Asian new democracies the philippines, south korea and taiwan compared

Tai Lieu Chat Luong Asian New Democracies: The Philippines, South Korea and Taiwan Compared Edited by Hsin-Huang Michael Hsiao Center for Asia-Pacific Area Studies Taiwan Foundation for Democracy RCHSS, Academia Sinica Taipei, Taiwan 2008 First published 2006, Second printing 2008 by the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy and the Center for AsiaPacific Area Studies, RCHSS, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan Taiwan Foundation for Democracy No 4, Alley 17, Lane 147, Sec 3, Sinyi Rd., Taipei 106, Taiwan Phone +886-2-27080100 / Fax +886-2-27081148 tfd@taiwandemocracy.org.tw http://www.tfd.org.tw Center for Asia-Pacific Area Studies, RCHSS, Academia Sinica No 128 Academia Rd., Sec 2, Taipei 115, Taiwan Tel: 886-2-2782-2191, 886-2-2782-2195 / Fax: 886-2-2782-2199 capas@gate.sinica.edu.tw http://www.sinica.edu.tw/~capas/ Ⓒ Taiwan Foundation for Democracy and Center for Asia-Pacific Area Studies, RCHSS, Academia Sinica 2008 The book is in copyright All rights reserved No parts of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without prior permission in writing from the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy and the Center for Asia-Pacific Area Studies, RCHSS, Academia Sinica Center for Asia-Pacific Area Studies Library Cataloging-in-Publication Data Hsiao, Hsin-Huang Michael, 1948Asian New Democracies: The Philippines, South Korea and Taiwan Compared / edited by Hsin-Huang Michael Hsiao p cm Includes bibliographical references GPN 1009704170 ; ISBN 978-986-82904-0-2 Democracy Philippines Congresses Philippines Politics and government 21st century Congresses Democracy Korea (South) Congresses Korea (South) Politics and government 21st century Congresses Democracy Taiwan Congresses Taiwan Politics and government 21st century Congresses I Hsiao, HsinHuang Michael JQ1416.A85 2008 Printed in Taipei, Taiwan Contents Acknowledgements Contributors v vi Part Ⅰ: Introduction Recapturing Asian New Democracies and Putting Taiwan in Its Place Hsin-Huang Michael Hsiao Part II: The Philippines The Crisis of Philippine Democracy Temario C Rivera 17 Rebuilding Democratic Institutions: Civil-military Relations in Philippine Democratic Governance Carolina G Hernandez 39 The Changing Character of Local Government Officials: Implications to Clientilism and Traditional Politics in the Philippines Virginia A Miralao 57 Democratic Consolidation and the Challenge of Poverty in the Philippines Cynthia Bautista 85 iv Asian New Democracies: The Philippines, South Korea and Taiwan Compared Part III: South Korea Political Parties and Democratic Consolidation in Korea Kie-Duck Park 127 Limited Democratization and the Future of Democracy in Korea Kwang-Yeong Shin 157 Human Rights as a Qualifier and a Catalyst for Korea’s Democracy Hyo-Je Cho 179 Part IV: Taiwan Civil Society and Democratization in Taiwan: 1980-2005 Hsin-Huang Michael Hsiao 207 10 Taiwanese Nationalism and Democratic Values Mau-Kuei Michael Chang 231 11 Taiwan’s Party Realignments in Transition Chia-Lung Lin and I-Chung Lai 255 12 Referendum: A New Way of Identifying National Identity Yung-Ming Hsu, Chia-Hung Tsai and Hsiu-Tin Huang 271 13 The Prospects of Deliberative Democracy in Taiwan Dung-Sheng Chen and Kuo-Ming Lin 289 Acknowledgements The current book originated in an International Symposium on Asia's New Democracies held at the Center for Asia-Pacific Area Studies (CAPAS), Academia Sinica, on September 2-3, 2004 It was co-organized by CAPAS and the Asia Foundation in Taiwan (AFIT) with a generous conference grant from Taiwan Foundation for Democracy (TFD) As the organizer of the symposium and the editor of this volume, I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to AFIT for its decision to put that symposium on the priority agenda, and to TFD for its financial support which made that symposium and the book possible I also owe my thanks to the staff of the three organizations who have helped in different phases of the symposium Dr Martin Williams and Miss Sangha were helpful with English polishing on the revised manuscripts submitted for publication by TFD I gratefully acknowledge all their contributions Hsin-Huang Michael Hsiao Taipei July 2006 Contributors Bautista, Maria Cynthia Department of Sociology, University of the Philippines, Diliman, the Philippines Chang, Mau-Kuei Michael Institute of Sociology, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan Chen, Dung-Sheng Department of Sociology, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan Cho, Hyo-Je Department of Social Sciences, SungKongHoe University, Seoul, South Korea Hernandez, Carolina G Department of Political Science, University of the Philippines, Diliman, the Philippines Hsiao, Hsin-Huang Michael Center for Asia-Pacific Area Studies (CAPAS), RCHSS and Institute of Sociology, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan Huang, Hsiu-Tin Department of Political Science, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan Hsu, Yung-Ming Research Center for Humanities and Social Sciences (RCHSS), Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan Lai, I-Chung Department of China Affairs, Democratic Progressive Party, Taipei, Taiwan Contributors vii Lin, Chia-Lung Central Committee, Democratic Progressive Party, Taipei, Taiwan