A Comparative Study between the Rural Regeneration Act(draft) and the Rural Re-building Act (draft)

Analyzing the political and economy in terms of the historically embedded structure and the development of the Taiwan rural development policy, agriculture related resources, land used, and the manpower in the rural villages are all used for developing Taiwan’s economy and the metropolis, especially under the government’s domination of extractive agriculture policy. Rural villages, as the living basis for the farmers and agricultural development, had been passed over and sacrificed, causing the backward and shortages of infrastructures in rural communities.
Both Ma administration and Chen administration proposed “rural development policy” separately; however, the drafts containing diverse policies and the mobilization of bias raised from one party was very different from the other. The Rural Re-building Act draft and the Rural regeneration Act draft were instructed by former President Chen and President Ma respectively, and developed by the administrative agencies. The rural development policy is so complicated and controversial, so both Presidents had to negotiate with the objectors in person.
The main differences between these two acts are as follows. First of all, the Rural Re-building Act draft drew a budget of one hundred billions, but the Rural Regeneration Act draft were about double in compare with the former administration and reached two hundred billions after been raised by the legislators. Secondly, both acts were committed to remodel 4,000 nationwide rural villages, but the bases of budget plans were so different. In addition, the Ministry of the Interior was in charge of the former act; however, the Council of Agriculture is responsible for the latter one. The fact shows that governed by different authorities came up with different implementing competence, same as rural villages development in the long term. Finally, many outsiders dissented the chapter four of Rural Re-building Act draft (rural community development) and the chapter three of the Rural Regeneration Act draft (activated village land), because these two chapters were both involved in advantages of land development, causing the opponents wondering the main driving force of rural development policy.
To building a better perspective of Taiwan’s rural village, the rural development policy should integrate with three vital agricultural functions-productivity, livelihood and ecology, harmony with national development policies, including national spatial planning and county-city municipality restructuring policy, and eventually, mark out a more prospective and innovative plan for the rural villages.