State Planning for Agricultural-Industrial Balance
After viewing the film, “Let it Be” (last February 23, 2008) which is a documentation of the daily lives of farmers and their families in Houbi Township, critique the following assertion of the state plan for agricultural development in 21st century Taiwan:
“…agriculture is no longer an industry that only emphasizes the production of food or raw materials; rather, it is an industry that incorporates other functions, such as quality of living and a balance of the natural ecology.”
Comments
This documentary shows the philosophy of traditional Taiwan farmers. They take things as they come not even worrying or blaming the heavens despite the total lost of rice crop due to typhoon. Still, they maintain a happy disposition in the face of destruction and uncertainty.
When suffering comes by as with the lost of an eye, the old farmer tried to examine his conscience to see whether he might have done something wrong in the past that deserves him physical misfortune. On realizing that sometime in the past he had done a misdeed, such as selling not completely dried peanuts, he rationalized that it is but fair and accepted his fate.
It is a fact that agricultural income is comparatively lesser than those in the industrial sector. Every household monthly earns about Php. 10,000 so they have to do part time job to sustain their life. The problem lies with the young generation living in the urban areas. To remedy the situation and give farmers a better life, the government encourages farmers to go into high value farming by planting valued and quality crops such as strawberry and expensive rice.
The Taiwan government balances the development of agriculture and industry. It instituted control measures to ensure that air and water pollution caused by industrial growth is minimized if not zero. Most Taiwanese are environmentally conscious of the ecological balance of nature due to:
(1) Experience of suffering from chemical waste thrown in rivers which eventually linked with and polluted the irrigation system of the field.
(2) Environmental protection organizations educating the citizenry through media. The present generation is responsible to hand down to the future generation a clean land. So, in compliance with public opinion, the government stopped the construction of the 4th nuclear power plant to the extent of canceling the agreement entered into with Bayer.
(3) The alarming presence of CO2 in the atmosphere alerted the government to act fast by adopting some measures such as all factories must pass the environmental evaluation every year otherwise a heavy fine will be imposed or forcible closure.
Conclusion:
Maintaining a clean and beautiful environment is the responsibility of the people and government not by one nation alone but by the collaborative efforts of all peoples and governments of the world. The development of agriculture and industry can be at the same time provided necessary rules and regulations are in place in order to keep the ecological balance and preserve nature from man’s destructive ways in the name of progress.
The bottom line is that if man abuses Mother Earth in his desire for what seems to be progress, nature strikes back with its full strength and man just could not imagine what took place. With this in mind, I prefer to see agricultural lands previously sold to industries returned and restored to the pristine rural areas of the old days, and the absence of artificial sophistication.
The movie revisits Taiwan’s incipient years through elderly rice farmers’ nostalgic recounting of their experiences with Chiang Kai-sek’s “Land-to-the-tiller Act.” Taiwan’s land reform program birthed an undying well of political support for Chiang’s fledging regime mostly from the rural folks while at the same time decimated the bulwark of opposition, the indigenous landed class. The political stability created by the state’s successful land distribution allowed it to direct its energy towards economic transformation generally by squeezing dry agriculture itself to initiate industrial formation. Here, with crystal clear view, one can highlight Taiwanese state’s capacity and relative autonomy and pry open the explanatory poverty of classical dependencist mantra (which surely will make them blush in vexation).
But an effective state is only half of Taiwan’s success story. As the movie implies and as the account of rice farmers suggests, culture played a vital role in it. A strong developmental state was complemented by the Confucian culture of obedience and submission to authorities. Truly, by the grace of God and Machiavellian ruse, a coherent and ideologically sophisticated central state effectively penetrated society and extracted, distributed, and directed resources for developmental objectives.
Agriculture definitely was the bedrock of Taiwanese developmental success. By dramatically increasing agricultural production via industrializing and making it input-intensive and export-oriented, Taiwan generated surpluses that help fuel its urban growth and industrialization in the 60s. Key to Taiwan’s agricultural industrialization was its reliance on mono-cultural agriculture and agro-chemical inputs. But the great leap of its agro-industry came at the expense of rural traditional society, public health, community sustainability and ecological balance.
Taiwan’s redefinition of its agricultural policy from one based on productive considerations to an expanded one to include social, cultural and ecological aspects reflect the central state’s active supervision over the agricultural sector. Though Taiwan’s agriculture is straw in the wind compared to its manufacturing’s and industry’s share in the GDP, the state sees the value of achieving sustainable agriculture and balancing development and ecology. There is a tacit recognition in the part of Taiwan that the pressures of industrialization from the inside and globalization from the outside endanger not just agriculture and food production but as well as cultural, human, social and environmental security. The convergence of these domestic and international variables gives the state the impetus and incentives to maintain and even increase its intervention in agriculture.
