Taiwan's Next Step in the Face of Globalization

Taiwan's Next Step in the Face of Globalization
China Times editorial
translated by Bevin Chu
May 21, 2007

Last weekend, the Times Cultural and Educational Foundation held an important two day seminar, examining and analyzing the impact of globalization on Taiwan. Over the past two years, the Times Cultural and Educational Foundation has also addressed tax policy and fiscal policy. But the topic of "Development and Distribution under Globalization" has special significance for us. First of all, globalization affects a wide range of other issues, including legislation, government administration, finance, education, and systems, therefore its scope will be broader than any other single topic. Secondly, the potential impact and influence of globalization upon Taiwan is not fully apparent. Therefore one cannot simply examine the evidence and arrive at a conclusion the way one normally would. Globalization is a broad topic. Finding a focus is not easy. That makes this seminar, which solicits opinions from a wide variety of sources, especially significant. Nearly everyone who attended the two day event benefited.

Prior to 2006, two of the best known books on globalization were Thomas Friedman's "The World Is Flat -- A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century," and Kenichi Ohmae's "The M-shaped Society." Friedman stresses competition, product flow, and the annihilation of geographical distance by means of information technology. With roadblocks to global competition removed, one might characterize globalization as smooth sailing all the way. But Friedman lives the US, which occupies a position of power and wields overwhelming advantages in resources and knowledge. Therefore he sees a competitive powerhouse engaging in "creative destruction." He doesn't see a resource poor place like Taiwan, facing a future of tough competition. If a weaker nations' systemic barriers and long-term abuses have not been eliminated, then convenient and rapid product flow and information systems for supply chain management merely help the economically powerful to gain a long term foothold and take whatever they want. For weaker nations, not only is the Earth not flat; it is even less flat than it used to be. Which of Taiwan's systems and mechanisms are disadvantageous to global competition? Which of them are ticking bombs? How can one eliminate long term abuses? The audience and speakers have offered us analysis and explanations.

The main point of Kenichi Ohmae's "The M-shaped Society" is the impact of globalization on Japan's domestic distribution of wealth, not Japan's international competitiveness. Taiwan's situation is different from Japan's. The gap between rich and poor on Taiwan has increased. The gap between high-tech professionals and low-tech laborers, between wealthy entrepreneurs and those on society's margins, is the difference between night and day. But this phenomenon has occurred on Taiwan for different reasons. Most people can understand injustices arising out of unfair resource allocation, "sweetheart" deals, and "favor the rich" tax policies. But this is not Japan's problem. Even assuming the impact of globalization is the same the world over, solutions must be found that address each country's unique circumstances. Only such an approach can offer the proper diagnoses and the proper cures.

Based on actual data, the distribution of wealth on Taiwan hasn't actually turned it into an "M-shaped Society." But Taiwan's per capita income is definitely falling, and the age of the heads of low income households is definitely rising. The number of single parent and single mother households is also increasing. When someone in these borderline households becomes unemployed, the potential for suicide jumps. Obviously this is a troubling problem.

Take education for example - Friedman thinks that globalization must emphasize education in science and technology. This remark is obviously directed at the inadequacies in America's science and technology education. Kenichi Ohmae also emphasizes the importance of educational reform. But he wants merely to free education from artificial constraints, so that it is no longer confined within the framework of standard answers. This is directed at conditions specific to Japan. According to The Economist, educational reform in Britain and Europe should emphasize liberal education. Educational debates on Taiwan have arrived at entirely different conclusions. The former prime minister wants to promote 12 years of compulsory education, under the aegis of a comprehensive social welfare policy. In reality, each nation's educational environment is different. Only educational policies that address the characteristics unique to each region can solve its unique problems.

This two day seminar included a wide range of topics, but a narrow focus. The weather may have been chilly, but the atmosphere inside was warm. The topics may have been unfamiliar, but the participants were eager. Above all, they were not cold abstractions, but matters that intimately affect our lives.

When the poor on Taiwan become poorer, and the rich become richer, we must not confine ourselves to talking about "M-shaped Societies." We must also demonstrate our heartfelt concern for others. When unsound public policy on leads to lost opportunities in a globalized world, we feel frustration and regret. The earnest discussion that has taken place is everything the Times Cultural and Educational Foundation hoped for. We all are citizens of the Republic of China. The challenge of globalization is our our common challenge. At such moments, the Times Cultural and Educational Foundation has never gone missing. Citizens of the Republic of China must show no fear, and confront this challenge.

