Yet another air disaster has shown that aviation safety in Taiwan has not improved. For many years, I have viewed aviation safety from the perspective of cultural conflict. Improvements in a company's management can be effective and can bring immediate results. I believe, however, that the way to make fundamental improvements in aviation safety is to foster greater compatibility between Chinese culture and Western aviation technology.
Civil aviation is a typical high-risk technology. An organization must adopt certain behavioral traits in order to handle high-risk technologies safely and effectively. In the West, for example, professional independence is assigned to any indispensable item. When anyone in an organization discovers a safety threat, he or she has the power to stop things. Such behavioral traits are a fine example of Western individualism and the rule of law.
When we introduce behavior based on basic Western cultural assumptions -- as well as its derivative concepts of training, operation and management of high-risk technologies, we must go through a long period of conflict, learning and adaptation. If we cannot see these essential differences clearly, the learning curve will be greatly lengthened.
To reduce such conflicts among aviation personnel, shorten the period of adaptation and save lives, we must clearly understand the behavioral, psychological and cultural traits of our aviation personnel, as well as how these traits interact with Western aviation systems. We should then set up related databases, which would serve as the basis for the company's pursuit of effective management. They would also be a source of reference for Western aircraft manufacturers when they design their planes.
Only after such information has been fully established will any fundamental change be possible in aviation safety. At present, however, who better than the National Science Council to coordinate collaborative efforts on the part of academia and industry to improve the compatibility between Western aviation technology and Taiwan's culture and society?
Jing Hung-sying is a professor in the department of aeronautics and astronautics at National Cheng Kung University.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then