Lin, Kuo-Ming Department of Sociology, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan Miralao, Virginia A Philippine Social Science Council, Manila, the Philippines Park, Kie-Duck The Sejong Institute, Seoul, South Korea Rivera, Temario C Division of International Studies, International Christian University, Tokyo, Japan Shin, Kwang-Yeong Department of Sociology, Chung-Ang University, Seoul, South Korea Tsai, Chia-Hung The Election Study Center, National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan PART I Introduction Recapturing Asian New Democracies and Putting Taiwan in Its Place Hsin-Huang Michael Hsiao I Introduction Most of the chapters in this volume were first presented at the International Symposium on Asia’s New Democracies: Taiwan, The Philippines and South Korea Compared, jointly sponsored by The Asia Foundation in Taiwan (AFIT), Taiwan Foundation for Democracy (TFD), and Center for Asia-Pacific Area Studies (CAPAS) of Academia Sinica, held in Taipei on September 2-3, 2004 A total of fifteen social scientists from the three new democratic countries under study have attended this important symposium and enthusiastically shared their keen observation of what have and have not been achieved democratically in their own countries and what lessons could be learned among the three Asian democracies At that symposium, four general themes were discussed, i.e., political and legal aspects of democratic consolidation, social and cultural factors of democratic consolidation, unique features of Asia’s three new democracies, and prospects of the new democracies in Asia During the course of two day intensive discussions, the issues such as electoral politics in democratic transition, political parties’ role in consolidating new democracy, building normal civil-military relations in democratic governance, changing role of advocacy civil society organizations in various phases of democratic development, the real and potential threats of armed movements, regional conflicts, ethnic cleavages and class contradiction to the formation of new democracy, the issues of national identity and constitutional reforms in democratic consolidation, democracy’s impacts on center-local power dynamics, democracy and the protection of human rights, and the prospects of direct democracy in the forms of referendum and deliberative democracy were touched and elaborated The Prospects of Deliberative Democracy in Taiwan 293 “Taiwanese” (72%) voted in the referendum, while most who not consider themselves “Taiwanese” (85%) did not The problems with the referendum were exacerbated by a lack of public participation and deliberative discussion, the result of people lacking the opportunity to understand why fellow citizens develop different positions as well as the ability to respect the opinions of others Therefore, the initiation of referenda, which might have contributed to a more mature democracy, faces serious challenges It is apparent that democratic development needs other practices that can help move the country beyond the limits of representative institutions and referenda These problems can be improved by practices of deliberative democracy to a certain extent Deliberative practices can contribute to the development of Taiwan’s democracy by improving the public’s policy literacy, political efficacy, sense of solidarity and increasing the average person’s motivation to participate in public life When citizens are willing to participate in public affairs, civic society tends to possess the capability of checking and balancing administrative apparatuses; this is especially important in a country with an authoritarian legacy and legislative organizations steeped in money politics Moreover, deliberative public discussion provides an open channel for citizens to express their thoughts about policy risks and any professional knowledge that can guide policy in the direction of the public interest The practice also functions as an arena for exchanging different perspectives and learning how to respect difference This way, social cleavages could be diminished to a certain extent Recently, various models of deliberative democracy have been developed and implemented in European, American and Asian countries In Taiwan, a taskforce formed by sociologists, political scientists, legal scholars and health policy researchers learned about deliberative democracy practices and attempted pilot projects such as a citizens’ conference, deliberative polls, perspective workshops and scenario workshops A list of milestones in the development of deliberative democracy can be seen in Table In 2001, the citizens’ conference was convened and followed by a trial of deliberative polls in 2002 After these experiments, the taskforce began to develop a new method in 2003, the group-citizen forum, which increases from a small number of participants into a larger number to display the opinions of groups and individual citizens and compare them One of the main purposes of innovating participatory methods is to establish a method that enriches 294 Asian New Democracies: The Philippines, South Korea and Taiwan Compared Taiwan’s political, social and cultural contexts In 2003, the taskforce chose the improvement of health quality as a scenario workshop topic The trial helped the taskforce to compile a standard operating procedure for scenario