Though Taiwan only has a population of 23.5 million, its 2022 gross domestic product amounted to about $761.69 billion USD — ranking it #21 in the world — and is projected to reach $990.75 billion by 2028. Taiwan is crowned as one of the “Four Asian Tigers” alongside Hong Kong, Singapore and South Korea — the Southeast Asian countries that experienced rapid industrialization and economic growth beginning in the 1960s and 1970s. Taiwan earned the title initially through its export-oriented economic strategies of exporting semiconductors, electronic components and computer hardware. 

Currently, Taiwan plays a vital role in the global supply chain, specifically in the technology sector. They are still a major producer and exporter of high-tech products. Taiwan’s tech companies dominate about “two-thirds of the semiconductor foundry market share with Taiwan Semiconductor Market Company (TSMC) controlling 84% of the production for the most advanced and efficient chips.” As a result, an increased number of “multinational corporations have invested in Taiwan in recent years, and demand for local talent with bilingual proficiency has also increased.” 

Further, the United States’ goal of trying to ‘decouple’ from China, meaning, trying to significantly decrease or sever economic dependence on Chinese supply chains, technology and trade in order to avoid national security risks and intellectual property theft has the potential to strengthen trading ties between Taiwan and the United States. From Taiwan’s perspective, this is another reason for their Bilingual 2030 pursuit — to increase its competitive advantages and international mobility to gain trading partners going forward, especially against competitor suppliers like Brazil, India and South Korea. 

Taiwan’s economic come up story and current success appear phenomenal at first glance. However, a closer look reveals that for both exports and imports, Taiwan’s “relative importance within global trade has fallen steadily since 2000.” In 2000, Taiwan ranked 14th in the world via exports, accounting for 2.3% of total world exports; in 2019, Taiwan ranked 17th in world exports, reducing its share of total exports to about 1.7%. Similarly, the bilateral trade relationship between the United States and Taiwan has greatly diminished. The United States has fallen to the fourth — from the first — largest trading partner for Taiwan since 2000. 

China and ASEAN (The Association of Southeast Asian Nations) members such as Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines and Maynamar have had a competitive advantage over Taiwan through cheap labor and large domestic markets — attracting more foreign investment and trading partners — a key explanation for Taiwan’s diminishing trading relationships. 

In addition, Taiwan’s domestic workforce is predicted to steadily decline over the next decade. 2022 was a year with a historically low number of births and the most deaths ever, indicative of Taiwan going into a negative growth by 2031. Consequently, Taiwan’s economic structure is no longer “labor-intensive, it is technology-intensive,” and now needs to fill shifting industry and talent shortage demands in “biomedicine, green energy, defense, modern agricultural and the circular economy.”

To counter the low fertility rates and push to create a ‘Silicon Valley for Taiwan,’ Taiwan also seeks to gain 400,000 white-collar foreign workers by 2030 with at least 20,000 being Silicon Valley-adjacent innovators and 200,000 overseas students. Despite this goal, Taiwan suffered a 5% decline in total foreigners from 2020-2021 — with some critics arguing Taiwan can make itself more expat-friendly, such as boosting English-speaking rates. 

Coupled together — a decrease in global trade, diminishing trading relationships, negative population growth, shifting industry demands amidst talent shortages and a decline in needed expats explain why Taiwan is desperate to recruit foreign technical workers and boost its labor force. More so, it explains why Taiwan sees becoming a bilingual English-Mandarin nation as a key facilitator to these goals and overall productivity growth. Taiwan can’t supply a cheap, domestic labor force like China and ASEAN members did to increase exports and certain trading relationships. But, Taiwan can boost its English proficiency as a means of reducing barriers to foreign investment and facilitating itself as a a hub for multinational firms looking to enter the Asian market.” Likewise, Taiwan can hope to outcompete Hong Kong. Singapore, India and the Philippines where English is widely used in business, governmental and professional sectors. 

The Bilingual 2030 policy realizes Taiwan’s shifting demands and meets them with a twofold policy. Its first aim is to “help Taiwan’s workforce connect with the world,” and secondly, to “attract international enterprises to Taiwan and enable Taiwanese industries to connect to global markets and create high-quality jobs.” For these aims to be achieved, Taiwan’s workers must not only align their professional expertise with international standards, but also collaborate with counterparts from other countries and work in global markets targeted by Taiwan’s industries. 

