Analyze

Taihsi Village is located in Changhua County, northwest of Formosa’s Sixth Naphtha Cracker complex, and colloquially referred to as the “cancer village”. Taihsi was founded by Han settlers in the 18th century who built close relationships to the river and sea through rice cultivation and fishing (Lai 2021, 673). Taihsi village expanded agricultural production under Japanese rule, yet state-led capitalist industrialization in the 1950s stunted development, pushing villagers to seek work along the Western coast and on sugarcane plantations in Okinawa (ibid.). Industrialization in the 1970s further marginalized Changhua, resulting in relentless out-migration of younger generations and state subsidies for watermelon harvest, duck farming, and clam fishing. In addition to agricultural challenges (water scarcity, flooding, soil salinization), Taiwan’s embrace of heavy industries in the 90s, including construction of the nearby Formosa complex, introduced unforeseen environmental problems (Lai 2021, 674).

Since 2015, a group of Yunlin residents has been leading a toxic tort case that – following several dismissals at the district court level – is now pending in the City of Tainan’s high court (Jobin 2021a; Lin 2021). Importantly, the mobilization has prompted social science analysis of Formosa’s “good neighbor” policies and compensations (Jobin 2021a; Lin 2021), the use of air pollution monitoring data (Tu 2020), and the central role of lawyers within the movement (Jobin 2021b). The litigation focuses both on the shortcomings of corporate social responsibility efforts and the failure to enforce Taiwan’s Public Nuisance Disputes Mediation Act voted into law in 1992 (Jobin 2021b, 80). In addition to analysis of interactions in the courtroom, analysis shows that Japanese law and legal precedents, as well as the US legal system, act as a role model for anti-Formosa class action lawsuits (Jobin 2021b, 32).

Building on his research on Formosa Plastics, sociologist Paul Jobin (2021a) has coined the term “civic eco-nationalism” to characterize Taiwanese environmental activism emerging over the last two decades – defined as “a mix of nationalism, ecology, and the spirit of democracy” (2021, 61). According to Jobin, resistance against Formosa demonstrates that struggles for independence, democratic institutions, and a Taiwanese national identity are integral to the island’s environmental activism (2021a, 60). Unlike other liberal democracies, Taiwanese politics operate along a split between the pro-China Kuomintang (KMT, blue camp) and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP, green camp). While the KMT has been in support of polluting industries and discouraging them from moving to the mainland, the DPP is known for keeping a lower profile, often contradicting electoral promises and therefore producing tension with more critical environmental movements (Jobin 2021a, 65). This gap in institutional politics, Jobin argues, is a key reason why social movements have developed a distinct form of civic eco-nationalism.

A prominent example of civic eco-nationalism for Jobin is the weekly environmental television show “Our Island”, founded in 1998 alongside Taiwan’s Public Television Station (PTS) (Jobin 2021a, 63). As the station's longest-running program, a main goal is to explore Taiwan’s marine and coastal environments which civilians were not allowed to enter under martial law (Jobin 2021a, 63). The team of journalists led by acclaimed documentary director Chin-Yuan Ke has produced several TV episodes that directly critique Formosa Plastics’ pollution. Such critical reporting is especially important in light of the company’s many attempts to control media narratives. Yunlin County, for example, Formosa has published a controversial corporate newspaper (“Kisses and Hugs”) that has been widely criticized for downplaying and denying the effects of air pollution (Chan 2020). While Our Island focuses largely on domestic developments, the team was also the first to cover disaster response at Formosa’s Steel plant in Vietnam.

Formosa's operations have been significantly influenced by Taiwanese politics and cross-strait relations with China. Its founder, Wang, was considered a moderate liberalizer with close ties to Taiwan's democratic party. However, he also sought to expand into the Chinese mainland during his lifetime, which often caused conflicts between Taiwanese and Chinese administrations (Lin 2016, 81).

Wang's plans to build a large petrochemical complex in Taiwan were initially halted in 1973 by the authoritarian Kuomintang (KMT) government. However, following the lifting of martial law in the mid-1980s, Formosa attempted to build the complex in the scenic Yilan County (Ho 2014). Unfortunately, rising concerns over petrochemical development and pollution led to mass protests by local residents and fisher people, which became a turning point for Taiwan's democracy movement (Ho 2014).

In the face of this opposition, Wang arranged secret trips to mainland China and announced that the plant would be built on the island of Haitsang in Xiamen province. However, due to economic sanctions between China and Taiwan and pressure from the nationalist KMT government, the construction of the vast petrochemical complex ultimately took place in the rural and impoverished Yunlin County in Central Taiwan (Lin 2016, 82).

Overall, Formosa's history reflects the complex interactions between Taiwanese politics, cross-strait relations with China, environmental concerns, and grassroots activism. These dynamics have played a significant role in shaping the company's operations and impact on the communities in which it operates.

As of today, Formosa Plastics' Sixth Naphtha Cracker Complex (SNCC) has become the main source of revenue in Yunlin County, generating about 90% of the local economy. Although the county has long been known as the agricultural hub of Taiwan, renowned for its fertile farmland and abundant fishing resources, it has also been plagued by ongoing conflicts with polluting industries. In 2010, a series of accidents and explosions at the Formosa complex resulted in significant investments in local schools, waste removal, and public infrastructure. 

1. How has Comite Civico Del Valle evolved, and what changes have been made to respond to emerging issues or new challenges?

2. What are Comite Civico Del Valle's most significant accomplishments in its work towards environmental justice and community health?

The CCV advances justice and good governance by advocating for and promoting environmental justice, health equity, and civic engagement in disadvantaged communities. The organization works diligently to empower community members through education and training curricula like, the Promotoras and the Environmental Health Leadership Summit to inform and educate active participants in decision-making processes affecting their lives. By partnering with researchers from universities and government agencies, the CCV also conducts research to identify and further support evidence that environmental health disparities disproportionately impact low-income and minority communities.  

CCV has been covered in a variety of local and national news outlets, including newspapers, television programs, and online media. Coverage is primarily positive, highlighting the organization’s accomplishments and impact, although sometimes it is harmful and focuses on internal and external conflicts or controversies.

Comite Civico del Valle functions within the environmental justice sector and as a non-profit organization.

The CCV has been involved in various partnerships and collaborations with other environmental justice organizations and academic and government agencies to advocate for policies and programs that promote environmental justice and public health. Notably, the CCV works with Identifying Violations Affecting Neighborhoods (IVAN) Community Air Monitoring Network, Salton Sea Community, Outreach, Education and Engagement (COEE), Allies In Reducing Emissions (AIRE) Collaborative among others, including CASA Familiar, CCEJN, The LEAP Institute, and CFASE. Collaborative work is essential to CCV’s mission to promote community-based solutions instead of perpetuating environmental injustice and health disparities, including the fossil fuel industry and discriminatory land use policies.

Given the nature of environmental justice work, it is likely that this organization finds it challenging to address these issues related to environmental justice, public health, and education because of the systemic inequalities, lack of resources, and opposition from other stakeholders like corporate institutions with wealth and political power who prioritize profit over social and environmental justice.

CCV does not claim to have a unique way of addressing problems. Still, the organization’s approach o environmental justice through community engagement and education can be considered different from traditional methods of advocacy that often include technological solutions or top-down decision-making. CCV emphasizes education and views the root causes of environmental injustices as social and political rather than technical or economic. The involvement of local communities is viewed as a critical component of addressing environmental justice issues within the organization.