workshops and to highlight the opinions of citizens on the quality of health Table Year 2001/11 Milestones in the Development of Deliberative Democracy in Taiwan Method and Issue Citizen Conference on Level of Practices National Level Health Insurance Deliberative Polls on Force National Level Payment Methods of A Combination of Group Force National Level Forum and Citizen Scenario Workshop on National Taiwan University Task Forum 2003/11 National Taiwan University Task Health Insurance 2002/11 National Taiwan University Task Resource Allocation 2002/5 Organization Force National Level Health Care Quality National Taiwan University Task Force 2004/3 Training Workshop for Local Level (Peitou National Taiwan practices of Citizen Community College) University Task Conference 2004/6 Citizen Conference on Force Local Level the future of the Peitou Hot Spring Museum 2004/9 Citizen Conference on The Peitou Culture Foundation and NTU task force National Level Surrogate Motherhood National Taiwan University Task Force 2004/9 Training Workshop for National Level (Seven National Taiwan practices of Citizen local organizations from University Task Conference different places) Force 2004/10 National Youth National Level National Youth 2004/11 Citizen Conference on Conference Council Metropolitan Level National Taiwan the metropolitan sky-cab University Task project Force The Prospects of Deliberative Democracy in Taiwan 2004/11 Citizen Conference on Local Level 295 The Peitou Culture Peitou City Foundation, Gentrification Professional Planning Group, and National Taiwan University Task Force 2004/11 Internet Citizen Local Level The Peitou Culture Conference on Peitou Foundation, City Gentrification Professional Planning Group, and Shih Hsin University Task Force 2004/11 Citizen Conference on Local Level Environment Protection for the Tahan River 2004/12 Citizen Conference on The Panchiao Community College Local Level Tax Reform Pingtung, Keelung, Peitou, and Sanchung community colleges 2005/1 Citizen Conference on National Level National Taiwan Sustainable University Task Development of Force National Health Insurance 2005/5 Citizen Conference on Genetic Therapy National Level National Taiwan University Task Force After three years of preparations for various modules of deliberative democracy, the taskforce started to collaborate with the National Association of Community Colleges to organize the first training workshop on citizen conference practices in early 2004 Then, the first local-level citizen conference was held in April 2004, which was coordinated by the Peitou Community College and the Peitou Cultural Foundation The movement of deliberative democracy has been progressing faster than we expected on both local and national levels 296 Asian New Democracies: The Philippines, South Korea and Taiwan Compared The idea of a citizens’ conference has spread to local associations in Kaohsiung and Taipei in the form of training for workshop participation Conferences organized by local civic groups are taking place in Peitou, Keelung, Pingtung, Sanchung and Panchiao These communities have selected tax reform or protection of local rivers as topics for the conferences In addition, the Kaohsiung City Government has awarded funding to a university research team to hold a citizens’ conference on the ecological impact of a transportation project Meanwhile, a research team at National Taiwan University organized citizens’ conferences on surrogate motherhood, sustainable development of public health insurance and genetic therapy in 2004 and 2005 Different practices of deliberative democracy have been implemented and evaluated by the research team The idea of deliberative democracy has also spread widely among political elites, intellectuals and community activists Some political leaders recognize the importance of deliberative practices in relation to policymaking and Taiwan’s democratic development; they have therefore made deliberative participation for the general public an essential part of floating controversial policies The legalization of surrogate motherhood and the impact of the Kaohsiung transportation project are two examples of this Many community activists also support the idea of deliberative democracy once they have become familiar with its principles; subsequently, they have made a considerable effort to organize local conferences In future, it should be possible to integrate top-down and bottom-up efforts in promoting the idea of deliberative democracy and thus lay a more solid foundation for Taiwan’s democracy III The Impact of Deliberative Processes How does deliberative public discussion help establish civic ability, identity and citizenship? Public discussions promoted by deliberative democracy are a self-training process for participation in public affairs People gain a better understanding of specific public issues by reading background information, listening to each other’s opinions, talking to one another and having their attention and concern focused on the issues at hand In this way they become citizens capable of shaping policies In an in-depth discussion, participants are required to listen to each other’s opinions and attempt to understand why others reach their conclusions; The Prospects of Deliberative Democracy in Taiwan 297 one must also give one’s point of view By doing so, inter-subjective communication free of distortion is possible Citizens gradually form a sense of respect toward one another and reinforce their identity as citizens This is an essential mechanism to build up solidarity among citizens In a public discussion that privileges parity, participants need to give detailed explanations and reasons for their views, but autarchic assertions will not be tolerated Participants must approach problems out of both self-interest and the public interest and try to strike a balance When people begin to display a willingness to take the public interest into consideration, their concerns for other citizens also grow and so lay the foundations for citizenship, solidarity and civic dignity and welfare – the core values of society Denmark is a nation with a long tradition of discussions among grassroots communities With this tradition the country built up citizen solidarity and established a mature democratic system encouraging civic participation and retaining a competent social welfare system, in addition to a highly technological, innovative and egalitarian economy In investigating the impact of deliberative public discussion on attitudes toward national health insurance reform, we will show how policy literacy, political efficacy, motivation of participation and policy attitudes have changed in citizens’ conferences on health resource allocation First, four questions in two questionnaires explored the extent of improvement in knowledge on policy Comparing the results, we found that correct answers increased from 1.6 to 2.9 after the conference We also asked participants to evaluate their knowledge on National Health Insurance (NHI) matters Before the conference, 94% of the panel said they knew nothing or very little about the issues After the conference, 90% said they knew a lot more Both “objective” knowledge tests and “subjective” evaluations showed that the conference produced learning effects In two in-depth interviews, the citizens repeatedly emphasized that they learned a great deal from participating in the conference, and many of them regarded the educational effects the most valuable part of the consensus conference Some pointed out that in the past they had not had access to information about the NHI policies For them, the national health insurance is “paying premiums; visiting doctors.” In the process of the conference, through background readings, dialogues with experts, and discussions with other participants, they were presented with a large amount of policy-relevant information, heard many viewpoints that had 298 Asian New Democracies: The Philippines, South Korea and Taiwan Compared not occurred to them, and began to develop clearer views on the NHI issues Many also pointed to the fact that the knowledge learned during the processes enhanced their abilities to identify problems and to form their own opinions on problem-solving As they became more informed during the public deliberation, the shared common knowledge constituted communicative framework for proposing rational arguments, weighing conflicting evidence and making better judgments Secondly, citizens tend to change some of their values, attitudes and policy preferences when they engage in this process of deliberative public discussions We used multiple measures to evaluate the changes As indicated by the two questionnaire surveys conducted before and after the conference, the participants’ general attitudes toward the NHI system and their specific policy preference The percentage of the participants who said they were satisfied and very satisfied with the NHI system changed from 49% (7/18) to 67% (12/18) after the conference.3 The percentage of the participants who agreed that the best way to solve the problem of fiscal imbalance was to raise premiums changed from 6% (1/18) before the conference to 39% (7/18) after the conference Self-evaluation of changes in policy opinions about the NHI system was asked in the he questionnaire survey after the conference Over 60% of the participants (11/18) reported that their opinions were changed by participation in the conference In in-depth interviews, participants described changes in values and policy preferences in their own terms Attitudes toward the NHI system and preferences for increased premiums showed the most significant change Most of the panel said that it identified more with the causes of the NHI because it embodied values of mutual aid and risk sharing The change in values attached to the program resulted from acquiring more information about the workings of the system As far as higher premiums were concerned, most participants said they opposed them before they attended the conference But by the end of the conference, all agreed to the change This dramatic change in position was brought about by strong values attached to the NHI program that developed from public deliberation, as well as by newly gained knowledge about the fiscal situation of the NHI program As one participant said: “Previously we opposed raising premiums because we didn’t know about the problems But now we have learned that the national health insurance system is suffering a financial crisis The system is taking care of our health and helping many people We don’t want to see the system fall apart The Prospects of Deliberative Democracy in Taiwan 299 Therefore, to maintain the sustainable development [of the system], raising premiums is necessary and reasonable.” Our “solidarity indicator” also showed changes in participants’ values and policy preferences We found that after the conference, there were more participants who agreed that the healthy and the wealthy ought to help the ill and the poor to pay for health services, and disagreed that those who visit doctors more frequently ought to pay more co-payments According to these findings, we are able to say that public discussion has helped participants recognize the public good of NIH and to cultivate a sense of citizen solidarity Thirdly, 83% of participants (15 out of 18) said they were more concerned about and interested in public affairs after the conference In in-depth interviews, about 90% (16 out of 18) of respondents reported that after the conference they kept abreast of and actively discussed NHI issues with one another Most pointed out that the knowledge gained from the conference helped to enhance their interest and willingness to participate in public affairs As one participant put it, “We usually are not concerned about matters that we know nothing about After you have learned something about the issue, you pay much more attention to it.” Another participant pointed to a “virtuous circle” of knowledge-participation: “After participating in an activity, you get knowledge about it, and the knowledge drives you into more participation.” The knowledge the citizens gained from the conference was not only relevant to policy, but also an intellectual exercising of citizenship rights As one participant explained: “I have developed a keen interest in public affairs after the conference Previously, I was indifferent to public affairs I am not like what I was before In the past, I lived in my own sphere of private life But after the conference, I found out that many of our rights are ignored because we are ignorant about these matters Through the process of a consensus conference, I have learned a lot of things, and I will actively participate in public affairs.” These findings are compatible with results from the national youth conference, the deliberative poll, and two citizen conferences According to the results in Table 2, participants increased their policy literacy and a feeling of political efficacy and changed their attitudes toward the public interest to some extent More than 88% of the participants had a strong 300 Asian New Democracies: The Philippines, South Korea and Taiwan Compared motivation to attend different types of deliberative public discussions in the future Generally speaking, deliberative public discussions establish a meaningful channel for citizens to become actively involved in public affairs and to create a strong sense of citizenship Table Effects of Different Types of Deliberative Public Discussion Motivation to Attend Deliberative Public Discussion Before After Change Before After Change Before After Changes Again Policy Literacy* Public Interest Attitude*** Political Efficacy** Deliberative Poll on Payment Collection Methods for NIH (2002，N=215) 2.8 3.7 +0.9 70% 86% +16 61% 81% +20% 88% National Youth Council (2004， N=174) 86% 88% +2% 94% Citizen Conference on Surrogate Motherhood (2004，N=18) 2.8 3.5 +0.7 76% 89% +13% 78% 78% +0% 100% Peitou Hot Spring Museum Citizen Conference (2004，N=13) 1.2 2.7 +1.5 30% 86% 92% +6% 100% Note: * The average number of correct answers in knowledge test questions There are five questions in the deliberative poll, five questions in the surrogate motherhood citizen conference and four questions in the Peitou citizen conference ** We used the question “Are your opinions valuable for policy decision-making?” in the deliberative poll, the National Youth Conference, and the surrogate motherhood citizen conference to measure the concept of political efficacy We used the question “Do you think the Taipei City Government should take the conclusions of the citizens’ conference seriously?” in the Peitou conference to measure the concept of political efficacy *** We used the question “Do you agree that healthy people should help sick people?” in the deliberative poll to measure attitudes toward the The Prospects of Deliberative Democracy in Taiwan 301 public interest We used the question “Do you agree that issues of surrogate motherhood should be discussed and decided on by the general public?” in the surrogate motherhood citizen conference to measure attitudes toward the public interest Finally, we used the question “Do you agree that citizens should be concerned with community affairs?” in the Peitou conference for this measure From the experiences of the various consensus conferences, we found that under proper conditions in which citizens are given opportunities for informed discussion, the ability to deliberate on complex issues using rational arguments privileged the common interest We also found that the deliberation process transformed values and policy preferences, improved intellectual qualities and encouraged an active sense of citizenship The findings have important implications for both democratic practice and democratic theory IV Prospects for Deliberative Democracy in Taiwan To establish informative and egalitarian public discussions as a norm, policy changes from the government are required Nevertheless, grassroot action to establish community