English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 94586/125118 (76%)
Visitors : 30545613      Online Users : 350
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/71581

    Title: 民主與環境治理-一個遴選集團理論的解釋
    Other Titles: Democracy and Environmental Governance: A Selectorate Theory Explanation
    Authors: 張文揚
    Chang, Wen-Yang
    Contributors: 外交系
    Keywords: 民主;遴選集團理論;二氧化碳;甲烷;環境治理
    democracy;selectorate theory;carbon dioxide (CO_2);methane;environmental governance
    Date: 2014-09
    Issue Date: 2014-11-20 11:44:02 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 民主國家是否在環境治理上的表現較佳?儘管過去的理論與實證研究發現民主國家在政治、社會與經濟方面表現較好,但在環境問題上卻仍未取得統一的見解。本文擬加入這場辯論,並以人均二氧化碳排放量與使用能源產生的甲烷兩者作為環境指標,檢驗196個政治實體在1980-2012年的環境表現。實證結果支持政治上愈民主的國家或地區愈能降低二氧化碳與甲烷排放量的假設。推究其原因,本文認為以「政治人物首要目標為政治生存」為假設的遴選集團理論,解釋了政體之間的環境表現差異。為能持續執政,民主國家需要提供包括環境品質的公共財,以滿足多數人民的需求。另一方面,非民主國家的政治人物為了持續執政,僅需要滿足少數在政權存續中扮演關鍵角色的利害關係人即可,提供公共財並無法延續其政治生命。這其中的差異部分解釋了為什麼民主國家的環境品質較非民主國家好。
    Do democracies perform better in environmental governance? Though theories and empirical studies confirm that democracies have better political, social and economic performance, whether or not this superiority applies to environmental issues is still far from consensus. This paper joins the debate by using carbon dioxide emission per head, and energy-related methane as environmental indicators, and testing 196 political entities' environmental performance during the period 1980-2012 empirically. Statistical results find that politically, more democratic entities can reduce CO_2 and methane emissions. The reason behind these findings is attributable to the selectorate theory, which is based on the assumption that "political survival is the utmost important goal." In order to stay in power, politicians in democracies have to provide public goods that include environmental quality. Non-democratic politicians can survive simply by satisfying stakeholders who play critical roles in regime survivability, and therefore there is no such need to focus on public goods provision. This difference explains why environmental quality in democracies is better than that in non-democracies.
    Relation: 臺灣民主季刊, 11(3), 1-39
    Data Type: article
    Appears in Collections:[外交學系] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    1-39.pdf3017KbAdobe PDF772View/Open

    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

    社群 sharing

    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback