Minister of Health and Welfare Chiu Tai-yuan (邱泰源) on Saturday last week outlined four strategies to address Taiwan’s declining birthrate: reducing the burden of childcare; improving maternal and child health; funding more childcare facilities and public housing for new parents; and encouraging marriage and childbearing. Chiu also floated the idea of promoting matchmaking activities — a proposal that drew swift public criticism.
Separately, Deputy Minister of Health and Welfare Lin Ching-yi (林靜儀) on Wednesday told lawmakers that fostering flexible workplace environments and encouraging men to participate in childcare would help boost the birthrate.
The backlash against Chiu is understandable. The problem is not that people cannot find partners, but that economic pressure and shifting social norms are driving the marriage rate down. For many women, professional success is a more appealing prospect than the traditional role of homemaker.
Careers and children are not mutually exclusive, but raising children inevitably requires time away from work. As Lin said, childcare still falls disproportionately on mothers. Financial costs add another layer of difficulty. The factors that matter most to would-be parents — as Chiu and Lin acknowledged — are housing, daycare and flexible workplaces.
Without affordable housing, young people are unlikely to marry and even less likely to have children. Taiwan’s social housing is already insufficient and prioritizes low-income households, making it difficult for young couples to qualify. Significantly expanding housing for families would require overcoming land shortages, regulatory hurdles, competing government priorities and community resistance. Past administrations have pledged reforms — taxing idle properties, incentivizing landlords — yet housing remains scarce and expensive, especially in major cities.
Even for those who secure housing and have children, finding affordable and accessible daycare is another challenge. The government last year expanded public and quasi-public daycare, but because they operate on a lottery system, many families still cannot get a spot. Private daycare is far costlier and also limited in availability. Compounding the problems is that many couples live far from extended family, having relocated to urban centers for work. With both parents typically employed to meet the high cost of living, access to reliable daycare is essential.
Assuming a family does secure daycare, flexibility at work remains crucial. Children get sick and schools suspend classes, while vaccinations, checkups and school events all demand parents’ time. Without employers who understand, routine interruptions become major obstacles.
The government could encourage flexible workplaces by offering subsidies or tax breaks to companies that allow remote work for parents, create backup staffing systems to cover sudden absences, or provide partially paid leave for either parent to care for their children until affordable daycare is found or the child starts school. Overtime must be strictly voluntary for parents, with an anonymous reporting mechanism — or even surprise audits — to ensure compliance.
The notion that Taiwan’s low birthrate stems from people struggling to meet partners misses the point. It is overwhelmingly a practical issue, driven by housing costs, daycare shortages and rigid workplace norms. Matchmaking events might grab headlines, but they do little to address the real barriers to starting a family.
If the government truly wants to reverse the declining birthrate, its most urgent task is to resolve Taiwan’s housing crisis. Without affordable homes, no amount of policy tinkering — or matchmaking drives — will persuade young couples to take on the financial and personal responsibilities of raising children.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS