在2020年新冠肺炎的肆虐之下,多數國家都面臨了疫情的挑戰,無論乎是在每日激增的感染人數、死亡人數、以及因為疫情而無法負載的醫療能量。在這種嚴峻的挑戰下,許多觀察家與學者卻看到了威權體制的優勢。因為威權體制可以忽略人權的問題,迅速進行大規模的疫區封鎖,或是對民眾強行進行檢測以及限制人身自由,進而可以較為快速的控制疫情。在這之中,中國與新加坡就是全球防疫的佼佼者。反過來說,對於歐美的民主國家,因為其防疫速度與政府反應較為緩慢,也因為其民主自由的特性而限縮了對人身自由過多的限制,進而導致疫情爆發,死傷慘重。本文討論民主制度是否在面對大規模疫情的挑戰時,較威權體制劣勢。筆者認為,在那些強調共識決與公民審議的民主國家中,政府面對疫情的考驗可以制定比較全面的防疫政策,因為審議民主的特質是會去納入不同的社會價值與觀點,來做最後的政策決定,而這種做法,可以更為有效的抑止疫情的擴散,並有效的控制疫情。而在威權國家之中,政府必須要先達到一定的統治效能以及經濟成長,才有足夠的政治實力與資源來對抗疫情。所以,民主體制與威權體制在防疫這件事上,並不是孰優孰劣的問題,而是在各自達成一定條件之後,它們的防疫效能就會比同儕來的更好。筆者採用大規模跨國資料,藉由這次2020年新冠肺炎為案例,以2021年的總染疫人數與因應新冠肺炎而死亡的總人數來分析,在不同的條件下,民主與威權國家是否可以達到更高的抗疫效能。本文發現,審議民主可以顯著地降低民主國家中的總染疫人數與死亡人數,而這些民主特質在威權國家中則不適用。另者,經濟發展無論在民主國家或是威權國家都與疫情的嚴重度成正相關,不過國家實力綜合指數則可以有效地幫助威權國家防疫。本文最後提出了政策的推薦,提倡審議民主的優勢。
Most countries have suffered from the COVID-19 pandemic since 2020. The numbers of confirmed cases and casualties and the overloading medical systems are all visible issues and problems each country is dealing with on a daily basis. Many observers and experts argue that authoritarian countries seem to be more capable of defending the COVID-19 pandemic because they can ignore human rights and intervene aggressively into the society to implement anti-pandemic policy, which allows quicker response to the COVID-19 pandemic and better control of it at the same time. China and Singapore are notable cases in this regard. In comparison, democracies do not allow such interventions to personal liberty and human rights, making the COVID-19 pandemic more devastating in their respective countries. In this paper, I question whether regime types (democracy and autocracy) and their respective features could lead to better combating the COVID-19 pandemic. I argue that democratic deliberation among democracies allows a more comprehensive policy-making process by incorporating different voices from the society, and this process could enhance better control of the COVID-19 pandemic. On the other hand, for autocracies, such democratic features do not matter as the only key factor in determining whether autocracies could defend themselves from the COVID-19 pandemic is the ability to govern powered by the level of development. Therefore, whether democracies outperform autocracies in combating the COVID-19 pandemic, or vice versa, depends on different sets of conditions. I use the total number of COVID-19 confirmed cases and COVID-19 confirmed casualties of each country as the dependent variables and investigate these mechanisms. I find that democratic deliberation indeed reduces the confirmed cases and casualties among democracies, but this feature along with other democratic measures, are not associated with the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic among dictatorships. I also find that the level of development is positively associated with the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic, which is the opposite of my argument. In contrast, the alternative measure of development I employed, the Composite Index of National Capability (CINC), is supportive to my hypothesis for authoritarian states. I then conclude by promoting democratic deliberation in the policy-making process.
本文基於一國憲政體制類型會影響政府在COVID-19疫情時運作的方式,嘗試探討台灣半總統制政府如何回應疫情。研究焦點放在中央政府層次,探討總統、行政院院長、疫情指揮中心(指揮官)以及國會等部門的運作,並考量一致性政府和總統兼黨主席等因素的影響。研究發現,在總統權力優勢的半總統制下,蔡英文總統在處理疫情上的角色是多重的,藉由總統和黨主席雙重身份,她既是主要政策決定者,也同時介入政策執行的督導和措施的指示。相對而言,行政院院長暨其領導的相關部會仍是因應疫情的行政主體,不過因疫情指揮中心和指揮..
Based on the fact that the type of government system will affect the way the government operates during the COVID-19 epidemic, this article attempts to explore how Taiwan’s semi-presidential government handled the epidemic. The focus of the study is on the central government level, exploring the operations of the president, the president of the Executive Yuan, the epidemic command center (commander), and Congress, and considering the impact of factors such as unified government and the fact that the president is the chairman of a poli..
本文初探各國社會資本、政體與新冠肺炎疫苗接種普及率與進度的關聯性。筆者關注社會資本的不同要素是否有助於各國推行疫苗接種;此外,社會資本能否作為解釋政體在疫苗接種差異的來源,特別是民主、非民主國家的區隔。本研究建置涵蓋世界價值觀調查、自由之家與疫苗接種資訊的87個國家資料庫進行實證分析。分析結果顯示制度信心如預期地對疫苗接種普及率有顯著正向效應;規範認知則對疫苗接種達標風險率有顯著負向影響,與社會資本的理論相悖。其次,不論疫苗接種普及率與達標風險率的分析,都顯示社會資本能作為解釋政體與疫苗..
This paper explores why some countries share higher COVID-19 vaccinations than others. The author addresses how social capital and regime types are associated with the rate and speed of vaccination in countries. It is argued that elements of social capital are not only able to promote the vaccinations, but also be one of mediating factors that account for the differences between types of political regimes in vaccination. Country data on social capital and political regimes is linked to data on COVID-19 vaccinations in 87 countries (includin..
請輸入想查詢的期刊標題、關鍵字、作者相關資訊. Please enter the journal title, keywords, and author-related information you want to query.