The latest caution about the impact of the nation’s low birth rate was issued on Tuesday.
Low birth rates are a problem being experienced in many nations. It is not a sudden phenomenon, it is part of a long-term trend, with its roots in the shift in a nation’s socioeconomic makeup, coupled with pervasive historical trends.
However, Taiwan is in a particular bind, even compared with other nations.
According to the CIA World Factbook, Taiwan ranks 219 in the world in terms of birth rate. That is seven from the bottom.
While some might suggest a densely populated nation such as Taiwan could perhaps do with fewer people, it is not that simple.
The percentage of the population aged 65 and over is expected to exceed 20 percent in 2026, making Taiwan a “super-aged society.” It is this aging demographic that is at the core of the dangers the phenomenon presents.
Last year, the nation’s total fertility rate — how many children a woman has in her lifetime — was calculated to be 1.2. In 1951 it was 7.05.
A total fertility rate of approximately 2.1 is needed to maintain a stable population. So the population is already shrinking, as is the percentage of young to old.
Fewer babies means an aging population. A higher percentage of senior citizens places a huge burden on tax revenue, pensions and healthcare. Fewer young people means falling international competitiveness, as well as a shrinking pool of talent and potential military recruits.
It also means there are fewer students going through the education system.
The problem was first felt in elementary schools more than a decade ago. Schools closed, teachers lost their jobs and their job security. Then it hit high schools. Now university departments cannot attract enough students and some universities are facing closure or having to merge.
In the immediate post-World War II period, Taiwan was still an agricultural society. In rural society extra children meant extra labor on the farm. Having more babies also increased the chance of producing a male heir — very important in agricultural, Confucian societies. Now, even one child entails a major financial burden on a couple.
People are increasingly living in cities. The decision to have children now involves different criteria, many related to cost.
Can a couple afford to have a child?
Clothes, an extra bedroom, food, school fees, cram-school fees and the need to run a car, as well as childcare fees — it does not come cheap.
Then there are the comforts and freedoms parents need to forgo to look after their children, especially when consumerist-driven media tout the ideal of individual life fulfillment. For many, having a child in an urban environment necessitates both parents working.
In addition, women are increasingly seeking more professional jobs and marrying later or not at all.
The nation’s marriage registration rate is declining, while the vast majority of babies are born — even if not conceived — in wedlock. There is also an increasing trend for women to give birth to their first child in their 30s.
Consequently, one-child or no-child families are becoming more common.
So what is the answer?
Local governments have been offering financial incentives for each child born, as well as childcare subsidies. Clearly, these are not working.
In April, the Ministry of Health and Welfare announced that it would set up an office tasked with introducing policies to counter the effects of the nation’s declining birth rate. It had better come up with something good — and soon.
The world has become less predictable, less rules-based, and more shaped by the impulses of strongmen and short-term dealmaking. Nowhere is this more consequential than in East Asia, where the fate of democratic Taiwan hinges on how global powers manage — or mismanage — tensions with an increasingly assertive China. The return of Donald Trump to the White House has deepened the global uncertainty, with his erratic, highly personalized foreign-policy approach unsettling allies and adversaries alike. Trump appears to treat foreign policy like a reality show. Yet, paradoxically, the global unpredictability may offer Taiwan unexpected deterrence. For China, the risk of provoking the
Eating at a breakfast shop the other day, I turned to an old man sitting at the table next to mine. “Hey, did you hear that the Legislative Yuan passed a bill to give everyone NT$10,000 [US$340]?” I said, pointing to a newspaper headline. The old man cursed, then said: “Yeah, the Chinese Nationalist Party [KMT] canceled the NT$100 billion subsidy for Taiwan Power Co and announced they would give everyone NT$10,000 instead. “Nice. Now they are saying that if electricity prices go up, we can just use that cash to pay for it,” he said. “I have no time for drivel like
Young supporters of former Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) were detained for posting the names and photographs of judges and prosecutors believed to be overseeing the Core Pacific City redevelopment corruption case. The supporters should be held responsible for their actions. As for Ko’s successor, TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), he should reflect on whether his own comments are provocative and whether his statements might be misunderstood. Huang needs to apologize to the public and the judiciary. In the article, “Why does sorry seem to be the hardest word?” the late political commentator Nan Fang Shuo (南方朔) wrote
Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) reportedly told the EU’s top diplomat that China does not want Russia to lose in Ukraine, because the US could shift its focus to countering Beijing. Wang made the comment while meeting with EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas on July 2 at the 13th China-EU High-Level Strategic Dialogue in Brussels, the South China Morning Post and CNN reported. Although contrary to China’s claim of neutrality in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, such a frank remark suggests Beijing might prefer a protracted war to keep the US from focusing on
RSS