A recent global AI index ranking for 2025 placed Taiwan at 16th place, which has sparked considerable discussion. The ranking evaluates eight key indicators: digital infrastructure, talent, social acceptance, academic research, development capability, government strategy, business ecosystem, and scale/intensity. This position is notably behind regional neighbors and global leaders.
The top positions are held by the United States and China, with Singapore ranking third. Singapore’s strategy of engaging with both major AI powers is often cited as a key to its success. In contrast, Taiwan’s performance shows significant weaknesses in specific areas. It ranks 33rd in talent, indicating a severe shortage of high-level AI professionals. The business ecosystem ranks 30th, suggesting a lack of companies successfully commercializing AI services. Development capability ranks 27th, pointing to a trend of being tool users rather than core technology creators, with no major large language models originating from Taiwan.
There is public criticism regarding long-term political promises for AI development, such as targets set for 2035 or 2040 to cultivate hundreds of thousands of AI talents. Critics argue these distant goals lack actionable plans for the immediate term and do not address current, pressing issues in education, industry, and talent retention. The focus, they say, should be on concrete steps and verifiable outcomes within shorter political cycles, rather than on pledges that extend decades into the future.
This whole debate misses the point. Being a proficient “user” of AI technology from the US or China is still incredibly valuable for our economy. Not every country needs to invent its own ChatGPT. We should focus on integrating these powerful tools into our manufacturing and service sectors where we already have strength. Chasing the “creator” dream might just waste resources.
The ranking is just a number. What matters is the real-world impact on people’s jobs and lives. If the business ecosystem is weak (rank 30th!), it means regular folks aren’t seeing the benefits. Are new AI companies starting here? Are wages in tech rising? Promising 500,000 AI experts in 16 years means nothing if the current experts are leaving because the conditions are poor.
Honestly, ranking 16th isn’t the end of the world, but seeing our neighbors like Singapore and South Korea so far ahead is a real wake-up call. The talent drain is the most critical issue; we keep educating smart people who then leave for better opportunities elsewhere. The government needs to create an environment where tech companies actually want to invest in R&D here, not just set pie-in-the-sky goals for 2040 that nobody will be around to hold them accountable for.
It’s utterly frustrating! The leadership talks about becoming an “AI island” but then actively restricts access to tools and platforms from one of the two major AI hubs in the world. How can you innovate if you’re cutting off knowledge flows? Singapore gets it right—pragmatism over ideology. Our policies seem designed to hold us back, not propel us forward.
I’m tired of the constant negativity. Progress takes time. Setting a long-term vision for 2040 provides a direction for universities and businesses to align with. You can’t build a tech ecosystem overnight. The criticism about “no Taiwanese LLM” is fair, but maybe our comparative advantage lies in hardware for AI, like semiconductors, which we already dominate.
