The National Development Council’s Population Projections for the ROC (Taiwan): 2020-2070, released late last month, officially recognizes that from this year, Taiwan is to have negative population growth, and that the demographic dividend — the economic growth that comes from a change in the age structure of a nation — is to end in 2028. The news made many people worry — and wonder what is in store for Taiwan.
From a more objective perspective, moderate negative population growth is not necessarily bad. It could offer Taiwan a great opportunity to alleviate the pressures of overpopulation, improve quality of life and allow the natural environment to recover.
Taiwan proper has an area of less than 36,000km2, but excluding the mountainous areas, its 23.6 million people live on only one-third of this area, making it the world’s most densely populated nation. In short, Taiwan is overcrowded.
The problems of overpopulation are self-evident. First, it destroys the living environment, cities become overcrowded, the many vehicles cause traffic congestion and alarmingly frequent accidents, sewers are blocked, and emissions are polluting the air and rivers.
Overpopulation and limited land availability cause people to move to the mountains to grow vegetables and fruit, and build factories. Over time, once beautiful mountains and forests are left with bald patches on their hillsides due to logging. This in turn causes landslides during the typhoon season, destroying houses, roads and bridges, and posing great danger to people’s lives and property.
Production and consumption by humans, as well as their vehicles and machines, release huge amounts of carbon dioxide.
One example of the irreversible damage that overpopulation does to nature is rising sea levels. Greenhouse gases produced by human activities cause global warming that melts the ice caps, leading to rising sea levels, which even put inland areas at risk of being submerged by flooding.
The sea levels around Taiwan have risen at about 1.5 to two times faster than the average global rate. Perhaps this is why a report released late last month by Greenpeace specifically mentioned that if Taiwan fails to curb its carbon dioxide emissions, 1,398km2 of land would be submerged by rising seawater by 2040, affecting 1.2 million people.
More aggressive measures for reducing carbon emissions and the population are needed if this disaster is to be avoided.
The National Development Council estimated that by 2050, Taiwan would have a population of about 20.4 million people, which is still a big number.
Many people worry that a population decrease would lead to labor shortages, but at least 40 percent of the labor force would be replaced by robots, based on predictions made a decade ago by artificial intelligence and robotics experts — and this is how things have been developing.
An increasing population would cause unemployment to worsen, so why are people worrying about depopulation?
The government could also tax industries that use automation — thereby making a profit without wages or labor and health insurance needing to be paid, such as how the government ensures that it functions properly by levying higher business taxes on the hotel, restaurant, finance, retail, manufacturing and warehousing sectors.
A moderate decline in population has many benefits. Hopefully, Taiwan’s future will be as a small, beautiful and progressive country with well-educated and happy citizens who do not need to fear having their homes flooded by rising sea levels.
Eric Wang is an adjunct university professor.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
Father’s Day, as celebrated around the world, has its roots in the early 20th century US. In 1910, the state of Washington marked the world’s first official Father’s Day. Later, in 1972, then-US president Richard Nixon signed a proclamation establishing the third Sunday of June as a national holiday honoring fathers. Many countries have since followed suit, adopting the same date. In Taiwan, the celebration takes a different form — both in timing and meaning. Taiwan’s Father’s Day falls on Aug. 8, a date chosen not for historical events, but for the beauty of language. In Mandarin, “eight eight” is pronounced
In a recent essay, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” a former adviser to US President Donald Trump, Christian Whiton, accuses Taiwan of diplomatic incompetence — claiming Taipei failed to reach out to Trump, botched trade negotiations and mishandled its defense posture. Whiton’s narrative overlooks a fundamental truth: Taiwan was never in a position to “win” Trump’s favor in the first place. The playing field was asymmetrical from the outset, dominated by a transactional US president on one side and the looming threat of Chinese coercion on the other. From the outset of his second term, which began in January, Trump reaffirmed his
Despite calls to the contrary from their respective powerful neighbors, Taiwan and Somaliland continue to expand their relationship, endowing it with important new prospects. Fitting into this bigger picture is the historic Coast Guard Cooperation Agreement signed last month. The common goal is to move the already strong bilateral relationship toward operational cooperation, with significant and tangible mutual benefits to be observed. Essentially, the new agreement commits the parties to a course of conduct that is expressed in three fundamental activities: cooperation, intelligence sharing and technology transfer. This reflects the desire — shared by both nations — to achieve strategic results within
It is difficult not to agree with a few points stated by Christian Whiton in his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” and yet the main idea is flawed. I am a Polish journalist who considers Taiwan her second home. I am conservative, and I might disagree with some social changes being promoted in Taiwan right now, especially the push for progressiveness backed by leftists from the West — we need to clean up our mess before blaming the Taiwanese. However, I would never think that those issues should dominate the West’s judgement of Taiwan’s geopolitical importance. The question is not whether
RSS