威權體制內部的民主制度:中國大陸民衆體制內政治參與對其政治態度的影響

Nominally Democratic Institutions in Authoritarian Regimes: The Impact of Political Participation on the Political Attitudes of Chinese People

周嘉辰(Chelsea C. Chou) ; 謝銘元(Ming-yuan Hsieh)

政治學報;66期 (2018/12) P1 - 28

關鍵字:威權體制, 名義上的民主機構, 政治參與 , 中國大陸 , Authoritarianism, Nominally Democratic Institutions , Political Participation , China

中文摘要

近年來,政治學界關於比較威權主義的分析取得了許多突破性的進展。在最近的研究中,許多學者將焦點置於威權體制內部具有民主形式的制度,包括政黨、立法機構與半競爭性的選舉等。相較於現有文獻,本文將焦點置於一般民眾的參與經驗,探究這些形式上民主制度的設立,是否會對個人對於威權體制的政治態度產生影響。基於「亞洲民主動態調查」第四波的中國大陸調查資料,本文利用「傾向分數匹配」的研究設計,探討威權體制內部的民主制度的作用。在中國大陸,體制內的政治參主要為村委會與居委會選舉,我們發現,當中國大陸民眾有這些投票經驗時,他們對現有政治體制有更為正面的看法。同時,研究結果也顯示,個人的參與效應在對中央政府的態度方面,比對地方政府更加深刻,反映出中國大陸基層投票制度的直接受益者為中央政府。我們的研究結果肯定這種名義上的民主制度對於鞏固威權體制的作用。

英文摘要:

Studies on authoritarianism have made a significant breakthrough since the late 2000s. In the recent development, many scholars focus on the role of nominally democratic institutions, including political parties, legislature, and semi-competitive elections. This paper examines the relationship between Chinese people's participation in state-authorized institutions and their attitudes toward the political regime and the performance of the government. Devising a matching design to study the Wave 4th China national survey of the Asian Barometer, this paper finds that when Chinese citizens have voted in the local election, they are more likely to have a positive view about the political system. In addition, this experience is more helpful in improving their evaluation about the central government's performance than the local government's. In other words, the Chinese central government is the direct beneficiary of its local nominally democratic institutions. Our study confirms that ordinary citizens' attitudes toward the authoritarian government are influenced by their participatory experiences in nominally democratic institutions.

全文下載:連結

政治知識的來源:社經地位、傳統媒體使用與新媒體使用

Sources of Political Knowledge: Socioeconomic Status, Media Use, and New Media Use

劉嘉薇(Jia-wei Liu)

政治學報;66期 (2018/12) P29 - 63

關鍵字:政治知識, 知溝理論 , 社經地位, 媒體使用 , 新媒體 , Political Knowledge , Knowledge-Gap Theory , Socioeconomic Status , Media Use , New Media

中文摘要

政治知識意指民眾對於政治事實的認知,過去國內文獻對政治知識的來源多集中於社經地位和傳統媒體使用的討論,對於新媒體的興起,雖蔚為話題,但卻沒有系統性地討論新媒體使用與政治知識的關係,這便是本研究的目的。若新媒體使用對政治知識提升有影響,是全面的影響?還是僅對部分特質的民眾有影響?本研究發現,社經地位仍是造成政治知識鴻溝的原因,電視使用對政治知識提升有其正面影響,但報紙已無此作用。基於理論,本研究採用新的研究設計,將民眾分為不同教育程度進行研究,發現新媒體使用僅能提高教育程度高者的政治知識。雖然社群媒體的本質在社交,然對於公共事務產生的正向價值仍值得追求,特別是在社群媒體上因為知識是共享和共構的,減少了許多組織的成本,使用者可「自動自發」地分享和協作生產-「使用者產生內容」,然此過程中需投入對公共事務的表達和討論,並避免錯誤資訊的分享和生產,才能使網路使用者進而獲取正確的政治知識。

英文摘要:

Political knowledge means the public's understanding of political facts. In the past, the discussion of the sources of political knowledge in the domestic literature focused on the discussion of the use of social and economic status and traditional media. The rise of new media is a topic, but there is no systematic discussion of the relationship between the use of new media and political knowledge and that is the purpose of this study. If the use of new media has an impact on the increase of political knowledge, would it have an overall impact or would it affect only some public? Social status is still the cause of the political knowledge gap. Television use can enhance political knowledge, but newspaper cannot. Based on the theory (new media affect political knowledge only in higher-education people), this study adopts the new research design, we divide the people into different education levels (high/middle/low education), and finds that the use of new media can only improve the political knowledge of those who are highly educated. Compared with the influence of various media on the use of political knowledge, the majority of television have their positive significance. Although the essence of social media is social (communicate with others, not get knowledge), the positive value of public affairs is still worth pursuing, especially spending less time working in the organization for users to share and collaborate on generated content. However, it will require the expression and discussion of public affairs and avoid the sharing and production of false information in order to enable Internet users to get the correct political knowledge.

全文下載:連結

總統和國會的權力平衡與憲政衝突:以總統國會制國家祕魯、俄羅斯、喬治亞和葡萄牙為例

Balance of Power and Constitutional Conflict Between President and Parliament: Comparing Georgia, Peru, Portugal with Russia

蔡榮祥(Jung-hsiang Tsai)

政治學報;66期 (2018/12) P65 - 101

關鍵字:總統國會制 , 憲法權力, 權力平衡, 憲政衝突, President-Parliamentary Systems, Constitutional Powers , Balance of Power , Constitutional Conflict

中文摘要

本文的研究問題有二:一、為何特定的總統國會制國家之憲政運作,較容易促成總統和國會的權力對抗(或妥協讓步)?二、府會衝突或和解如何影響半總統制民主的運作?主要的研究發現為總統國會制國家在少數政府或共治政府時期最容易發生行政和立法機關的衝突。當行政和立法機關之間的衝突發生在強總統和強國會對立的模式中,很容易升高成政權危機或是出現憲政崩潰。因為強總統和強國會彼此之間的憲法權力對等或武器相當,特別是在不同黨派分別控制總統和國會時,很容易促成抗衡結果。當行政和立法的互動模式屬於強總統和次強國會的對應時,總統可以略勝國會一籌,推行自己屬意的政策,而當國會可以聚集足夠的多數時,總統還是會受到國會的阻撓,不能恣意行事。當總統擁有較少的憲政武器例如總統並無單邊的委任立法權以及國會擁有低門檻的反否決權時,屬於次強總統對上強國會的設想狀況。此時總統可能相對地較為弱勢,因為國會掌握了立法的最後決定權。當總統只擁有否決權以及國會需要高的門檻才能撤銷總統的否決時,則屬於次強總統和次強國會之間的互動模式。這種模式較可能出現均勢的結果,亦即任何一方無法凌駕對方,雙方必須尋求妥協和讓步。本文以秘魯、俄羅斯、喬治亞和葡萄牙(1976~1982)四個總統國會制國家的運作經驗來說明四種不同的行政和立法的權力平衡與憲政衝突高低之間的關係。

英文摘要:

Why some president-parliamentary countries are much easier to facilitate power struggle between the president and parliament and why other president-parliament countries are more likely to encourage compromise or negotiation between the president and parliament are the major research questions of this paper. Four scenarios can be envisioned. First, in the scenario of strong president vs. strong parliament, it is more possible to entice regime crises and democratic breakdown. Second, in the scenario of strong president vs. moderate parliament, the president prevails over the parliament and can promote his preferred policies. However, when the parliament can muster enough votes to pass a bill or override the president's veto, the parliament can have a check on the enactment of presidential powers. Third, in the scenario of moderate president vs. strong parliament, the president does not have unilateral power such as decree power and the parliament has the final authority of legislation. Fourth, in the scenario of moderate president vs. moderate parliament, both branches hang in the balance. This paper illustrates the framework by analyzing the cases of Peru, Russia, Georgia, and Portugal (1976-1982).

全文下載:連結