The movie Let It Be revisits Taiwan’s incipient years through the elderly rice farmers’ nostalgic recounting of their experiences with Chiang Kai-sek’s “Land-to-the-tiller Act.” Taiwan’s land reform program birthed an undying well of political support for Chiang’s fledging regime mostly from the rural folks co-opted by state-sanctioned peasant organizations while at the same time prostrated the indigenous landed class and chiseled out from it a new breed of entrepreneurs in search of new sources of income. The political stability created by the state’s efficacious land distribution allowed it to direct its energy and resources towards economic transformation generally by squeezing dry agriculture itself to initiate rural consumerism and industrial formation. Out of the rural population, consumers and great reserves of human capital emerged which were taken advantage by a state-assisted entrepreneurial class for its outward-looking enterprises. In Taiwan, the state acted more like a midwife without which peripheral industrialization could not have been birthed that rapidly. Here, with crystal clear view, one can highlight Taiwanese state’s capacity and relative autonomy and pry open the explanatory poverty of classical dependencist mantra (which surely will make them blush in vexation).
But an effective state is only half of Taiwan’s success story. As the movie implies and as the account of rice farmers suggests, culture played a vital role in it. A strong developmental state was complemented by the Confucian culture of obedience and submission to authorities. Truly, by the grace of God and Machiavellian ruse, a coherent and ideologically sophisticated central state effectively penetrated society and extracted, distributed, and directed resources for developmental objectives. It is probable that without the factor of culture, or “Asian Values” as they would have it, the state could not have been as effective in demanding compliance and participation of the rural population and producing the necessary conditions for the legitimation of its rule.
Agriculture definitely was the bedrock of Taiwanese developmental success. By dramatically increasing agricultural production via industrializing and making it input-intensive and export-oriented, Taiwan generated surpluses that help fuel its urban growth and industrialization in the 60s. Key to Taiwan’s agricultural industrialization was its reliance on mono-cultural agriculture and agro-chemical inputs. But the great leap of its agro-industry came at the expense of rural traditional society, public health, community sustainability and ecological balance.
Taiwan’s reconfiguration of its agricultural policy from one based on productive considerations to an expanded one to include social, cultural and ecological aspects reflect the central state’s keen supervision over the agricultural sector. Though Taiwan’s agriculture is straw in the wind compared to its manufacturing’s and industry’s share in the GDP, the state sees the value of achieving sustainable agriculture and balancing development and ecology. There is an explicit recognition in the part of Taiwan that the pressures of industrialization from the inside and globalization from the outside endanger not just agriculture and food production but as well as cultural, human, social and environmental security. The convergence of these domestic and international variables gives the state the impetus and incentives to maintain and even increase its intervention in agriculture.
The film shows the viewers the interaction of culture and philosophy of traditional Taiwanese rural society and how it played a part in the state’s agricultural plan. Agriculture sustained not just the economy but the political stability of Taiwan during its early years. The threat of communism gave Taiwan a sense of insecurity which pushed the state to excel economically. Without the scrupulous use of agricultural resources, it is quite difficult for Taiwan to lay down the foundation of its industrialization.
I feel for the rice farmers of Houbi town especially when they look at their past. My childhood days were spent in a rural town so I know exactly how agricultural life is. But what strikes me most is the discipline and patience of the farmers. This is one of the factors that allowed Taiwan to establish its brilliant economic performance in the 70s onward. The philosophy of the farmers to take everything sitting down and accept everything as part of their destiny truly helped the state to direct its course towards only one goal – economic and political survival. This philosophy or “ Asian Values” definitely help the Taiwanese state to extract income as well as loyalty and participation among the rural folks. It is difficult to imagine Taiwan coming out of its lowly conditions after World War II to become one of the leading economies of Asia without this distinct cultural and philosophical trait of its people.
It was agriculture that helped Taiwan survive as a nation but at the rate of how population and market competition is growing, the sector clearly takes an intense beating. Taiwan’s policy of protecting agriculture and achieving agricultural sustainability is a testament to the same scrupulousness and vision of Taiwan’s state leaders. Agriculture is not anymore the life blood of the economy but despite this, the state still see the importance of striking a balance between continuous economic development and ecological harmony. Traditional rural society together with its culture, philosophy and way of life is rooted on land. The productive practices of the rural folk made them who they are. With the entry of modern agricultural technology, these way of life is threatened and is driven to extinction causing alienation and displacement. This is what is being lamented by the elderly farmers of Houbi: There are no more young people to replace them and with their passing so is their culture and way of life.
Striking a balance between rapid industrialization and cultural and ecological harmony is at the heart of Taiwan’s 21st century agricultural planning. Productive agriculture, I see, is not anymore the focus of its economic policy as industries now provide the lion’s share of its national income. Rather, focus is now on how to sustain agriculture to achieve not just a stable food supply but also to sustain the environment that nourished the culture, philosophy and community of the rural folks.
Good thing for Taiwan because they have leaders who thought about balancing the agricultural development with the natural ecology. I wonder if we still have leaders here in the Philippines who are concern about this issue? Because as far as I know, owners of big subdivisions, golf courses, industrial plants, etc. are our "noble" legislators themselves.