Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wzw2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-07T20:48:14.210Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Political Institutions and the Malaise of East Asian New Democracies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 March 2016

Tun-jen Cheng
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Although quite a few third-wave democracies in Southern and Central Europe became consolidated within a decade of their origin, all of those in East Asia are still fragile and fledgling. Ever since South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, and the Philippines embarked on democratic transition or restoration more than a decade ago, elections have been regularly held, and democratic competition is widely considered the only path to power. Rough edges remain, however. Rules are stretched, even bent. Political stalemate tends to delay, if not prevent, timely policy action. And public cynicism toward underperforming, if not malfunctioning, democracy in these four polities is so pervasive and unnerving that pundits warn against a crisis of governance in East Asia's new democracies.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of East Asian Studies , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , April 2003 , pp. 1 - 41
Copyright
Copyright © East Asia Institute 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aoki, Masahiko. 2001. Towards a Comparative Institutional Analysis. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Armstrong, Charles. 1997. “The Politics of Transition in North and South Korea.” In McCann, David R., ed., Korea Briefing. Boulder, Colo.: Westview, pp. 5–24.Google Scholar
Auerback, Marshall. 2001. “Thailand's Election: More Signs of Backlash Against the West.” Japan Policy Research Institute Paper no. 21.Google Scholar
Cheng, Tun-jen. 2001. “The Economic Significance of Taiwan's Democratization.” In Mai, Chao-cheng and Shih, Chien-sheng, eds., Taiwan's Economic Success Since 1980. London: Edward Elgar, pp. 120–155.Google Scholar
Cheng, Tun-jen, and Chou, Tein-cheng. 2000. “Legislative Factions in Taiwan.” In Dittmer, Lowell, Fukui, Haruhiro, and Lee, Peter, eds., Informal Politics in East Asia. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 42–65.Google Scholar
Cheng, Tun-jen, and Haggard, Stephan. 2001. “Democracy and Deficits in Taiwan: The Politics of Fiscal Policy, 1986–1996.” In Haggard, Stephan and McCubbins, Mathew D., eds., Presidents, Parliaments, and Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 183–225.Google Scholar
Cheng, Tun-jen, and Hsu, Yung-ming. 1996. “Issue Structure, the DPP's Factionalism, and Party Realignment.” In Tien, Hung-mao, ed., Taiwan's Electoral Politics and Democratic Transition. Armonk, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe, pp. 137–173.Google Scholar
Cheng, Tun-jen, and Hsu, Yung-ming. 2002. “Strategic Voting, the Third Party, and the Non-Duvergerian Outcome: The 2000 March Election in Comparative and Historical Perspectives.” In Dickson, Bruce and Chao, Chien-min, eds., Assessing the Lee Teng-hui Legacy in Taiwan's Politics. Armonk, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe, pp. 148–176.Google Scholar
China Times (various issues).Google Scholar
Cox, Gary. 1987. The Efficient Secret. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Crawford, Sue E. S., and Ostrom, Elinor. 1995. “A Grammar of Institutions.” American Political Science Review 89(3): 582–600.Google Scholar
Diamond, Larry. 1996. “Three Paradoxes of Democracy.” In Diamond, and Plattner, Marc F., eds., The Global Resurgence of Democracy, 2d ed. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 111–123.Google Scholar
Diamond, Larry, and Kim, Byung-Kook, eds. 2000. Consolidating Democracy in South Korea. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
Finer, Samuel E. 1975. “Adversary Politics and Electoral Reforms.” In Finer, Samuel, ed., Adversary Politics and Electoral Reforms. London: William Clowes and Sons (copyright by Anthony Wigram).Google Scholar
Girling, John L. S. 1981. Thailand: Society and Politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Haggard, Stephan. 2000. The Political Economy of the Asian Financial Crisis. Washington, D.C.: Institute of International Economics.Google Scholar
Haggard, Stephan, and Kaufman, Robert. 1995. The Political Economy of Democratic Transitions. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hicken, Allen D. 2002. “Party Systems, Political Institutions, and Policy: Policymaking in Developing Democracies.” Ph.D. diss., University of California–San Diego.Google Scholar
Hsu, Yungming. 1999. “A Tale of Two Cities: Minority Politics and Strategic Voting in the 1994 and 1998 Taipei Mayoral Races.” Paper presented at the Taiwan Political Science Association (in Chinese).Google Scholar
Huntington, Samuel P. 1968. Political Order in Changing Societies. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Hutchcraft, Paul. 1998. Booty Capitalism: The Politics of Banking in the Philippines. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Kerkvliet, Benedict J., and Mojares, Resil B. 1991. “Introduction.” In Kerkvliet, Benedict J. and Mojares, Resil B., eds., From Marcos to Aquino. Manila: Ateneo de Manila University Press.Google Scholar
Kim, Byung-Kook. 2000. “The Politics of Crisis and a Crisis of Politics: The Presidency of Kim Dae-Jung.” In Oh, Kongdan, ed., Korea Briefing 1997–1999. Armonk, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe, pp. 35–74.Google Scholar
Kim, Yong-Ho. 1998. “Korea.” In Sachsenroder, Wolfgang and Frings, Ulrike E., eds., Political Party Systems and Democratic Development in East and Southeast Asia, vol. 2. Aldershot, England: Ashgate, pp. 132–178.Google Scholar
