Taiwan has had a packed agenda for the past few months. From recall elections and the four referendums to the upcoming legislative by-election for Taichung’s second electoral district, Taiwanese have been pouring time and energy into politics, which has been laborious.

The voter turnout rate for the Dec. 18 referendum was 41.09 percent, far lower than the about 75 percent for last year’s presidential election. Since the referendum questions were about policymaking, not candidates, it was hardly surprising that it did not garner as much attention and interest.

The lifting of a ban on the importation of pork containing traces of ractopamine will help Taiwan set up international trade partnerships.

Now that the referendum chaos is left behind, the ban will not be reinstated. Taiwanese voters turned their backs on mindless populism in favor of rationality, demonstrated exceptional maturity, and acted as an impressive check and balance on the political process.

Three years ago, Taiwanese who were opposed to the importation of food products from northeastern Japan started labeling them “nuclear foods” and pushed for the world’s first and only “anti-nuclear food referendum.”

Bigger is not necessarily better, especially as regards nations. In the business world, using the Boston Consulting Group matrix, a company or corporation might aid its growth and power by purchasing other select companies to add to its portfolio. Later, it might divest and choose to sell its “dogs” and even “cash cows” when they approach becoming clear liabilities. All this is done to please shareholders.

The practice does not fit the world of nations, especially as regards the “big three”: the US, China and Russia. The world of people is not the same as the zero-sum game of business.