Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Informal accountability, credible actions, and democratization in Taiwan

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Constitutional Political Economy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

How does informal government accountability relate to democratization? In this paper, we use multiple methodologies to show the relation between informal government accountability and democratization in Taiwan. Three results are relevant: First, a game-theoretic model reveals that both informal government accountability and formal democratization are pursued when economic conditions are weak to improve support for the government and extract political concessions for citizens. In particular, the game-theoretic model depicts informal accountability and democratization as outcomes from strategic interaction between the government and citizens where the timing of their preferences and credibility motivate the outcomes. Second, the descriptive studies and statistical analyses corroborate that informal government accountability and democratization occur when economic performance is weak; they also show that informal government accountability is precursory to the democratization process in Taiwan. Third, the evidence supports that informal government accountability leads to formal democratization when political tenure is jeopardized if the constituency-base is not expanded. The findings provide for a predictive model of political development that specifies how informal government accountability feasibly leads to democratization in Taiwan.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Data for this project will be made available at a public archive. Data availability constrains the start and end dates. For instance, the Freedom House index begins in 1973.

  2. In particular, the tipping phenomena points out that players often choose on the basis of how many others have groups are already made similar choices. See Moore (1995).

  3. Studies show that even authoritarian governments rely on support from non-government constituencies. See Ames (1987), and Bates (1981) for discussions.

  4. The conclusion that better payoffs are achieved through groups that unite is derived from game forms such as prisoner’s dilemma, battle of the sexes, the stag hunt and pure coordination. See Osborne (2004), and also elaborations in Calvert (1995) and Weingast (1997).

  5. See Weingast (1997) and Calvert (1995) for the effects of shirking and free-ridership.

  6. Those who support scaled-indices contend that democratization is a progression through a process that is best captured on a scale; however, a growing literature shows that even scaled-indices are single summary indicators that are ultimately “blunt” and not rigorous. See Persson and Tabellini 2006: 1.

References

  • Ames, B. (1987). Political survival: Politicians and public policy in Latin America. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arceneaux, K. (2003). The conditional impact of blame attribution on the relationship between economic adversity and turnout. Political Research Quarterly, 56(1), 67–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bates, R. (1981). Markets and states in Tropical Africa. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brinks, D. M. (2003). Informal institutions and the rule of law: The judicial response to state killings in Buenos Aires and São Paulo in the 1990 s. Comparative Politics, 36(1), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calvert, R. (1995). Rational actors, equilibrium, and social institutions. In J. Knight & I. Sened (Eds.), Explaining social institutions. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chao, L., & Myers, R. H. (1994). The first Chinese democracy: Political development of the Republic of China on Taiwan, 1986–1994. Asian Survey, 34(3), 213–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheibub, J. A., & Chernykh, S. (2008). Constitutions and democratic performance in semi-presidential democracy. Japanese Journal of Political Science, 9(3), 269–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, M. (1996). Local fact ions and elections in Taiwan’s democratization. In H. Tien (Ed.), Taiwan’s electoral politics and democratic transition: Riding the third wave. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, P. (1975). Taiwan: Protective adjustment economy. Asian Survey, 15(1), 20–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, T., & Haggard, S. (2001). Democracy and deficits in Taiwan. In S. Haggard & M. McCubbins (Eds.), Presidents, parliaments, and policy. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • China Yearbook. 1957–1980. Taiwan: Government Information Office. Becomes Republic of China Yearbook. 1981–1998. Taiwan: Government Information Office.

  • Chou, Y., & Nathan, A. (1987). Democratizing transition in Taiwan. Asian Survey, 27(3), 277–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Copper, J. F. (1987). Taiwan in 1986: Back on top again. Asian Survey, 27(1), 81–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croissant, A., & Merkel, W. (2004). Introduction: Democratization in the early twenty-first century. Democratization, 11(5), 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Della Porta, D., & Reiter, H. (1998). The policing of protest in contemporary democracies. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deng, F. (1997). Information gaps and unintended outcomes of social movements: The 1989 Chinese student movement. American Journal of Sociology, 102(4), 1085–1112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Domes, J. (1992). Taiwan in 1991: Searching for political consensus. Asian Survey, 32(1), 42–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duch, R. M. (2001). A developmental model of heterogeneous economic voting in new democracies. The American Political Science Review, 95(4), 895–910.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feng, Y. (1997). Democracy, political stability and economic growth. British Journal of Political Science, 27(3), 391–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Free China Journal. Various issues. Taipei, Taiwan. Continues as Taipei Journal in 1999.

