Narrow Results

As political scientists start applying the complex-system approach to study party politics and as business scholars start to apply communication theories to study deinstitutionalization, we prospect a new possibility to study and explain politics within a political party. This study employs a systematically collected field observation data to evaluate Clemente and Roulet’s (2015) “the spiral of deinstitutionalization” framework. Based on analysis of news events and internal reports within Kuomintang from April 20 to October 17, 2015, we believe that this framework facilitates explanation about how the decision of nominating Hung Hsiu-Chu as the party’s first female presidential candidate was replaced three months before the Election Day. We interpret the whole story and provide details that contribute to enriching the framework for future organizational and political party research.

Taiwan has experienced a number of party splits and attempted mergers since democratization. These have played a critical role in the development of the country’s party system. While a number of studies have looked at the emergence of Taiwan’s splinter parties, party mergers have not received academic attention. This study aims to systematically examine the process of party mergers and takeovers. We examine four cases of attempted mergers and takeovers. In each case, we focus the analysis around three core questions: (1) How should we best classify the actual outcomes? (2) How we can best explain the variation in outcomes? (3) How can we assess the success of merger/takeover attempts? Unlike earlier studies, we examine a variety of merger outcomes rather than just successful cases. In addition to mergers, we propose the terms negotiated takeovers and hostile takeovers. Our classification scheme is based on relative party power and the inter-party relationship. To explain the variation in outcome, we applied a framework stressing the interplay of contextual, inter-party and inner-party factors. We found key contextual variables were electoral results, relative party sizes and the electoral system. The most important inter-party variables were ideological proximity and inter-party trust following successful cooperation. Lastly, the inner-party balance of power was also critical, particularly, the strength of leaders with favorable attitudes toward the merger project. We assess the success and failure of merger/takeover attempts with reference to election results, post-merger party unity and whether the post-takeover relationship was cooperative.

The U.S. attitude toward global climate governance is volatile, and its behavior is often constrained by its domestic politics. Studying the implementation of climate policy at the state level in the United States from the perspective of party politics and political polarization in the United States can provide important lessons for climate governance practices. Through a panel data model, this research analyzes the relationship between the party affiliations of governors in all 50 U.S. states and carbon dioxide emissions from 1997 to 2020. Based on this, the connection between political polarization and climate governance is discussed. Results indicate that the party affiliations of U.S. state governors significantly impact carbon dioxide emissions in their respective states; American democracy has the inherent flaw of failing to fulfill electoral promises; U.S. party politics is not conducive to the stable, long-term development of climate policies. These results reflect deeper societal contradictions and divides in the U.S., and the political polarization epitomized by the climate governance issue will have serious spillover effects on global climate governance.