Written by Hao-Hsiang Hsieh
Image credit: Provided by Hao-Hsiang Hsieh. Zhengbin Fishing Port (正濱漁港), spanning over 90 years of history, was once northern Taiwan’s main hub for inshore and distant-water fishing and now stands as a transformed port that still reflects the roots and enduring significance of Taiwan’s fisheries.
Connectivity as a Core
Participating in the Taiwan-Europe Connectivity Workshop 2026, hosted by the European Research Center on Contemporary Taiwan (ERCCT) at the University of Tübingen from July 6 to 10, marked a milestone in my doctoral journey. The workshop bridged physical distances, fostered people-to-people academic exchange, and explored the institutional ties that bind Taiwan and Europe. Engaging across these dimensions of connectivity helped me consider broader theoretical frameworks and rethink the lived realities behind Taiwan’s governance reforms.
The Value of Physical Presence
While advances in technology connect people across time zones and geographies, physical presence remains important and meaningful. On the journey from Taipei to Tübingen, I felt excited and eager to share my current research with participants. After learning about the background and development of the ERCCT, I felt a profound sense of gratitude and respect. Although it is thousands of kilometres from Taiwan, this research centre was established in Tübingen nearly twenty years ago and continues to thrive thanks to a dedicated community of scholars devoted to Taiwan studies. Walking on the streets of Tübingen, the deep sense of connection I felt was something no virtual meeting could ever offer, which is the value of physical presence.
The Resonance of People-to-People Exchange
The workshop brought together doctoral students from Taiwan, China, Korea, Vietnam, and the Philippines, including colleagues based in Taiwan and those pursuing doctoral degrees in Europe. Although our research approaches ranged from methodological enquiries to empirical studies, we shared a common focus on Taiwan. The topics ranged broadly across regional affairs, local humanities, cross-strait relations, electoral studies, youth and human rights, Indigenous culture and identity, talent and international student policies, semiconductor diplomacy, nationality recognition, and my research on fishery governance reforms.
These varied backgrounds sparked knowledge exchanges. My training in international relations and political science accustomed me to a state-centric lens, focusing primarily on a top-down approach. However, colleagues specialising in civil society offered a dimension I had previously overlooked. In addition, colleagues with quantitative research skills provided valuable methodological feedback. Furthermore, a colleague from Vietnam shared insights on domestic considerations in fishery governance reforms, adding perspectives from other countries.
This was my first time attending an international workshop composed entirely of doctoral students. Although our fields differed, engaging in in-depth, cross-disciplinary dialogue grounded in doctoral-level inquiry broadened my horizons. Beyond the academic discussions, getting to know such a talented, like-minded group of colleagues underscored the power of people-to-people exchange.
Institutional ties between Taiwan and Europe
In my research on EU normative power, the EU combats global Illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing by promoting regulatory diffusion. This process serves as a cornerstone of institutional connectivity.
Since 2010, the EU has issued 28 yellow card warnings to third countries identified with deficiencies in IUU fishing governance. Of these, 15 countries obtained a green card and were delisted, 8 remain under yellow card status, and 5 were escalated to a red card, resulting in a ban on their fishery product exports to the EU. My empirical study shows that economic pressure from trade dependence on the EU fishery market is not the dominant factor driving fishery governance in third countries, and it provides a foundation for the discourse on the influence of normative power in the EU’s fight against IUU fishing.
Furthermore, Taiwan’s experience offers an example. On October 1, 2015, the European Commission issued a yellow card warning to Taiwan as a pre-identification of being a non-cooperating third country. Despite its low trade dependence on the EU fishery market, Taiwan implemented legislative and operational reforms and finally secured the lifting of its yellow card in 2019. Subsequently, both parties agreed to establish a joint working group to deepen institutional connectivity in combating IUU fishing, ensuring that fishery catches are legally harvested and supported by robust traceability systems.
Beyond the State: Rethinking Normative Power from Below
The conventional top-down and state-centric perspective favoured by my initial training captures only the normative surface of global regulatory diffusion. While dozens of third countries have received EU yellow-card warnings, their domestic reform trajectories varied significantly before securing a green-card delisting. Viewing target states merely as passive recipients of external regulatory coercion overlooks the complex domestic negotiations that turn external pressure into enduring policy. During our workshop discussions, participants raised penetrating questions, including: How do you explain the concept of normative power to civil society? What were the actual perspectives of fishers and local stakeholder groups throughout Taiwan’s reform process, given that these reforms involved both legal amendments and practical operations?
While fishery governance reforms did not trigger the same scale of public debate in Taiwan as amendments to the Mining Act, which directly intersect with Indigenous rights, this does not mean local voices can be discounted. This feedback urged me to rethink normative power through bottom-up movements. A broader spectrum of civil society, ranging from frontline fishers and industry associations to environmental advocates and labour organisations, played an indispensable role. Beyond narrow commercial interests, these bottom-up networks monitored regulatory compliance on the water, advocated for higher environmental and labour standards, and held public authorities accountable. In doing so, they helped generate domestic momentum for reform rather than social resistance.
Above all, I believe that incorporating the dynamics within civil society clarifies what normative power entails in practice. This perspective aligns more closely with the EU’s original intent to encourage third countries to improve their IUU fishing governance through dialogue, consultation, and capacity-building. Far from being an abstract standard passively adopted from EU regulations, normative alignment is actively contested, translated, and internalised by domestic agency. Moving beyond a simple assessment of whether a third country meets or falls short of EU standards, this bottom-up lens shows how societal mobilisation supports legal compliance and strengthens enduring institutional ties between Taiwan and Europe.
Hao-Hsiang Hsieh (謝皓翔) is a PhD student in the Department of Diplomacy at National Chengchi University (NCCU) and also works as an Assistant Research Fellow at the Taiwan Institute of Economic Research (TIER). His work focuses on policy research on how Taiwan’s industries align with international norms, particularly those of the European Union.