Leones, Errol B., and Moraleda, Miel. 1998. “Philippines.” In Sachsenroder, Wolfgang and Frings, Ulrike E., eds., Political Party Systems and Democratic Development in East and Southeast Asia, vol. 1. Aldershot, England: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Lewis-Beck, Michael S. 1990. Economics and Elections: The Major Western Democracies. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Lijphart, Arend. 1999. “SNTV and STV Compared.” In Grofman, Bernard et al., eds., Elections in Japan, Korea, and Taiwan Under the Single, Non-Transferable Vote. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 289–299.Google Scholar
Lijphart, Arend, ed. 1992. Parliamentary Versus Presidential Government. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Limmanee, Anusorn. 1998. “Thailand.” In Sachsenroder, Wolfgang and Frings, Ulrike E., eds., Political Party Systems and Democratic Development in East and Southeast Asia, vol. 1. Aldershot, England: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Linz, Juan J. 1990. “The Perils of Presidentialism.” Journal of Democracy 1(1): 51–69.Google Scholar
Linz, Juan J. 1997. “Introduction: Some Thoughts on Presidentialism in Postcommunist Europe.” In Taras, Ray, ed., Postcommunist Presidents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–14.Google Scholar
Linz, Juan J., and Stepan, Alfred. 1996. “Consolidating New Democracies.” Journal of Democracy 7(2): 14–33.Google Scholar
Linz, Juan J., and Valenzuela, Arturo, eds. 1994. The Failure of Presidential Democracy in Latin America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Liu, I-chou. 1999. “Campaigning in an SNTV System: The Case of the Kuomintang in Taiwan.” In Grofman, Bernard et al., eds., Elections in Japan, Korea and Taiwan under the Single, Non-Transferable Vote. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 181–210.Google Scholar
Mainwaring, Scott, and Scully, Timothy R. 1995. “Introduction.” In Mainwaring, Scott and Scully, Timothy R., eds., Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin America. Stanford: Stanford University Press, pp. 1–35.Google Scholar
Mainwaring, Scott, and Shugart, Matthew Soberg. 1997. “Conclusion: Presidentialism and the Party System.” In Mainwaring, Scott and Shugart, Matthew Soberg, eds., Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 394–439.Google Scholar
Maisrikrod, Surin. 2002. “Political Reform and the New Thai Electoral System: Old Habits Die Hard?” In Hsieh, John and Newman, David, eds., How Asia Votes. New York: Chatham House, pp. 187–209.Google Scholar
McCargo, Duncan. 1997. “Thailand's Political Parties: Real, Authentic, and Actual.” In Hewison, Kevin, ed., Political Change in Thailand. London: Routledge, pp. 114–131.Google Scholar
McCargo, Duncan. 2002. “Balancing the Checks: Thailand's Paralyzed Governance Post-1997.” Paper presented at the workshop “Crisis of Democratic Governance in Asia.” Taipei, Taiwan, March 12–13.Google Scholar
Mo, Jongryn. 2002. “Accountability and Capability: Striking a New Balance in Korea.” Paper presented at the workshop “Crisis of Democratic Governance in Asia.” Taipei, Taiwan, March 12–13.Google Scholar
Montesano, Michael J. 2001. “Thailand in 2000: Shifting Politics, Dragging Economy, and Troubled Border.” Asian Survey 41(1): 171–180.Google Scholar
Morell, David, and Samudavanija, Chai-anan. 1981. Political Conflict in Thailand: Reform, Reaction, Revolution. Cambridge, Mass.: Oelgeschlager, Gunn, and Hain.Google Scholar
Murray, David. 1996. “The 1995 National Elections in Thailand.” Asian Survey 36(4): 361–375.Google Scholar
New York Times (various issues).Google Scholar
O'Donnell, Guillermo. 1996. “Delegative Democracy.” In Diamond, Larry and Plattner, Marc F., eds., The Global Resurgence of Democracy. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 94–110.Google Scholar
Park, Chan Wook. 2002. “Election in Democratizing Korea.” In Hsieh, John and Newman, David, eds., How Asia Votes. New York: Chatham House, pp. 118–146.Google Scholar
Przeworski, Adam. 1991. Democracy and the Market: Political and Economic Reform in Eastern Europe and Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rokkan, Stein. 1970. Citizens, Elections, Parties: Approaches to the Comparative Study of the Process of Development. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Rood, Steven. 2002. “Elections as Complicated and Important Events in the Philippines.” In Hsieh, John and Newman, David, eds., How Asia Votes. New York: Chatham House, pp. 147–164.Google Scholar
Shugart, Matthew Soberg, and Carey, John. 1992. Presidents and Assemblies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shugart, Matthew Soberg, and Mainwaring, Scott. 1997. “Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America: Rethinking the Terms of the Debate.” In Mainwaring, Scott and Shugart, Matthew Soberg, eds., Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 12–54.Google Scholar
Taipei Times (various issues).Google Scholar
Taylor, Brian. 2001. The Civilian-Military Relationship in Russia. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Thies, Michael. 2001. “Keeping Tabs on Partners: The Logic of Delegation in Coalition Government.” American Journal of Political Science 45(3): 580–598.Google Scholar
von Mettenheim, Kurt, ed. 1997. “Introduction.” In Mettenheim, Kurt von, ed., Presidential Institutions and Democratic Politics. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 1–14.Google Scholar
Wu, Yu-shan. 2000. “The ROC's Semi-Presidentialism at Work.” Issues and Studies 36(5): 1–40.Google Scholar
Wurfel, David. 1988. Filipino Politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar