The marine ecosystem is looking over the abyss. In the seas surrounding Taiwan, the decline of the fish catch has become a serious concern.
We are a matter of weeks away from local elections, yet it seems that ocean conservation is almost entirely absent from the policy agenda of candidates: No ocean conservation policy has been presented.
While local governments have been waiting for the central government to pass legislation on this issue, they have been sitting on their hands, taking precious little action to safeguard the ocean. It is becoming increasingly apparent that to save the ocean and the marine ecosystems around Taiwan, local governments have to play a much more active role.
For more than 30 years, Taiwan’s fishing industry has been dealing with a raft of serious problems, including marine ecology destruction, decline in fish biodiversity and overfishing. The excessive consumption and overexploitation of the ocean have caused serious damage.
Local governments, responsible for designated areas of water surrounding Taiwan, could make an impact on the deteriorating situation, but to do so they have to put in much more effort.
First, local governments need to facilitate communication with the local community, and raise awareness about how it should view its relationship with the ocean.
It should bridge the gap between decisionmakers and local communities, providing environmental guidance to improve conditions in the industry and introducing forward-thinking initiatives inside the Marine Protected Area (MPA).
Local communities need to learn how to improve their relationship with the ocean, how to use its resources properly and responsibly, and to deepen their understanding of how the ocean can give back.
The main purpose is to create a win-win situation in which the ocean and communities can coexist, to guarantee that local economies and ocean conservation can thrive.
Second, the capacity to patrol the MPA must be enhanced. For the MPA to work, strict enforcement is key.
However, not enough law enforcement officers can be sent from the central government to local areas. Local governments should play a bigger role in patrolling and monitoring the area.
Local patrol teams should be organized to find people who contravene the regulations, and report on them.
These teams should also be responsible for the safekeeping of signs in the MPA, ensuring they are not vandalized or concealed. Patrol teams should also educate and inform tourists and residents of the value of the MPA.
Third, local governments should invest more in scientific monitoring. As all problem-solving strategies are based on experimental fact, it is crucial to obtain scientific data to analyze the root and nature of the problems facing Taiwan’s ocean environment.
The data would also be useful in maintaining the livelihoods of fishers and people in the hospitality sector.
The central government should pass an ocean conservation bill as soon as possible.
However, to recover our ocean’s biodiversity, local governments are essential. Local governments should consider these propositions and put them into practice effectively.
Since last year, Greenpeace has advocated for the passage of an ocean conservation bill with 10 demands. The central and local governments should act on this concretely and substantively.
Greenpeace has visited villages and towns along the coast and in outlying islands to discuss the issue with local communities, and it has won the support of more than 20 environmental organizations. More than 280 stores and thousands of people have also responded to its call for the ocean conservation bill. It is apparent that the public support this issue.
The elections are around the corner. Local governments and candidates should highlight ocean conservation in their political agendas.
Taiwan needs to commit itself to protecting the ocean, take action to save the ocean and make the most of the next four years.
Tommy Chung is director of the Greenpeace Taiwan “Project Ocean.”
Translated by Liu Yi-hung
Within Taiwan’s education system exists a long-standing and deep-rooted culture of falsification. In the past month, a large number of “ghost signatures” — signatures using the names of deceased people — appeared on recall petitions submitted by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) against Democratic Progressive Party legislators Rosalia Wu (吳思瑤) and Wu Pei-yi (吳沛憶). An investigation revealed a high degree of overlap between the deceased signatories and the KMT’s membership roster. It also showed that documents had been forged. However, that culture of cheating and fabrication did not just appear out of thin air — it is linked to the
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
Taiwan People’s Party Legislator-at-large Liu Shu-pin (劉書彬) asked Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) a question on Tuesday last week about President William Lai’s (賴清德) decision in March to officially define the People’s Republic of China (PRC), as governed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), as a foreign hostile force. Liu objected to Lai’s decision on two grounds. First, procedurally, suggesting that Lai did not have the right to unilaterally make that decision, and that Cho should have consulted with the Executive Yuan before he endorsed it. Second, Liu objected over national security concerns, saying that the CCP and Chinese President Xi
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its