Fri, Jan 05, 2001 page12

• Fish report exaggerates dangers

  • By Ted Chuang 莊慶達
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  Taiwan's Environmental Quality Protection Foundation (EQPF, 環境品質文教基金會) recently published a study conducted by Ling Yong-chien (凌永健), a chemistry professor at National Tsinghua University, which said that certain dangerous chemicals known as POPs (persistent organic pollutants) have been found in 14 of 30 different kinds of deep-sea fish imported from China. The report immediately caused consumer panic nationwide as well as huge losses to the fishing industry. As a long-time researcher in the field of fisheries economics, I would like to comment on the issue from the four perspectives below. I wish to do so in the hope of helping to relieve consumers' doubts as well as rectifying the negative consequences of the study and mitigating the losses suffered by the fishing industry .

  First, the objectivity of the standard used in the investigation is questionable. Ling's study was based on Australia's organo-chlorine pesticide residue limit, the strictest standard in the world. Personally, I am not opposed to the use of a strict standard in order to ensure the health of the Taiwanese people. Many different standards, however, do exist. The standards of the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO, 聯合國糧農組織), the EU, US and Japan are all frequently used. In fact, Australia's POP standard on meat products is several dozen times higher than other international standards. I will not comment on whether the standard used by Ling was too high. I believe that consumers, however, are entitled to the right to know that the results of the study actually meet most major international standards so that their own judgements will not be misled by the study. As for whether or not the chemicals found in those fish are harmful to the human body, this must be confirmed by the Department of Health (衛生署) or the Environmental Protection Administration (環保署), and no assumptions should be made in advance.

  Second, the publication of the study was inappropriate. I certainly agree that an academic study should be published and discussed, or even challenged freely and publicly. On the other hand, if the researcher already knew that the results of the study might cause panic in society, or even harm public order, the study should either have been published by the government or postponed until a second examination conducted by the government had been carried out. In fact, according to the EU's latest report published in June 2000, Taiwan's aquatic products meet the EU's strict criteria, proving that local aquatic products can perfectly satisfy international standards. The publication of the study by the EQPF was really surprising, and I therefore urge the foundation to clear up publicly all misunderstandings caused by the publication of the results as soon as possible.

  Third, the government needs to respond to the study immediately. The Fisheries Administration (漁業署) under the Council of Agriculture (COA, 農委會) must begin to estimate the losses caused by the incident and to prevent it from being expanded right away. The administration should also study the possibility of local fishermen asking for compensation from the foundation. Meanwhile, I suggest that the COA form a special task force to examine the deep-sea fish currently being sold in local markets and to publish the results as soon as possible in order to earn consumer trust. Moreover, the government should review the current examining standards and make adjustments when necessary to keep up with international standards at all times.

  Fourth, the government needs to establish regulations concerning the publication of certain studies which might greatly influence public order as well as Taiwan's economy. They must limit the publication of certain studies by individuals or by non-government groups. Information channels are also needed in order for the government to effectively control or respond to major incidents like this.

  Taiwan's businesses have been seriously harmed by the economic recession worldwide. It is not a good sign if the businesses also have to face non-economic difficulties. It is to be hoped that all non-government groups, scholars, the government and the fishing industry can learn from this experience in order to ensure the food quality, public order, and economic security of Taiwan.

  As the "small three links" (小三通) with China get underway, the exchange of aquatic products from the two sides of the Taiwan Strait will become commonplace. It is therefore necessary for the government to take precautions to try to prevent any possible negative impact on Taiwan's fishing industry. As for the future, I suggest we all adopt a healthier attitude regarding food examinations in order to distinguish right from wrong, so that the development and safety of our society can be secured.

  Ted Chuang is the director of the Institute of Fisheries Economics at National Taiwan Ocean University.

  Translated by Eddy Chang
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Taichung explosion kills four, rescue ongoing

  • 2

    Four killed in Taichung mall explosion

  • 3

    Tesla uses Chinese courts to silence critics and make them pay

  • 4

    US removes no independence statement

  • 5

    Two US warships transit the Strait