to surprise scientists. Last week, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) confirmed that H5N1 is spreading not just from birds to herds, but among cows. Meanwhile, media reports say that an unknown number of cows are asymptomatic. Although the risk to humans is still low, it is clear that far more work needs to be done to get a handle on the reach of the virus and how it is being transmitted. That would require the USDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to get
For the incoming Administration of President-elect William Lai (賴清德), successfully deterring a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) attack or invasion of democratic Taiwan over his four-year term would be a clear victory. But it could also be a curse, because during those four years the CCP’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) will grow far stronger. As such, increased vigilance in Washington and Taipei will be needed to ensure that already multiplying CCP threat trends don’t overwhelm Taiwan, the United States, and their democratic allies. One CCP attempt to overwhelm was announced on April 19, 2024, namely that the PLA had erred in combining major missions
On April 11, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida delivered a speech at a joint meeting of the US Congress in Washington, in which he said that “China’s current external stance and military actions present an unprecedented and the greatest strategic challenge … to the peace and stability of the international community.” Kishida emphasized Japan’s role as “the US’ closest ally.” “The international order that the US worked for generations to build is facing new challenges,” Kishida said. “I understand it is a heavy burden to carry such hopes on your shoulders,” he said. “Japan is already standing shoulder to shoulder
Former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) used to push for reforms to protect Taiwan by adopting the “three noes” policy as well as “Taiwanization.” Later, then-president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) wished to save the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) by pushing for the party’s “localization,” hoping to compete with homegrown political parties as a pro-Taiwan KMT. However, the present-day members of the KMT do not know what they are talking about, and do not heed the two former presidents’ words, so the party has suffered a third consecutive defeat in the January presidential election. Soon after gaining power with the help of the KMT’s