透過您的圖書館登入
IP:18.117.142.128
  • 期刊
  • OpenAccess

政治制度與金融改革-台灣與韓國的比較

Political Institution and Financial Reform: A Comparison between Taiwan and South Korea

摘要


台灣與韓國分別從2000年與1998年開始進行了類似的金融改革,但成效差異甚大,韓國的改革成效卓著,台灣的改革卻成效不彰。何以如此?兩國的政治制度影響頗巨。政治制度會引導行動者進行政治互動,並型塑出政策過程的普遍特徵。金大中利用韓國政治制度的特點,建構出國會的多數聯盟以推動政策,這是何以韓國的金融改革能成效卓著。陳水扁則受台灣政治制度的引導走向少數政府,欠缺穩定的國會多數支持,這也導致台灣的金融改革成效不彰。

並列摘要


South Korea initiated major financial reforms from 1998 to 2000. Taiwan also enacted similar reforms from 2000 to 2006, but the effects were vastly different. In short, the reforms of South Korea were comprehensive and effective compared to the reforms made in Taiwan. Why were the results so different? The key is whether the political leaders of each country obtained stable support from a congressional majority as they endeavored to implement policies. Obtaining stable support in congress is essential for effective policy implementation, and such support is conditioned by political institutions in these two countries. Kim Dae-jung successfully applied the characteristics of the political institutions in Korea to construct a majority coalition in congress to support his policies. The financial reforms in Korea thus thrived. On the other hand, Chen Shui-bian in Taiwan was forced to form a minority government by way of the political institutions in Taiwan. Without a majority of the congress to support his policies, financial reforms in Taiwan were ineffective.

參考文獻


盛治仁(2006)。單一選區兩票制對未來臺灣政黨政治發展之可能影響探討。台灣民主季刊。3(2),63-86。
林繼文(2006)。政府體制、選舉制度與政黨體系─一個配套論的分析。選舉研究。13(2),1-35。
林繼文(2009)。共治可能成為半總統制的憲政慣例嗎?法國與台灣的比較。東吳政治學報。27(1),1-51。
陳宏銘(2007)。台灣半總統制下「少數政府」的存續:2000~2004。東吳政治學報。25(4),1-64。
陳尚懋(2007)。台灣金融改革的政治分析─ACTA模型的檢驗。東吳政治學報。25(1),115-160。

被引用紀錄


劉冬(2016)。台灣、韓國積極勞動市場政策之比較分析:以歷史制度論觀點為基礎〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU201602205
林泓泰(2015)。從韓三國統一探討現代韓半島分裂局勢〔碩士論文,國立中正大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0033-2110201614005333

延伸閱讀