Original Chinese below:

中時電子報
中國時報 　2007.05.21
全球化趨勢下台灣的下一步
中時社論

在上個周末，時報文教基金會一連兩天舉辦了一場重要的研討會，檢視並分析「全球化」給台灣帶來的衝擊。過去兩年，時報文教基金會也曾分別對我國的租稅政策與金融政策做過討論，但相較之下，此次「全球化下發展與分配」的主題，卻有其特殊的意義。第一，全球化議題牽涉極多，立法、行政、金融、教育、制度等面向盡皆涵蓋，故其對話範圍較以往單一議題的會議為廣。第二，全球化對台灣的可能衝擊與影響尚未完全浮現，這與以往「看證據做分析」的討論方式不同。正因為全球化議題觸角廣、聚焦不易，這次研討會集思廣益的意義也就格外重大。兩天下來，幾乎所有的與會者都感到獲益良多。

在二○○六年之前，坊間與全球化有關最著名的書籍有湯瑪士．弗里曼所著《世界是平的》與大前研一所著《Ｍ型社會》兩冊。弗氏所論強調全球化時代競爭、物流、資訊之無遠弗屆，故全球競爭的路障皆已排除，可以「一路平坦」形容之。但弗氏身處美國，居強權之地、握有資源與知識的絕對優勢，所以能看到競爭強者前途之摧枯拉朽，卻不見資源技術處不利地位如台灣者，其競爭前景之坎坷。對於弱勢國家而言，若自己的制度障礙與積弊未除，則物流資訊技術之便捷只是便利經濟強權者長驅直入、予取予求而已；地球非但不平坦，反而比以往更為崎嶇。究竟台灣社會存在哪些不利於全球競爭的制度與機制？有哪些潛在的危機？要如何才能改善這些制度積弊？與會者與評論人都提出了仔細的分析與解說。

至於大前研一的《Ｍ型社會》一書，其著眼點則為全球化對日本國內資源分配的影響，而非日本面臨的國際競爭。就此分配議題而言，台灣的情形又與日本截然不同。雖然台灣也有分配惡化、高技術人才與低技術勞工間薪資差異擴大、大企業家與社會邊緣人境遇有如天壤等兩極化的現象，但台、日之間形成此種現象的原因卻各異。大多數人民比較能切身體會的不公平分配政策，多與金融併購、租稅公平有關，但這卻不是日本當前的問題。簡言之，即使全球化的衝擊因子相同，但必須要搭配各國的特殊情境，才能理出病因，找出解決問題的方法。

以實際數據來看，台灣資源分配並沒有真正呈現Ｍ型，但是不可否認的，台灣的所得分配確實在惡化，且低所得家庭的戶長年齡在上升，戶長處於單身或女性狀態的比例也都在增加。當失業發生在這些邊緣家庭時，資料顯示，自殺的可能性就大幅增加。這顯然是一個大家憂慮的問題。

再以教育問題為例─弗里曼認為全球化下應著重理工教育；這顯然是針對美國理工教育不彰的特殊處方。大前研一也強調全球化時代教育改革的重要，但他只是期待教育要破除拘束，不再受限於「標準答案」的框架；這又像是針對日本國情而發。至於《經濟學人》分析英國與歐洲在全球化時代的教改，則認為應加強通識教育。台灣談教育又與以上三種論述不同；前內閣希望在整套社會福利政策的勾勒下，推動十二年國教上路。事實上，各國的教育環境多少有些不同，也唯有納入具有情境特性的地域思維，才有可能得出真正具有意義的解決方案。

兩天的研討會，雖然議題很多，但是焦點卻很集中。場外時陰時雨，場內卻是氣氛持續熱烈。研討的主題或許看似生硬，但與會者都是熱情而積極的參與。最重要的是：這兩天所討論的內容並不是冰冷生硬的政策或趨勢，而是與我們未來生活息息相關的願景與鋪陳。

當台灣社會向貧者愈貧、富者愈富的兩極化發展時，與會者不僅是以英文字母Ｍ去做形象的描述，更是以將心比心的真誠，流露出人文關懷。當論及台灣公共政策之失當而錯過因應全球化之良機時，研討會場也有相當的感慨與無奈。這樣真誠的會議討論，其實也正是時報文教基金會舉辦這次研討會所期望的。我們都是台灣的公民；台灣面對的全球化挑戰，當然也就是我們共同的挑戰。在台灣的關鍵時刻，時報文教基金會從不缺席；在面對全球化挑戰的關鍵時刻，我們也希望台灣不要畏懼，勇敢的面對挑戰。