英文摘要 |
Taiwan and South Korea are usually considered to be the most similar cases described in political economy literature, because the two countries have many similarities in common ranging from histories and geopolitics to experiences of economic development. Moreover, because they were similarly affected by the international financial crisis of 2008, both countries have tried to transform their economic development models from brown to green economies, by seeking to further reduce heavy reliance on fossil fuels. However, under though they have many common macrodevelopmental goals, variations still can be seen in how the Taiwanese and South Korean governments in different Presidential terms have chosen to pursue their policy goals with regarding to facilitating development of Sustainable Energy (SE) and Green Economy (GE). To examine and understand the possible reasons for such differences, the authors applied the theoretical concept of Developmental Mindset (DM) in the analysis. Guided by this theory, the authors found that different political attitudes and developmental mindsets held by Taiwanese and South Korea presidents have actually had significant impacts on the effectiveness of relevant policy implementations. The study found that since Taiwan Presidents Ma Ying-jeou and Korean President Park Geun-hye have both exhibited passive political ambitions and less developmental mindsets in developing the SE and GE sectors, the main sustainable strategies they have implemented tended to urge individuals to change their lifestyles and reduce their use of fossil fuel resources. In this regard, neither President Ma nor President Park asked the principal carbon dioxide producers to take responsibility for making contributions to reduce such emissions. On the contrary, however, Taiwan President Tsai, Ing-wen and Korean Presidents Lee, Myung-bak and Mun, Jae-in all held strong political ambitions and clearly developmental mindsets toward developing SE and GE, and they all considered these two issues as of high priority in their government developmental agendas, and both SE and GE have made obvious progress during these three Presidents’terms of office. The article is a seminal study of utilizing the concept of DM in analyzing SE and GE development in Taiwan and South Korea, and its contributions and limitations are discussed. |