  • Freedom House. (1972–2009). Freedom in the world. New York: Freedom House.

  • Fudenberg, D., & Tirole, J. (1992). Game theory. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government Information Office. (2003). The Story of Taiwan. http://www.gio.gov.tw/info/taiwan-story/. Last accessed July 14, 2010.

  • Guo, G. (2007). Retrospective economic accountability under authoritarianism: Evidence from China. Political Research Quarterly, 60(3), 378–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haggard, S., & Kaufman, R. R. (1997). The political economy of democratic transitions. Comparative Politics, 29(3), 263–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helmke, G., & Levitsky, S. (2006). Informal institutions and democracy: Lessons from Latin America. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard, M. M., & Roessler, P. G. (2006). Liberalizing electoral outcomes in competitive authoritarian regimes”. American Journal of Political Science, 50(2), 365–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, E., Rueschemeyer, D., & Stephens, J. D. (1993). The impact of economic development on democracy. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 7(3), 71–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, B. (1973). Taiwan 1972: Political season. Asian Survey, 13(1), 102–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, B. (1974). Taiwan 1973: Consolidation of the succession. Asian Survey, 14(1), 22–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knight, J. (1992). Institutions and social conflict. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lauth, H.-J. (2005). Impact of informal institutions on democratic performance: Theoretical reflections and empirical findings. http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p42574_index.html. Last accessed May 1, 2009.

  • Levitsky, S., & Way, L. (2002). The rise of competitive authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy, 13(2), 51–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, M. G. (2010). Polity IV Project. www.cidcm.umd.edu//polity. Last accessed August 6, 2010.

  • Moore, W. (1995). Rational rebels: Overcoming the free-rider problem. Political Research Quarterly, 48(2), 417–454.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrow, J. (1994). Game theory for political scientists. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, M. (2004). An introduction to game theory. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (1995). New horizons in institutional analysis. American Political Science Review, 89(1), 174–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, H., & Whitten, G. (1999). The electoral impact of unexpected inflation and economic growth”. British Journal of Political Science, 29(4), 623–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Persson, T., & Tabellini, G. (2006). Democracy and development: The devil in the details. American Economic Review, 96(2), 319–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, G. B., Jr., & Whitten, G. D. (1993). A cross-national analysis of economic voting: Taking account of the political context. American Journal of Political Science, 37(2), 391–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seymour, J. D. (1988). Taiwan in 1987: A year of political bombshells. Asian Survey, 28(1), 71–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taiwan Communique. (1987). various issues. Washington, D.C.: International Committee for Human Rights in Taiwan.

  • Thompson, M. (2004). Pacific Asia after ‘Asian values’: Authoritarianism, democracy, and ‘good governance’. Third World Quarterly, 25(6), 1079–1095.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tien, H. (1996). Elections and Taiwan’s democratic development. In H. Tien (Ed.), Taiwan’s electoral politics and democratic transition: Riding the third wave. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagle, U. (2000). The policy science of democracy: The issues of methodology and citizen participation. Policy Sciences, 33(3), 207–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weimer, D. (2008). Theories of and in the policy process. The Policy Studies Journal, 36(4), 489–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weingast, B. (1997). The political foundations of democracy and the rule of law. The American Political Science Review, 91(2), 245–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winckler, E. A. (2000). Taiwan’s Transitions. The China Journal, 43, 119–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yap, O. F. (2005). Bargaining in less-democratic newly industrialized countries: Model and evidence from South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, and Malaysia. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 17(3), 283–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, C. (1992). The strategy of political liberalization: A comparative view of Gorbachev’s reforms. World Politics, 45(1), 47–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

A previous version of this paper was presented at the conference, “Taiwan, China and Democratization in East Asia: An International Symposium,” September 29–September 30, 2007, at the Missouri State University. The author gratefully acknowledges comments and suggestions from Alan Hamlin, Dennis Hickey, the anonymous reviewers and participants at the conference. The responsibility for all errors remains with the author.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political Science, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, 66044, USA

    O. Fiona Yap

Authors
  1. O. Fiona Yap
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to O. Fiona Yap.

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

See Table 2.

Table 2 Summary statistics of dependent and independent variables
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yap, O.F. Informal accountability, credible actions, and democratization in Taiwan. Const Polit Econ 22, 103–121 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10602-010-9098-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10602-010-9098-0

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation