• Ching-Ju Cheng
  • Debbie Chieh-Yu Lee
  • Jerry C. Y. Liu
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Business, Arts and Humanities book series (PSBAH)


Despite contemporary understandings of the term “governance” in East Asia being highly influenced by modern Western discourses and practices, the role of traditional Chinese discourses, such as “to rule by virtue”, are under-explored vis-à-vis the idea of self-regulation and self-reflection in bodies’ governance in the region. The cultural backdrop of Taiwan reveals a unique blend of Han Chinese, Japanese, European, American, and Taiwan’s own aboriginal cultures, which reflects the understanding and practice of local cultural governance. This chapter explores cultural governance in the Confucian context, and principles of good governance in Taiwan through a literature review and qualitative interviews and questionnaires involving seasoned practitioners from seventeen arts and culture organizations in Taipei, the capital city of Taiwan. An analysis of these interviews yields the participants’ common interest in pursuing the idea of good cultural governance adhering to the principles of decentralization and transparency. Freedom of speech, assembly, and expression are well-established strengths of the arts and cultural sectors in Taiwan, where the importance of cultural democracy and autonomy is highly valued. Taiwan’s arts and cultural sectors are still experimenting with and practicing the possibility of good cultural governance. The research project adds nuance to our understanding of cultural governance in the current local context and application. This study will contribute to future research on the dimensions and principles of good governance for cultural organizations from an East Asian perspective.


  1. Brook, T. (2000). The Milieux of Scientific Activity in Ming China. Paper presented at the Conference on Regimes for the Generation of Useful and Reliable Knowledge in Europe and Asia 1368–1815, Windsor, UK, April 14–16.Google Scholar
  2. Dean, M. (2010). Governmentality: Power and Rule in Modern Society (2nd ed.). Los Angeles/London/New Delhi/Singapore/Washington, DC: SAGE.Google Scholar
  3. Foucault, M. (1991). Governmentality. In G. Burchill, C. Gordon, & P. Miller (Eds.), The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality (pp. 87–104). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  4. Glinkowski, P. (1998). Artists and Policy-Making: The English Case. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 18(2), 168–184; Tony Bennett, 1998, 83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hall, S. (1997). The Centrality of Culture: Notes on the Cultural Revolutions of Our Time. In K. Thompson (Ed.), Media and Cultural Regulation (pp. 207–226). London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  6. Laws & Regulations Database of the Republic of China. (2011). Civil Associations Act. Accessed 25 Nov 2017.
  7. Liao, S.-C. (2002). Cultural Policies Under State Governance: A Historical Reflection. Journal of Architecture & Planning, 3(3), 160–184.Google Scholar
  8. Liu, J. C. Y. (2014). ReOrienting Cultural Policy: Cultural Statecraft and Cultural Governance in Taiwan and China. In L. Lim & H. K. Lee (Eds.), Cultural Policies in East Asia: Dynamics Between the State, Arts and Creative Industries (pp. 120–138). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  9. The National Culture and Arts Foundation. (2017). About the National Culture and Arts Foundation. Accessed 25 Nov 2017.
  10. Wei, M.-C. (2009). Multiculturalism in Taiwan: A Preliminary Study of Its Origins, Evolution, and Impact on Taiwan’s Democratic Politics. Taiwan: A Radical Quarterly in Social Studies, 75, 287–319.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ching-Ju Cheng
    • 1
  • Debbie Chieh-Yu Lee
    • 1
  • Jerry C. Y. Liu
    • 1
  1. 1.Taiwan Association of Cultural Policy Studies (TACPS)TaipeiTaiwan (R.O.C.)

Personalised recommendations