No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
This paper reviews the study of Taiwan politics in the field of public administration, focusing on the concurrence of two reforms: democratization and new public management (NPM). The most vehement criticism against NPM has been voiced by the advocates of substantial democracy. They believe that, by encouraging individuals to pursue maximized self-interest, this efficiency-oriented movement only serves to attenuate the moral dimensions of democratic life, leaving underdeveloped such values as social justice, equality, social solidarity, and public-spirited participation. Such an observation leads to the following intellectual curiosity: what would happen if one country were to go through both democratization and NPM simultaneously, as is the case with many countries today? In an attempt to answer this question and to illustrate the dynamics between these two reforms, this paper examines Taiwan’s history of administrative development. The findings challenge the common understanding that these two reforms are mutually incompatible. The main argument is that there is in fact a synergic interaction between the reforms during their initial phase. Because the NPM reforms actually advocate certain core values also shared by liberal democracies, and because NPM measures help fulfill certain political functions for regime transition, the two reforms actually reinforce each other early on in the process. Nevertheless, as democratization proceeds, such advanced goals as improving the quality of civil society and promoting grass-roots deliberation with regard to a collective future begin to be emphasized on the reform agenda. NPM at this later stage is found to impose
Loading…
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 14 citations exist upstream.
Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.