public discussion networks is a more important, if difficult, task Denmark began establishing people-houses in rural communities during the 19th century, offering a site for continuing adult education as well as a location for discussing policies or other important issues In the United States the Kettering Foundation, which works to bring community organizations together, established a network for national public discussions It is hoped that public discussion can occur naturally in local communities, offering the general public access to and sufficient information on important policy discussions, as well as the space for public opinion to form a consensus The establishment of public discussion networks is also an important goal for Taiwan, as these networks not only exchange different information and methods of discussion, but also function as platforms for discussion for all as well as a network for mobilizing collective action Perhaps, in future, when this network is firmly established, we might hold a national public discussion day for major policies such as education reform or alternative energy sources, allowing many informed citizens to express their views and reasons for their positions they hold This kind of spontaneous community public participation is an important way of promoting public policy discussion, the establishment of civic society, Asian New Democracies: The Philippines, South Korea and Taiwan Compared 302 and identification with citizenship that can help to improve both the quality and legitimacy of public policies It can also serve to check the power of administrators and legislators and to bring divided social groups together (Wong 2003) The emergence of deliberative public discussion is therefore a key process in Taiwan’s democratic development In the meantime, access to public participation remains limited We therefore cannot criticize citizens as selfish or unworthy voters, because individual social values and actions in a democracy with electoral competition but no public interaction are very different to those of cooperation and collective interest in a democratic system that emphasizes equal access to discussion and the public interest The deepening of democratic development through public participation is not a one-sided process; both grassroots and top-down establishment of public discussion networks require the cooperation of political elites, volunteer groups and the general public This process of transformation is a slow one, and its effects are not very obvious at the beginning It will face many difficulties, but it is also the necessary path for those activists who are concerned about the development of democracy Notes The authors would like to thank the participants for their insightful comments Part of this project was funded by the National Science Council, NSC93-2420-H002-003 Some political scientists have argued that social cleavages derived from national identity have weakened and that civic nationalism is emerging (Lin, Chu, and Hinich 1996; Tien and Chu 1996; T Wong 2001; J Wong 2003) Two of the participants were not surveyed after the conference References Barber, Benjamin R 1998 Three Scenarios for the Future of Technology and Strong Democracy Political Science Quarterly, 113(4): 573-589 Beck, Ulrich 1992 Risk Society: Toward a New Modernity London: Sage Benhabib, Seyla, ed 1996 Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political Princeton: Princeton University Press The Prospects of Deliberative Democracy in Taiwan 303 Bohman, James, and Williwm Rehg 1997 Introduction Pp 67-92 in Deliberative Democracy, eds., James Bohman and William Rehg Cambridge, MA: MIT Press Bohman, James 1996 Public Deliberation Cambridge: MIT Press Chen, Ming-Tung 1995 Local Factions Politics and Political Change in Taiwan Taiwan: Yuen-Tan Chu, Yun-Han 1994 The Realignment of Business-Government Relations and Regime Transition in Taiwan Pp.113-141 in The Changing Government and Business Relations in the Pacific Rim Countries, ed., Andrew MacIntyre Ithaca: Cornell University Press Chu,Yun-Han 1996 Taiwan’s Unique Challenges Journal of Democracy, 7: 69-82 2004 The Predicament and Challenges of Taiwan’s Democratic Development Taiwan Democracy Quarterly, 1: 143-162 Dryzek, John S 1996 Discursive Democracy: Politics, Policy, and Political Science Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2000 Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations Oxford: Oxford University Press Elster, Jon, ed 1998 Deliberative Democracy New York: Cambridge University Press Fishkin, James S 1991 Democracy and Deliberation: New Directions for Democratic Reforms New Haven, CT: Yale University Press Gutman, Amy and Dennis Thompson 1996 Democracy and Disagreement Cambridge MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Lash, Scott and Brian Wynne 1992 Introduction Pp.1-8, in Risk Society: Toward a New Modernity (trans Mark Ritter) London: Sage Lin, Tse-Ming, Yun-Han Chu, and Melvin Hinich 1996 Conflict Displacement and Regime Transition in Taiwan: A Spatial Analysis World Politics, 48: 453 Nino, Carlos Santigao 1996 The Constitution of Deliberative Democracy New Haven: Yale University Press Putnam, Robert D 1993 Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press Tan, Qingshan 2000 Democratization and Bureaucratic Restructuring in Taiwan Studies in Comparative