Climate change and environmental protection have become issues of great concern to governments around the world. In line with this trend, most New Southbound Policy partners, including ASEAN nations and India, are working hard to promote the electric vehicle (EV) industry, establishing supply chains and building public infrastructure for the EV sector.
With a land area of 4.46 million square kilometers and a population of more than 650 million people, the 10 ASEAN member nations form the third-largest market in the world.
In 2019, before the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, ASEAN nations produced 4.2 million vehicles and 3.6 million motorcycles, making them the world’s most promising vehicle markets.
India is a world leader in in terms of the introduction of EVs and their legislation. Under the Faster Adoption and Manufacturing of Hybrid and Electric Vehicles in India scheme, 30 percent of newly licensed motor vehicles and 60 percent of public transportation vehicles must be electric by 2030.
India’s cities have nearly 1.7 million buses, while 3 million are needed to meet demand. Moreover, about 100,000 buses need to be replaced every year. As 60 percent of India’s buses must be fully electric within eight years, there is clearly a huge demand for electric buses.
Taiwan’s Digital New Southbound Policy is precisely about realizing a “package technology export” business model, based on the nation’s industrial strengths in EV development. Exporting completed buses or assembling them after export might not be the best way for Taiwan to enter the New Southbound market, especially as exporters would end up having a price war with China.
Taiwan should instead combine its experience and resources in the semiconductor and information and communication technology (ICT) industries to develop battery thermal management algorithms, data analytics and failure modes for the operational data of key components in electric buses. It should focus research and development on key subsystems that are critical to electric buses and play to the strengths of Taiwanese engineers.
Meanwhile, Taiwan should make use of the supply chain management experience of its semiconductor and ICT industries, engaging the local and foreign suppliers with the highest quality-to-price ratios to begin to compete in the international electric bus market.
Taiwan’s promotion of electric buses shows that — through the professional division of labor and original equipment manufacturing — such experience applies to its expansion into the New Southbound market. To facilitate a soft landing, Taiwanese businesses should cooperate with vehicle manufacturing facilities in New Southbound countries to gain a cost advantage and facilitate passing local certifications.
Taiwanese companies should handle foreign clients’ smart in-vehicle systems, including big data management, integrated design of vehicle assembly, electrical control systems and battery technology — using local components — while their foreign partners should be responsible for vehicle assembly.
With its experience and resources in the semiconductor and ICT industries, Taiwan would enjoy an advantage against international competition in smart transportation.
By following the smart transportation plan in the government’s Digital New Southbound Policy, Taiwan could anticipate positive outcomes in New Southbound countries.
Huang Chen-sheng is chairman of Tron-e Energy Technology Corp, and Wang Yi-chuan is chief of strategy at the Taiwan Thinktank.
Translated by Eddy Chang
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
“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
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