US pork exports grew by 45 percent between 2010 and last year, while those of US beef doubled. Average annual growth of US pork and beef exports during this period has been 4 percent and 8 percent respectively.
US pork has been available in Taiwan for more than 20 years, but because Taiwanese prefer domestically produced pork — freshly slaughtered without being refrigerated or frozen — home-grown pork has a 90.6 percent share of the market.
Out of 2.67 million tonnes of pork exported by the US last year, only a little more than 11,000 tonnes were shipped to Taiwan — a mere 1.2 percent of its pork market.
The Central News Agency reported that Taiwan Swine Association secretary-general Chang Sheng-chin (張生金) said: “US pork free of leanness-enhancing feed additives, which is allowed to be imported, only costs NT$35 to NT$40 per kilogram, which is close to half the NT$60 to NT$62 production cost of domestic pork.”
Evidently, the low cost of US pork does not give it an overwhelming advantage on the Taiwanese market, because it has only gained a small foothold after all these years.
From a marketing point of view, product differentiation — the preference for the flavor of Taiwanese pork and for fresh pork over frozen pork — has prevented US pork’s cost advantage from having an effect.
As a result, when Chang added that “if we were to import pork that contains leanness-enhancing agents, the price would be even lower, so it might have a greater impact,” what he said does not comply with marketing logic.
The Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) rationale for opposing pork, but not beef, with traces of ractopamine, is that few Taiwanese eat beef, while most eat pork.
This rationale is even less capable of standing up to scrutiny.
Beef produced in Taiwan only accounts for 5.3 percent of the local beef market, while US beef has the lion’s share at 46.6 percent.
Last year, Taiwan imported more than 64,000 tonnes of US beef — almost three times as much as in 2012, which shows that Taiwanese favor US beef.
A calculation based on a local population of 23 million people shows that each person consumed an average of 3kg of US beef last year, compared with 500g of US pork — six times as much.
Considering that many people do not eat beef, but do eat pork, the real number is probably several times higher.
In other words, if one assumes that eating too much beef with traces of ractopamine has an adverse health effect, the main point of concern should be how much ractopamine these beef-lovers have accumulated in their bodies.
No wonder that people posted comments on the Professional Technology Temple bulletin board such as: “They found nothing worrying about ractopamine after eating tens of thousands of tonnes of US beef, but eight years later, when they suddenly want to oppose the Democratic Progressive Party [DPP], they tell me to worry.”
Another user asked: “What sense does it make to say that you cannot eat pork with leanness enhancers, but when it is in beef, that is OK?”
With respect to trade, the main thing that the US cares about is keeping trade fair — fair for the US, that is.
At a time when Taiwan-US relations are warmer than ever and Taiwan is eager to sign a trade agreement, US pork has a tiny share of the local market and, by implication, a tiny impact on local pig farmers.
The ruling DPP has a high rate of support, while the opposition KMT opened the door to the importation of US beef with traces of ractopamine when it was in power.
Given these factors, the DPP and the KMT should not object to letting pork follow where beef went before, although they seem to have run into a brick wall this time.
It must be difficult for the US to understand why Taiwanese legislators are so eager to crush US pork imports. Surely they find Taiwanese logic very strange.
Wu Hai-ruei is a manager of a listed company.
Translated by Julian Clegg
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
Mainland Affairs Council Deputy Minister Shen You-chung (沈有忠) on Thursday last week urged democratic nations to boycott China’s military parade on Wednesday next week. The parade, a grand display of Beijing’s military hardware, is meant to commemorate the 80th anniversary of Japan’s surrender in World War II. While China has invited world leaders to attend, many have declined. A Kyodo News report on Sunday said that Japan has asked European and Asian leaders who have yet to respond to the invitation to refrain from attending. Tokyo is seeking to prevent Beijing from spreading its distorted interpretation of wartime history, the report
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase
RSS