The historical institutionalism analysis of Taiwan’s administrative reform

Bibliographic Data

ID9964338
AuthorsMei‐Chiang Shih (Tunghai University, corresponding author), Mei-Chiang Shih (Tunghai University, Taichung, Taiwan), Milan Tung‐wen Sun (0000-0002-3767-192X, National Chi Nan University), Milan Tung-Wen Sun (National Chi Nan University, Nantou, Taiwan), Guang-Xu Wang (0000-0002-1347-0365, National University of Tainan, Tainan, Taiwan)
Year2012
Volume78
Issue2
Pages305-327
Publication date2012-06-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueInternational Review of Administrative Sciences (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0020-8523 • E-ISSN: 1461-7226
PublisherSAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/0020852312438523
OpenAlexW2115752118
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited21

Government restructuring has been discussed extensively in Taiwan for more than three decades, and the first NPM-style administrative reform programme, which emphasizes ‘a leaner and businesslike government’, was launched in 1996. Since then, NPM has been the key guideline producing a strong path-dependence effect for subsequent administrative reform programmes in Taiwan. This article examines the trajectory of administrative reform in Taiwan from 1949 to 2010, the latter being the year when the Organizational Act of the Executive Yuan was passed, which symbolically represents the end of the current phase of administrative reform. Similar to many Asian countries, exogenous and endogenous factors have induced efforts at administrative reform in Taiwan. Although it is argued that it is difficult to generate any common path of administrative reform among Asian countries, the analysis of the case in Taiwan may provide some observations for future discussions on this topic, such as evidence of political manipulation, the transformation of the role of the state, the desire for an indigenous reform strategy, and the demand to revitalize the civil service system. Points for practitioners 1. Administrative reform is a political process, and pubic servants have to deal with value conflicts carefully. 2. Professionalism and political neutrality are the two most important things in the administrative reform process. 3. Public servants can have a critical role in the administrative reform process when the critical juncture appears, but democratic values and public purposes should be the cornerstone for the bureaucrats in action

Democracy · Government (linguistics · Political science · Politics · Public service · Reform movement · Restructuring · China's Socioeconomic Reforms and Governance · Law · Policy Transfer and Learning · Public Administration · Social Policy and Reform Studies

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub