Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis article integrates the termination literature with the Punctuated‐Equilibrium (P‐E) model of policy change into a broader framework of policy termination to examine the Chen Shui‐bian administration's abrupt decision to terminate Taiwan's fourth nuclear power plant (FNPP) as well as to explore the evolution of agenda‐setting for the FNPP's termination over a decade. The termination of the FNPP may be viewed as a result of interactions among the nuclear policy image, the institutional venue, and the political or policy strategy over time, as indicated in the integrated framework. Nevertheless, changing nuclear policy image is not sufficient to automatically change the institutional venue in the process of Taiwan's transition from an authoritarian regime to a pluralist political system. Before venue shopping for policy termination, antinuclear activists had to ally with the Democratic Progressive Party to struggle for opening up Taiwan's political institutions along with Taiwan's democratization. On the other hand, as a consequence of Taiwan's recent democratization, antinuclear activists were unsuccessful in terminating the FNPP in the absence of sufficient political resources, notwithstanding a major venue change from the Kuomintang (KMT) government to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government under President Chen's leadership. Furthermore, besides domestic venues, international institutions also appear to be important to the creation and maintenance of the nuclear policy system, as well as to the dramatic reversal of the Chen administration's termination decision in this case.

This article integrates the termination literature with the Punctuated-Equilibrium (P-E) model of policy change into a broader framework of policy termination to examine the Chen Shui-bian administration's abrupt decision to terminate Taiwan's fourth nuclear power plant (FNPP) as well as to explore the evolution of agenda-setting for the FNPP's termination over a decade. The termination of the FNPP may be viewed as a result of interactions among the nuclear policy image, the institutional venue, & the political or policy strategy over time, as indicated in the integrated framework. Nevertheless, changing nuclear policy image is not sufficient to automatically change the institutional venue in the process of Taiwan's transition from an authoritarian regime to a pluralist political system. Before venue shopping for policy termination, antinuclear activists had to ally with the Democratic Progressive Party to struggle for opening up Taiwan's political institutions along with Taiwan's democratization. On the other hand, as a consequence of Taiwan's recent democratization, antinuclear activists were unsuccessful in terminating the FNPP in the absence of sufficient political resources, notwithstanding a major venue change from the Kuomintang (KMT) government to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government under President Chen's leadership. Furthermore, besides domestic venues, international institutions also appear to be important to the creation & maintenance of the nuclear policy system, as well as to the dramatic reversal of the Chen administration's termination decision in this case. 55 References. Adapted from the source document.

This article focuses on the effects of democratization and changing intergovernmental relations on Taiwan's watershed management. It also includes the case of the TaipeiWatershed Management Bureau in managing an individual watershed, the Taipei Water Special Area, to assess the problems of intergovernmental coordination and collaboration in watershed management under the context of Taiwan's democratization. This article indicates that efforts to promote intergovernmental coordination and local support cannot be avoided to achieve watershed policy effectiveness, despite the recent centralization of water governance and a restructuring of a commission-based agency into a single-head agency. It argues that under the effect of democratization, watershed management in Taiwan must be capable of dealing with the issues of local participation, intergovernmental coordination and collaboration, and conflicting demands on water and land resources management, to include a demand for adequate compensation of stakeholder costs, if watershed management is to be both sustainable and legitimate.