制度因素與非制度因素對民主崩潰的影響：46個半總統制國家的經驗研究

The Impact of Institutional and Non-institutional Factors on Democratic Breakdowns: An Empirical Study of 46 Semi-Presidential Countries

10.6166/TJPS.66(111-146)

張芳華(Fang-Hua Jhang)

民主崩潰 ； 半總統制 ； 政變論 ； 存活分析 ； Democratic Breakdown ； Semi-Presidentialism ； Coup Theory ； Survival Analysis

政治科學論叢

66期（2015 / 12 / 01）

111 - 146

繁體中文

本文主要探討在半總統制下，影響民主崩潰的制度與非制度因素，並提出影響民主崩潰的可能機制。結合委任代理人、否決者與政變論點，本研究認為總統議會制相較於總理總統制易產生組閣爭議與政策僵局，提高了政變介入與行政獨裁的機會，易於發生民主崩潰。透過存活分析結果顯示因為總統議會制有著制度設計上的缺失，其民主崩潰的風險高於總理總統制。經濟因素中，僅GDP成長率對民主崩潰有負向且顯著的影響。先前成功政變經驗愈多，由於可降低軍方官員從事政變的風險並形成政變的牢籠，故提高民主崩潰的機率。變項間交互作用分析結果顯示總統議會制結合不佳的經濟發展或是先前成功政變經驗並不會顯著提高民主崩潰的可能性。

This study aims to explore both the institutional and non-institutional factors under semi-presidentialism that may lead to the collapse of democracy, and to study the mechanisms of these democratic crises. Utilizing the principal-agent theory, veto player theory and coup theory, this research argues that compared with premier-presidentialism, president-parliamentary constitutions are more probable to create disputes regarding the formation of the government as well as policy paralysis between the assembly and the elected president, thereby increasing the likelihood of coup intervention and administrative dictatorship, both being detrimental to democratic survival. The results of survival analysis are as follows. Firstly, owing to the institutional drawbacks of president-parliamentarism, its chance to experience a democratic breakdown is higher than the other subtype of semi-presidentialism. Secondly, of all the economic factors, GDP growth rate is the only significant variable and has a negative impact on the dependent variable. Thirdly, countries that had historically experienced more successful coups will have a higher likelihood to suffer from democratic collapse, due to lower risk faced by their military officials engaged in the coup and the coup trap. Finally, our results also show that president-parliamentarism, combined with poor economic development and possible coup threats, does not necessarily generate a high possibility of ending in a democratic collapse.

1. Elgie, Robert(2007).Varieties of Semi-Presidentialism and Their Impact on Nascent Democracies.Taiwan Journal of Democracy,3(2),53-71.
   連結：
2. 王維芳(2002)。半總統制下的政治穩定：以中華民國為例。遠景基金會季刊，3(3)，47-74。
   連結：
3. 王維芳(2002)。半總統制下的政治穩定：以中華民國為例。遠景基金會季刊，3(3)，47-74。
   連結：
4. 沈有忠(2006)。德國威瑪共和的憲法：一個半總統制的個案研究。東吳政治學報，24，163-212。
   連結：
5. 林繼文(2006)。政府體制、選舉制度與政黨體系：一個配套論的分析。選舉研究，13(2)，1-35。
   連結：
6. 張峻豪(2011)。半總統制運作類型的跨國研究。問題與研究，50(2)，107-138。
   連結：
7. 盛杏湲(2003)。立法機關與行政機關在立法過程中的影響力：一致政府與分立政府的比較。台灣政治學刊，7(2)，51-105。
   連結：
8. 許菁芸、宋鎮照(2011)。俄羅斯的民主抉擇與統治菁英權力結構變化。東吳政治學報，29(4)，117-175。
   連結：
9. 陳佩修(2000)。軍事政變的成因、結果與影響：泰國個案研究。問題與研究，39(1)，35-65。
   連結：
10. 蔡榮祥(2013)。多黨總理總統制民主的政府類型與憲政運作的衝突─以斯洛維尼亞、斯洛伐克、克羅埃西亞、立陶宛為例。東吳政治學報，31(3)，65-116。
    連結：
11. 蔡榮祥、石鵬翔(2011)。總理總統制與政治穩定：以烏克蘭、羅馬尼亞為例。政治科學論叢，47，65-106。
    連結：
12. 蘇子喬(2011)。哪一種半總統制？─概念界定爭議之釐清。東吳政治學報，29(4)，1-72。
    連結：
13. 蘇子喬(2010)。台灣憲政體制的變遷軌跡（1991-2010）歷史制度論的分析。東吳政治學報，28(4)，147-223。
    連結：
14. 葉銀華，2015，〈台灣政府體制要走向何方？〉，《聯合報》，1/24，A17
15. World Bank. 2014. "GDP Growth (Annual %)." in http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG. Latest update 1 July 2015
16. Wikipedia. 2015. "President." in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President. Latest update 21 June 2015
17. Maddion Project. 2010." Historical Statistics of the World Economy: 1-2008 AD." in http://www.ggdc.net/MADDISON/oriindex.htm. Latest update 30 March 2010
18. International Monetary Fund. 2014."World Economic Outlook Database." in http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2014/02/weodata/weoselco.aspx?g.http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2014/02/weodata/weoselco.aspx?g=2001&sg=All+countries
19. The Semi-Presidential One. 2015. "List of President-Parliamentary and Premier-Presidential Countries with Dates." in http://www.semipresidentialism.com/?p=220. Latest update 21 August 2015.
20. Electoral Indices. 2015. "Electoral Indices." in http://www.tcd.ie/Political_Science/staff/michael_gallagher/ElSystems/Docts/ElectionIndices.pdf. Latest update 2 April 2014
21. Wikipedia. 2015. "Islam by Country." in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country. Latest update 19 May 2015
22. Polity IV Project. 2014. "Polity IV Individual Country Regime Trends, 1946-2013." in http://systemicpeace.org/polity/polity4.htm. Latest update 6 June 2014
23. Wikipedia. 2015. "Elections by Country." in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_by_country. Latest update 25 May 2015
24. Acemoglu, Daron,Ticchi, Davide,Vindigni, Andrea(2010).A Theory of Military Dictatorships.American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics,2(1),1-42.
25. Arce, Moisés(2003).Political Violence and Presidential Approval in Peru.The Journal of Politics,65(2),572-583.
26. Bowman, Kirk,Lehoucq, Fabrice,Mahoney, James(2005).Comparative Political Studies,38(8),939-970.
27. Burkhart, Ross E.(2000).Economic Freedom and Democracy: Post-Cold War Tests.European Journal of Political Research,37,237-253.
28. Cheibub, José A.,Chernykh, Svitlana(2008).Constitutions and Democratic Performance in Semi-Presidential Democracies.Japanese Journal of Political Science,9(3),269-303.
29. Clutterbuck, Richard(1980).Review.International Affairs,56(1),125-126.
30. Dafna, Hochman(2009).Civil-Military Power Struggles: The Case of Mauritania.Current History,108,221-226.
31. Duverger, Maurice(1980).A New Political System Model: Semi-Presidential Government.European Journal of Political Research,8,165-187.
32. Elgie, Robert(2005).From Linz to Tsebels: Three Waves of Presidential/Parliamentary Studies?.Democratization,12(1),106-122.
33. Elgie, Robert(ed.),Moestrup, Sophia(ed.)(2007).Semi-Presidentialism Outside Europe: A Comparative Study.New York:Routledge.
34. Elgie, Robert(ed.),Moestrup, Sophia(ed.),Wu, Yu-Shan(ed.)(2011).Semi-Presidentialism and Democracy.New York:Palgrave Macmillan.
35. Elgie, RobertMcmenamin, Iain(2008).Semi-Presidentialism and Democratic Performance.Japanese Journal of Political Science,9(3),324-340.
