Brian Hioeby Brian Hioe
語言:
English
Photo Credit: 曾 成訓/WikiCommons/CC BY 2.0
IN LATE JULY, environmental groups in Taiwan protested plans for the development of the Tungho Industrial Park.
In particular, plans to develop the Ching Chuang Kang Industrial Park were rejected by the Taichung city government three years ago. However, developers responded by changing the name of the park to the Tungho Industrial Park and applying again last year. This time, the application was allowed to enter the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process.
There are a number of concerns regarding the development of the Tungho Industrial Park. For one, local residents are concerned about sewage from the park contaminating groundwater and the Wufu Canal, which is used for irrigating agriculture. Environmental groups have pointed out that the land is zoned for agricultural use and, in this way, called for prioritizing the safety of water supply for agriculture. To this extent, environmental groups have also raised questions about why an industrial park slated for agricultural land was allowed to start the EIA process.
Likewise, the site that the Tungho Industrial Park is to be built on is sensitive for the military, with restrictions on constructing on positions that could impact national security. Electromagnetic interference and light pollution is thought to potentially affect military sites pertaining to aviation. Dangers regarding information leaks about such military sites have also been brought up.
Lastly, the Tongho Industrial Park would affect the habitat of endangered species such as ring-necked pheasants and leopard cats. There are less than 50 ring-necked pheasants in Taiwan, having declined sharply from 100 in 2020. Taiwan’s leopard cat population is also estimated at less than 600 individuals, with conservation efforts focused on areas such as those that would be affected by the Tongho Industrial Park.
The Chuangli Development Company was responsible for the Ching Chuang Kang Industrial Park project three years ago. In the course of its EIA application, the company was found to have forged documents. But while it is the Chiuting Property Company that is responsible for the Tungho Industrial Park, Wang Sung-shan was in charge of both projects. It has also been pointed out that the two industrial parks have similar plans on more or less the same area.
It is to be seen if this is a case in which the Taichung government prioritizes developmentalism over environmental concerns. It proves relatively rare as well for a development project to impact national security concerns. At the same time, it is often the case that politicians in Taiwan seek to build industrial parks to tout as a legacy of their administration, in spite of the damage to local communities and the environment. It is to be seen if this is the case with the Tungho Industrial Park.
More generally, the Environmental Impact Assessment process in Taiwan has increasingly come under fire. In October, environmental groups held a press conference to call for increased participation and oversight in the EIA process. Environmental groups highlighted that the EIA process had been changed under Environmental Protection Administration minister Chang Tzi-chin.
Previously, civil society groups that participated in the EIA process were allowed to dialogue with developers. But under the new regulations, civic groups were only given three minutes each to question developers, who were not obligated to respond to concerns from civil society groups. Calls, then, were for civil society groups to be given more time. New tools using AI, too, were highlighted as potentially allowing for accessible meeting minutes.
Previously, environmental groups criticized the composition of the EIA board. Over half of the members were grandfathered in from preceding EIA boards. However, civil society groups mostly focused fire on that representation for the public health and the medical sector was removed, while there are only two members of the EIA committee who have a background in ecology. This is the lowest in the history of EIA committees in Taiwan, while there were no representatives from civil society groups.