Bilingual 2030 will stress college and senior high school education, supplemented by integrating English proficiency at all stages of education. In 2021, 21% of grade 12 and 6.5% of grade 9 students reached the B2 level (high-intermediate level) or higher on the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) for Languages, statistics that make 2030 bilingualism achievable. However, their high performance in receptive skills, reading and listening, were incongruent with their mediocre performance in writing and speaking — which is precisely what Taiwan wants to improve. The Ministry of Education has formulated six goals to bridge writing and speaking gaps and achieve bilingual proficiency. 

First, accelerate the development of bilingual higher education. The Ministry of Education plans to select universities that are able to speed up the implementation of bilingual teaching and make them a beacon for other Taiwanese universities. The ministry will collaborate with the British Council to provide consulting to universities in hopes of achieving the 50-50-50 target by 2030 — at least 50% of all university sophomores should have achieved B2 in listening, speaking, reading and writing, at least 50% of all sophomore and master students should have done at least 50% of their credits in full English for that academic year. 

Second, balance and optimize bilingual conditions for schools at the senior high school level and below. At a glance, this means enhancing students’ ability to use English in daily life, having STEM schools integrate more English, and adopting all-English teaching in English classes. Further, Taiwan seeks to form partnerships with the U.S., U.K. and Australia and have Taiwanese schools establish sister-school partnerships with these target countries — specifically to conduct online bilingual classes. By 2030, Taiwan hopes to have “one in every six schools nationwide to establish a partnership with a foreign sister school.”

Third, develop digital learning. The Ministry of Education aims to distribute technology to remote areas to bridge proficiency gaps between urban and rural areas. Likewise, Taiwanese university students with higher proficiency will online-tutor remote and disadvantaged students. 

Fourth, expand the provision of affordable English proficiency tests to gauge the progress of Bilingual 2030. With the support of the Ministry of Education, Taiwan developed their own English proficiency test — about a half to one-third the price of foreign English tests — to increase access for more rural, economically-disadvantaged demographics. 

Fifth, raise civil servants’ English proficiency. Bilingual 2030 will initially focus on the civil service whose work is integrated with international affairs and where English is pertinent to their job. In the future, English will be taught to all civil servants and the portion of English testing on civil service exams will be increased. 

Sixth, establish an administrative body dedicated to policy promotion and implementation. Bilingual 2030 is still a novel and nebulous long-term initiative and requires various stakeholders to collaborate and reach a consensus. The Bilingual Policy Development Center will “assist with the horizontal integration of measures relating to education, examinations, and training across 31 related government agencies. It will provide these agencies with vertical specialized services ranging from policy research to policy execution and consolidate international cooperation efforts under the policy.” 

In addition to the six initiatives, Taiwan has plans for multiple other ancillary initiatives. For example, there are plans to have “government regulations, policies, and websites in legally binding English” eliminating translation barriers to foreign businesses. The government will also “promote the establishment of an exclusively English-language television station, and both TV and radio broadcasters will be encouraged to produce English-language programming.” While Bilingual 2030 is still ongoing trial and error with each municipality and school having to acclimate the policies to its students, it’s a significant step for the island’s future.  

Taiwan faces various economic challenges which will only be exacerbated in the face of rapid globalization, the rise of AI, its volatile relationship with China and competition from neighboring countries. However, Taiwan can control its future by endowing its workers and future generations with bilingualism, global perspectives and international mobility. 

The post Taiwan’s Bilingual 2030 policy — why Taiwan has formulated it and what it entails appeared first on Glimpse from the Globe.

The truth is that I learned German because I wanted to. I grew up hearing stories from my parents about their time living abroad when they were in high school and college, and was always impressed by my mom’s mastery of Spanish as well as both of my parents’ French-speaking abilities. As early as I can remember, I always knew that someday, I, too, wanted to have my own international adventures, learning about as many cultures and languages as I possibly could. 

My freshman year of college, classes were held entirely online due to COVID policies. After a rather lonely semester spent in my room in Phoenix, my family and I decided that this time might be the perfect opportunity for me to finally realize my dream of living abroad. We got to planning, and eventually decided that I would take a break from school and spend the next six months attending a language school and living with a host family in Freiburg, Germany. 

What followed was arguably the best half a year of my life, and I met my host parents, Brigitte and Robby (whom I now refer to as my German parents), with whom I remain incredibly close to this day. By the end of my stay, I had achieved a certified B2 level of proficiency in German (basic fluency), and my language level has continued to rise via continued study and exposure since.

To some U.S. Americans, Germany might seem like a random place to choose for a study abroad experience, especially without a familial connection of some sort. It is far too long of a story to delve into as to why I ended up there. After all, the majority of my family has been in the United States for multiple generations, with the most recent immigrant being my great-grandfather, who came to the United States from the Czech Republic (Czechoslovakia at the time). My Swedish last name raises a lot of eyebrows, but even it has been in my family for generations. None of us are really Swedish — at least, not in any relevant sense. 

All of this being the case, it is definitely confusing for many in the United States why I “bothered” to learn German, and it has happened more than once that somebody argued with me or insisted that I must be German, simply because I speak the language. Yet, when I am abroad, I very seldom — in fact, almost never — face the same level of disbelief or questioning. So why is it so pervasive within the borders of the United States?

It is no secret that, in many other countries, Americans are often made fun of for our tendency to expect everyone else to speak English, regardless of what country we find ourselves in. In some ways, this makes sense. After all, English is the world’s most commonly taught language. It is spoken by at least a small portion of the population in 101 different countries, and it is the official language of both the UN and NATO, along with several other significant international organizations. In short, English is everywhere. 

Perhaps, this explains why nearly 80% of U.S. Americans only speak English. In contrast, only about 40% of the world population is monolingual, with 65% of Europeans speaking at least two languages fluently and 20 out of the 25 most linguistically diverse countries being located in Africa. Although over sixty-five million U.S. residents report speaking a language other than English at home, this group accounts for a mere 20.7 percent of the U.S. population. Given these numbers, it makes sense that people meeting me would assume I learned German at home. 

The existence of such statistics may not seem particularly problematic upon first glance, due to the prevalence of English on the global stage, which has popularized the opinion that it is not practical for native English speakers to dedicate time to learning another language; however, this could not be further from the truth. 

As the world becomes more interconnected and multilingual than ever before, the monolingual culture of the United States is putting it at a disadvantage. 96% of the global consumers — the majority of whom do not speak English — reside outside of the United States, and one in five U.S. jobs is dependent on global trade. A quarter of employers in the United States are reporting a loss of business due to the lack of foreign language proficiency in the workforce. In a 2014 study commissioned by the Coalition for International Education, nearly 40% of businesses attributed their failure to reach their international potential to language barriers. 

U.S. monolingual culture is not only affecting businesses: it is taking a toll on our scientific and diplomatic progress, too. In 2004, English-speaking scientists from the United States failed to recognize the danger of the avian flu epidemic due to the original reports being published in Chinese, and the Department of State and the Department of Defense have reported increasing difficulties in staffing thousands of language positions vital to the United States’ diplomatic, intelligence and military progression. If our culture continues on its current linguistic trajectory, the consequences for us will be serious. 

As the U.S. government continues to cut funding to language education programs, the problem worsens. Between 1997 and 2008, the number of elementary schools teaching foreign languages dropped from 31% to 25%, and middle school numbers fell from 75%to just 58%. Between 2009 and 2013, the number of students in higher education enrolled in language courses declined by over 111,000 spots, meaning that a mere 7% of college students were studying a foreign language -– marking the first time numbers had fallen since 1995. Due to a lack of resources, students attending schools in underprivileged areas are at an even greater disadvantage than their peers.

What can be done? Simply put, more funding and resources must be dedicated to foreign language education at all levels, particularly for younger students, who are more receptive to new languages by nature. 

Colleges and universities need to make the teaching of languages a bigger priority through their foreign language requirements for students. Being multilingual should not be viewed as merely an asset, but as a necessity in today’s world. 

While I am proud of all the work I have done to make learning German a possibility for myself, similar opportunities need to be made more easily accessible to larger groups of students who might lack the extra time and resources that I was so fortunate to have available for me. 