International Development, 35: 48-64 Tien Hung–Mao and Yun-Han Chu 1996 Building Democracy in Taiwan The China Quarterly, 148: 1141-1170 Wong, Joseph 2003 Deepening Democracy in Taiwan Pacific Affairs, 76: 235-256 304 Asian New Democracies: The Philippines, South Korea and Taiwan Compared Wong, Timothy Ka-Ying 2001 From Ethnic to Civic Nationalism: The Formation and Changing Nature of Taiwanese Identity Asian Perspective, 25: 193-199 Taiwan Foundation for Democracy This is a publication of the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy (TFD) The TFD is an independent, nonprofit foundation dedicated to the study and promotion of democracy and human rights in Taiwan and abroad Founded in 2003, the TFD is the first democracy assistance foundation established in Asia The Foundation is committed to working together with other democracies to advance a new wave of democratization worldwide This publication has been produced by the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy Statements of fact or opinion appearing in this publication are solely those of the participating authors and not imply endorsement by the publisher All rights reserved No portion of the contents may be reproduced in any form or by any means without prior written permission of the publisher Taiwan Foundation for Democracy Background Taiwan’s peaceful transition to democracy is not only a historical accomplishment for its twentythree million people, but a landmark in the worldwide spread of democracy Only after years of struggle and effort could this transformation take place We must never forget this history, for it shapes the cornerstone of our continued commitment to the principles of democracy and human rights The Foundation was established with an inter-related, two-tracked mission in mind Domestically, the TFD strives to play a positive role in consolidating Taiwan’s democracy and fortifying its commitment to human rights; internationally, the Foundation hopes to become a strong link in the world’s democratic network, joining forces with related organizations around the world Through the years, Taiwan has received valuable long-term assistance and stalwart support from the international community, and it is now time to repay that community for all of its efforts The Ministry of Foreign Affairs initiated the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy project in 2002 After much research and careful evaluation, the Ministry integrated the required resources from many sectors of society In January 2003, the Ministry obtained the support of all political parties to pass the budget for the Foundation in the legislature The TFD formally came into being on June 17, 2003, with its first meeting of the Board of Trustees and Supervisory Board At that meeting, Legislative Yuan President Wang Jin-pyng was elected its first chairman According to its By-laws, the TFD is governed by a total of fifteen trustees and five supervisors, representing political parties, the government, academia, non-governmental organizations, and the business sector Mission The Taiwan Foundation for Democracy (TFD) is the first democracy assistance foundation to be established in Asia, and is devoted to strengthening democracy and human rights in Taiwan and abroad Its primary concerns are to further consolidate Taiwan’s democratic system, promote democracy in Asia, and actively participate in the global democratic network The TFD will put its ideals into practice through farsighted, transparent, and non-partisan management Building on the strength of both political parties and civil society, the TFD will enable Taiwan to positively contribute to the worldwide movement for democracy According to its By-laws, the Foundation’s mission is as follows: ■ Work with the international community to strengthen democracy around the globe and expand Taiwan’s participation in international activities; ■ Support democratization in Asia and the rest of the world by establishing close relationships with leaders of the world’s democracies and cooperative partnerships with civil society groups, political parties, think tanks, and non-governmental organizations in democratic countries; and ■ Elevate Taiwan’s democracy and further consolidate its democratic development by promoting education in democracy and international exchanges among academic circles, think tanks, parliaments, and political parties from the world over Our Tasks The primacy source of funding for the TFD is the government However, it is independently incorporated, non-partisan, and non-profit According to its By-laws, the Foundation may accept international and domestic donations One-third of its budget is reserved for Taiwan’s political parties, supporting their own international and local initiatives that are in line with the mission of the TFD The remaining budget is used for the TFD core activities, including: ■ Building relationships with related institutions around the world; ■ Participating actively in the global promotion of democracy and supporting the improvement of human rights conditions; ■ Supporting democracy promotion activities of NGOs and academic institutions; ■ Promoting research and publications on democratic developments at home and abroad; and ■ Holding seminars, workshops, conferences, and other educational activities in the area of democracy and human rights