36. Gassebner, Martin,Lamla, Michael J.,Vreeland, James R.(2012).Extreme Bounds of Democracy.Journal of Conflict Resolution,57(2),171-197.
37. Gurses, Mehmet(2011).Elites, Oil, and Democratization: A Survival Analysis.Social Science Quarterly,92(1),164-184.
38. Hellinger, Daniel. C.(2011).Comparative Politics of Latin America: Democracy at Last?.New York:Routledge.
39. Kellman, Mitchell H.,Shachmurove, Yochanan(2013).Export and Development Montenegro 2006-2012.Montenegrin Journal of Economics,9(3),29-43.
40. Levitsky, Steven(1999).Fujimori and Post-Party Politics in Peru.Journal of Democracy,10(3),78-92.
41. Linz, Juan J.(ed.),Stepan, Alfred C.(ed.)(1978).The Breakdown of' Democratic Regimes: Lartin America.Baltimore:The Johns Hopkins University.
42. Linz, Juan J.(ed.),Stepan, Alfred C.(ed.)(1978).The Breakdown of Democratic Regimes.Baltimore:The Johns Hopkins University.
43. Linz, Juan J.(ed.),Valenzuela, Arturo(ed.)(1994).The Failure of Presidential Democracy.Baltimore:The Johns Hopkins University.
44. Lipset, Seymour M.(1960).Political Man.London:Heinemann.
45. Londregan, John B.,Poole, Keith T.(1990).Poverty, the Coup Trap, and the Seizure of Executive Power.World Politics,42(2),151-183.
46. Luttwak, Edward N.(1979).Coup d'État: A Practical Handbook.Cambridge:Harvard University Press.
47. Maeda, Ko(2010).Two Modes of Democratic Breakdown: A Competing Risks Analysis of Democratic Durability.The Journal of Politics,72(4),1129-1143.
48. Nordlinger, Eric A.(1977).Soldiers in Politics: Military Coups and Governments.Upper Saddle River:Prentice-Hall.
49. OECD(2015).Anti-Crruption Reforms in Ukraine.16th Istanbul Anti-Corruption Action Plan Meeting,Paris:
50. Potter, David(ed.),Goldblatt, David(ed.),Kiloh, Margaret(ed.),Lewis, Paul(ed.)(1997).Democratization.Cambridge:Polity Press.
51. Powell, Jonathan M.(2014).An Assessment of the 'Democratic' Coup Theory: Democratic Trajectories in Africa, 1952–2012.African Security Review,23(3),213-224.
52. Powell, Jonathan M.,Thyne, Clayton L.(2011).Global Instances of Coups from 1950-2010.Journal of Peace Research,48(2),249-259.
53. Sahin, Bican(2006).Is Islam an Obstacle to Democratization in the Muslim World? The Debate of the Compatibility of Islam and Democracy Revisited.Bilig,37,189-206.
54. Schleiter, Petra,Morgan-Jones, Edward(2009).Review Article: Citizens, Presidents and Assemblies: The Study of Semi-Presidentialism Beyond Duverger and Linz.British Journal of Political Science,39(4),871-892.
55. Shen, Yu C.(2011).Using the Veto Players Theory to Explain the Stability of Semi-Presidential Regimes.International Journal of Humanities and Social Science,1(9),87-102.
56. Shugart, Matthew S.(2005).Semi-Presidential Systems: Dual Executive And Mixed Authority Patterns.French Politics,3,323-351.
57. Shugart, Matthew S.,Carey, John M.(1992).Presidents and Assemblies: Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamics.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
58. Skach, Cindy(2005).Borrowing Constitutional Designs: Constitutional Law in Weimar Germany and the French Fifth Republic.New Jersey:Princeton University Press.
59. Taagepera, Rein,Shugart, Matthew S.(1989).Seats and Votes: The Effects and Determinants of Electoral Systems.New Haven:Yale University Press.
60. Thyne, Clayton L.,Powell, Jonathan M.(2014).Coup d'état or Coup d'Autocracy? How Coups Impact Democratization, 1950-2008.Foreign Policy Analysis
61. Tsebelis, George(2002).Veto Players: How Political Institutions Work.Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.
62. Waterman, Richard W.,Meier, Kenneth J.(1998).Pricipal-Agent Model: An Expansion?.Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,8(2),173-202.
63. Wiseman, John(1986).Urban Riots in West Africa, 1977-85.The Journal of Modern African Studies,24(3),509-518.
64. 吳玉山(2002)。半總統制下內閣組成與政治穩定：比較俄羅斯、波蘭與中華民國。俄羅斯學報，2，229-265。
65. 吳玉山(2011)。半總統制：全球發展與研究議程。政治科學論叢，47，1-32。
66. 林建甫(2008)。存活分析。台北:雙葉書廊。
67. 陳愛娥(2001)。我國現行憲法下總統角色的定位：單純國家統一的象徵或真正的政府首長？。新世紀智庫論壇，16，7-18。

1. 顏煌庭(2020)。半總統制民主國家的總理選擇。臺灣民主季刊，17(1)，1-44。