The United States is already behind. It is time for us to catch up — and to avoid the dire consequences if we do not. I hope that someday, it will no longer be so commonplace for me to hear the question, “Are you German?” 

The post No, I’m not German: A Glimpse into Monolingualism in the United States appeared first on Glimpse from the Globe.

With little to no films produced or translated into languages beyond those with economic dominance, minority and indigenous languages have minimal presence in modern domains of entertainment and/or communication. This dynamic only further accelerates language loss and linguistic supremacy; however, a recent production of The Lion King offers hope for the future of minority languages in modern media.

Since its premiere in June 1994, The Lion King has become the highest-grossing animated film, the best-selling movie on DVD and has been translated into over 45 languages. The newest of which is te reo Māori — the indigenous language of Aotearoa/New Zealand.

Throughout the 1980s, usage of te reo was almost exclusively limited to toponyms, and it remained very contentious throughout society as highlighted by the “Kia Ora” Controversy. During this infamous interaction, telephone operator Naida Glavish greeted callers with “kia ora” instead of “hello” only to subsequently be demoted. In response, and in fear of the language’s disappearance, the Māori community mobilized and advocated for the implementation of the 1987 Māori Language Act.

This legislation and subsequent community efforts reversed the trajectory of te reo. In under 50 years since obtaining its official status, Māori has transitioned from near extinction to the big screen, making the release of The Lion King an indicator of a drastic societal shift. It symbolizes not only the astronomical progress made in terms of language equality but also the advancements achieved in creating a more equitable society for all. 

Recently, te reo Māori has gained a growing presence in TV, radio and social media, but its implementation into films remains extremely limited. Driving this exclusion, is the fact that “[t]he global motion picture industry is dominated by seven companies that account for about 90 percent of box office receipts.” 

With limited industry diversity, and minority language speakers being “by their very nature unrewarding audiences for the media,” there exists little to no incentive for large companies to produce films in a wide range of languages. Therefore, the translation of a world-renowned Disney film into an indigenous language spoken by less than 200,000 is both groundbreaking and may suggest that a new era of inclusivity in terms of representation and accessibility is approaching. 

Working in tandem with Māori-owned Matewa Media, The Lion King remake centered indigenous voices. Disney Senior Vice President Kylie Watson-Wheeler noted: “The Lion King Reo Māori helps to broaden the accessibility, inclusiveness and diversity of The Walt Disney Company’s storytelling for a new generation.” Beyond adding to the films created in te reo, the film’s production demonstrates to people of all linguistic, ethnic, and economic backgrounds that they have a place in society.

Producing and releasing this movie in Aotearoa was not met without contempt, in part due to the fact that over 90% of the population speaks English, and the Pākehā (European) population dominates both political and professional spheres. Despite the opposition, the film premiered in June and was released in both Aotearoa and Australia. It continues to be shown in theaters, and its success was followed by the release of Frozen Reo Māori in late October of 2022. 

With growing numbers of indigenous-language films released, a cultural revolution is underway, as “minority language media serve[s]as a defensive tool, balancing the impact of the language(s) that dominate the media landscape.” Across the world, translators and filmmakers have slowly begun to take on the challenge of producing films in indigenous and endangered languages. 

In 2013, the 90-minute film Sooyii was filmed entirely in Blackfoot, a language with less than 50 fluent speakers. Similarly, in 2018, SGaaqaay K’uuna or Edge of the Knife, was produced in Haida, an indigenous Canadian language spoken by less than 20 fluently. Both of these films have subsequently inspired community members to invest in their own language-learning process, helping to preserve the language. 

Scenes and full-length versions of Star Wars: A New Hope have also been produced into languages including Quechua and Navajo to add to the media available for youth in the respective tongues, as well as promote reconciliation for the impact of past exploitation. 

The oppression of Indigenous and minority populations and their languages has long been upheld through the powerful media industry which perpetuates dangerous imperialistic dynamics. As of late, slow efforts at diversifying the content produced have begun. By responding to the inequalities faced by these communities, the media industry has started to positively contribute to the revitalization of te reo and other languages. 

