 |
|
Global economic outlook downgraded amid uncertainty over Trump Administration’s fluctuating tariff policies
Manufacturers turn pessimistic on economic outlook, accelerate shipments ahead of uncertainty |
With the Trump administration's series of tariff policy adjustments promoting American manufacturing, global trade friction has intensified. Meanwhile, the widening performance gap between the US and other economies may exacerbate monetary policy divergence among major central banks. As the world's largest economy, changes in US policies will influence global economic and trade trends, leading international forecasting institutions to significantly downgrade growth projections for major economies in 2025.
Domestically, benefiting from strong AI demand and customers' early procurement in response to US tariff variables, March manufacturing exports, production, and export orders all showed significant growth compared to the previous month, driving a notable increase in the proportion of manufacturers with positive economic outlooks. However, fluctuating US tariff policies and unclear progress in negotiations between countries have added uncertainty to the global economy, causing a significant rise in the percentage of manufacturers with negative outlook for the coming six months. The service sector has also been affected by potential impacts of Trump's policies on domestic industries and weakening downstream demand, coupled with lackluster financial market performance, making retail and financial service providers more conservative about the economic outlook for the next six months. ...Read more |
 |
|
 |
| The Principle of Legislative-Executive Division from an Economic Standpoint |
| In democracies, while policies theoretically derive from the people, direct citizen participation in all decisions is impractical. Elected representatives may fail to truly represent the public interest, necessitating the separation of power and the establishment of mutual oversight mechanisms. Citizens retain checks through recalls and referenda. After long-term implementation, the purpose behind these institutional designs is often forgotten. This article employs economic theory to explain why executive power must maintain independence, constrained only by legislative oversight and public accountability, rather than being arbitrarily controlled by legislators or subject to public opinion. The first reason for executive-legislative separation is policy coherence. Public choice theory demonstrates that when representatives or citizens vote on issues individually, contradictory decisions often emerge from competing interests. Even parliamentary systems separate cabinet functions from legislative control to maintain comprehensive policy formulation. The second reason is that public opinion often prioritizes immediate personal benefits over indirect public costs. More experienced democracies generally avoid implementing flawed policies merely because they enjoy popular support. Our constitution and referendum laws specifically prohibit legislative budget increases and tax-reduction referenda to prevent self-interest-driven decisions—explicitly limiting legislative and referendum interference with executive functions. Third, policy formulation requires nuanced cost-benefit analyses that cannot be precisely calibrated through public opinion or voting mechanisms. Fourth, policies demand coordinated implementation and integrated decision-making. Legislative oversight should not undermine this coordination by arbitrarily reducing budgets for specific initiatives absent clear inefficiencies. Fifth, effective governance requires adaptive management. Executive departments can implement rapid adjustments to changing circumstances, while public opinion channels and referendum processes lack comparable responsiveness. Sixth, implementation and accountability require clear responsibility. When policies are legislatively prescribed but administratively executed, adaptive implementation becomes difficult, and accountability remains ambiguous. All developed nations maintain institutional frameworks preventing complete legislative dominance over executive functions. Elected executives serve defined terms with clear accountability. Certain policies requiring long-term consistency should be protected from both legislative micromanagement and inappropriate executive interference. The legislature exists to provide oversight and balance, not to command administrative functions. The branches represent coordinate powers, not a boss-employee relationship. If legislators could dictate all executive actions, the system designed to prevent executive autocracy would merely transform into legislative authoritarianism. The historical separation of supervisory powers from legislative authority reflects concerns about parliaments potentially using impeachment powers to subordinate governments. We currently need improved mechanisms and institutional norms to effectively resolve executive-legislative conflicts. (For more, please see the current monthly journal) |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
| |
Taiwan Economic Research Monthly
Taiwan's Industrial Global Positioning and Development Challenges Under the Trend of Secure and Resilient Supply Chains |
| ‧ |
In recent years, dramatic shifts in the global geopolitical and economic landscape have elevated supply chain security and resilience as central concerns for nations worldwide. The U.S.-China technological rivalry, geopolitical conflicts, and COVID-19 pandemic disruptions have compelled governments and corporations to recognize the inherent vulnerabilities of concentrated market dependencies and single-source procurement strategies. These developments have catalyzed a transformation in supply chain configurations—shifting from cost-minimization paradigms toward frameworks that prioritize economic security and industrial resilience.
To ensure supply chain stability, numerous nations and enterprises have initiated "de-risking" strategies that emphasize diversified production bases and strengthened regional cooperation. For strategically significant products, stakeholders have begun developing domestic production capacities. The United States, European Union, Japan, and other advanced economies have recalibrated their industrial policies to attract Taiwanese investment, thereby enhancing their supply chain autonomy.
Amid evolving global supply chain architectures, this special issue employs multiple methodological approaches—including data analytics, survey research, and policy analysis—to examine the implications of Trump administration policies and international de-risking trends for Taiwan, alongside developments in domestic manufacturing value-added ratios and operational headquarters. The analysis explores opportunities and challenges from the perspective of Taiwan's "hidden champions" while drawing policy insights from key competitors.
As a small open economy, Taiwan relies on trade engagement as the principal driver of its economic development. Taiwanese industries must respond prudently to emerging challenges, adapt strategies flexibly, and secure their pivotal roles in international supply networks.
|
|
|
|
|