Technovation in Taiwan: Implications for Industrial Governance

No longer able to compete with China and Southeast Asian economies on the basis of cheap skilled labor, Taiwan has begun to explore new industrial sectors, such as biotechnology and the life sciences more generally, as key areas for development. The notion that biotech has been “targeted” by the government naturally conjures up images of the postwar developmental state and its mechanisms for industrial governance. Indeed, the resiliency of the East Asian developmental state model has been the focus of much recent debate ( Wong 2004 ), which begets the question: Does the developmental state still matter in Taiwan, and if so, specifically what role can it play? The government’s current effort in facilitating biotech industrialization provides an idea case through which to reappraise the developmental state, and specifically its role in leading industrial transformation in this uniquely knowledge‐intensive sector.     

TEN YEARS AFTER: THE US CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET AND IMPOUNDMENT CONTROL ACT OF 1974

The reformed congressional budget process is no longer new. This fact alone invites an assessment of the experience of budgeting under the procedures enacted in 1974. But there is a more pressing reason for undertaking such an assessment. Today, there is widespread unhappiness with the congressional budget process. In recent years the deadlines of the budget process have repeatedly not been met, resulting in incomplete budgeting and the proliferation of proposals to abolish or reform the budget procedures enacted in 1974.
Consequently, this paper will first outline the reformed budget procedures and establish the goals of the 1974 Budget Act. The second section assesses whether the goals of budget reform have been achieved. In short, the answer is a negative one. The third section explains why the goals of budget reform have not been met, and the final section evaluates the main proposals advanced for changing the budget process.     

The Social Control of Drinking-Driving: An Ethnographic Study of Bar Settings

Rather than being considered merely an illegal act, the drinking-driving phenomenon can be viewed as a form of social behavior, governed by a set of socially shared rules. This article reports a study which identifies these rules through observation of individuals participating in drinking-driving behavior in four different settings: a close-knit neighborhood bar, a neighborhood bar that draws on a larger population, a social club, and "a fairly fashionable watering hole." The study indicates that the particular social and economic environment of the drinking establishment influences drinking-driving behavior. The intimacy of the neighborhood bar allows the bartender to exert control over drinking and assist in finding alternatives to driving. As the practical possibilities for contact with the bartender are reduced, the ability for the drinking establishment to control drinking-driving is lessened. Moreover, the economic reality in all bars—the need to sell drinks—takes precedence over controlling drinking- driving. Alternative countermeasures which take into account these social rules of drinking-driving are suggested as preferable policy developments.