Moreover, as a smashing success, The Lion King in Māori shows that the inclusion of diverse minority languages in media is no longer an ideal, but a plausible reality for the near future. It is important to remember, however, that this progress is only possible with the continued support from language media corporations such as Disney, as well as the continued engagement by the public at large. 

The post “The Lion King” in Te Reo Māori: A New Era of Minority Languages in Media appeared first on Glimpse from the Globe.

Climate change is no longer a distant threat of the future but rather a devastating actor in the present. Unfortunately, this reality was preventable. For decades, indigenous climate activists desperately called for action, only for the world to cast them aside and subsequently ignore them as they were kidnapped and murdered. In contrast, white Western scientists, such as Allan Chornak, have recently received international praise for peaceful sit-ins and social media campaigns. 

This unequal response is representative of the international climate regime, which is tainted by a history of coercion and dominance from the Global North. Historically, many developed states of the Global North, such as the United States, UK, Australia and others, used their economic position to influence global (in)action and silence the Global South. Only recently, the international community has finally begun to be more inclusive of traditionally marginalized voices in political and scientific discourse, specifically indigenous peoples. 

Domestically, in recognition of indigenous knowledge and after a century of the oppression of indigenous-controlled burn practices, California reversed its policy. It now permits the practice to mitigate the increasing number of wildfires due to rising global temperatures. 

On the international level, for one of the first instances in an international climate treaty, the 2016 Paris Agreement acknowledged the value of “traditional knowledge, knowledge of indigenous peoples and local knowledge systems.”

Beyond this important recognition of indigenous knowledge, Paris was revolutionary because it was one of the first times that one of the great drivers for change was believed to be science, specifically the Fifth IPCC Assessment. The knowledge within this report was used by lobbyists, NGOs and the Global South to convince the Global North to take action; however, despite the impact of this report, the knowledge from many of the world’s leading environmental caretakers was excluded. 

The IPCC Assessments attempt to accumulate existing scientific data to create apolitical reports that “provide governments at all levels with scientific information that they can use to develop climate policies.” Yet, the information from this report focuses nearly entirely on scientific knowledge accumulated from the Global North. Additionally, despite the fact that the majority of the world’s population resides in the Global South, nearly 70% of the IPCC data collection task force’s members represent countries from the Global North.

Unfortunately, the exclusion of indigenous peoples and the Global South does not stop at the decision-making table. Even afterward, due to the way it is distributed and translated, the IPCC reports and countless other climate science literature are inaccessible to many communities. This is in part due to the wide range of languages spoken within these populations as, although indigenous people make up less than 5% of the world’s population, they speak more than half of the world’s languages. 

In lieu of this fact and the existence of nearly 7,000 languages worldwide, the Sixth IPCC Assessment, arguably the most important piece of climate science literature, was translated into six languages in February 2022. 

The six languages chosen by the IPCC are the six UN official languages: English, Spanish, French, Arabic, Russian and Chinese. These languages objectively communicate with a large audience as nearly half of the world speaks at least one of these languages. However, regardless of their wide reach, these are languages of oppression or colonial languages for much of the world. This selection of languages also disproportionately excludes the Global South and indigenous communities who are statistically much more linguistically diverse and typically learn UN languages as second or third languages, if at all. 

If indigenous peoples “comprise less than 5% of the world population” but “protect 80% of the Earth’s biodiversity,” why are they still excluded? 

Climate science literature is vital to help individuals more accurately assess the crisis we now face and better advocate for change. Therefore, IPCC reports and other important climate science literature must be translated into more languages to reach the voices of the Global South and those most susceptible to the impacts of climate change. 

Additionally, to combat the effects of our changing planet, scientific literature and the scientific community must broaden their approach to include a wider range of knowledge, specifically that from indigenous communities. As Dr. Morcom notes, indigenous communities and languages “possess so much knowledge of culture… and they contain priceless environmental knowledge that helps us relate well to the land on which we live.”

The Global North continues to hold financial and political leverage within our current climate change regime. However, their voices are not the ones that should be centered. In scientific literature and all decision-making conversations, indigenous knowledge and languages must be better represented if we are to combat climate change successfully. 

The post The Most Important Languages are Being Excluded from Climate Conversations appeared first on Glimpse from the Globe.