On Feb. 25, China unilaterally announced that starting in March, the importation of pineapples from Taiwan would be banned.
On the eve of the Mid-Autumn Festival, the pineapple ban was followed by a notice from the Chinese General Administration of Customs that the importation of custard apples and wax apples from Taiwan would be suspended from the next day, citing pest concerns.
It is neither pineapple, custard apple nor wax apple season; importation of these fruits ended in April, and the timing of the pest concern notification raises questions about whether there are real pest concerns or there is a different motive.
Because of the proximity of the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, the positive image of Taiwan’s agricultural products and their high acceptance among Chinese consumers, China has long been the main market for the nation’s agricultural products, buying more than 20 percent of the exports at a value of more than US$1 billion. The top three fruit exports are pineapples, custard apples — or more precisely mainly atemoya, a hybrid of custard apple and cherimoya — and wax apples, so it is not surprising that the ban on pineapples was followed by a ban on the other two fruits.
A lot of work must be done to mitigate the effects of the ban before custard apples and wax apples reach the market in December.
The first step should be a direct response, including specific improvements of the safety management of orchards, post-harvest handling and inspection, batch-by-batch quarantine before shipment, and the establishment of a production and sales history tracing system.
The second step should be export diversification. This sounds like a cliche, but Taiwanese custard apples and wax apples are unique on the world market, so this is an opportunity to promote these fruits in Japan and Singapore, or even the US and Canada, and to invite overseas traders and distributors to learn more about them and taste them.
Third, new products should be developed to enter new markets. In addition to being eaten fresh, custard apples can be frozen or used to make ice cream, and wax apples can be dried, or processed into jam or syrup. These products would stand out.
Moreover, processed or frozen products can be exported to China without quarantine requirements.
Fourth, the Council of Agriculture should initiate a NT$1 billion (US$36.06 million) fund for international promotion of custard apples and wax apples, new product development, and transportation and cold chain subsidies as it did to address the pineapple ban. These funds would not necessarily be used up, because the NT$560 million invested after the pineapple ban was enough to support the market and diversify exports.
Finally, agricultural insurances should once more be promoted. Four years ago, the council started promoting custard apple income insurance to mitigate natural disasters and price risks, but due to good weather conditions, good harvests and price stability over the past few years, farmers have increasingly ignored the importance of insurance, and currently only 3.8 percent of land for atemoya cultivation is covered by insurance, while for wax apples only climate-indexed insurance — which does not cover price risks — is available.
The recent ban will hopefully lead to a greater emphasis on fundamental export inspection, and further lead to the development of new products, the diversification of risk and added value, and the expansion of agricultural income insurance.
Yang Min-hsien is a professor at Feng Chia University and former president of the Rural Economics Society of Taiwan.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
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
RSS