Developmental local government is regarded as a remedy for the deep-rooted structural socio-economic challenges in South Africa. Many of these challenges are a legacy of apartheid and colonialism, so the ascent to power of a democratic government after the 1994 democratic elections was seen as a watershed for the development of policies and programmes to ameliorate poverty, unemployment and gross inequality. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act, 108 of 1996, positions South Africa as a developmental state (defining developmentalism as a capable state with strong economic growth and professionalized public institutions). The White Paper on Local Government, 1998, was also introduced to mitigate poverty and unemployment. The adoption of a democratic developmental state model that empowers local government, as the coalface of service delivery, was seen as the solution. The developmental trajectory posited by the national government was thus predicated on the efficacy of municipalities. This study therefore explores the success and failure of developmentalism in South Africa, using the Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality as a case study. Analysis and comparison regarding the best model for South Africa was done on the basis of a literature review of international and local studies and official documents and legislation. The review shows that the now defunct developmentalist Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) was adopted in 1994 to address the socio-economic ills associated with colonialism and apartheid, but it was replaced by the neoliberal Growth Employment and Redistribution policy. Most developing countries use East Asia as a template to replicate developmental models. Developmentalism thrived in Asia because these countries are not democratic. However, South Africa is a constitutional democracy, which means that the public and public participation must be taken into consideration in policy-making and decision-making, especially for local government to address local socio-economic problems, particularly those affecting the poor. This was not found to be the case in the Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality, where developmentalism is overshadowed by endemic problems around leadership, patronage and a lack of consultation with the people, leaving their needs largely unmet. Neo-liberal policies, clearly not aligned with developmentalism, have been espoused, so a developmental local government model has not been implemented systematically in the Metro. Recommendations to prioritize truly developmental local economic growth and socio-economic development include extensive training and higher appointment criteria. / Development Studies / M.A. (Development Studies)

The object of this study is good governance, the context for its consideration is the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), and the disciplinary perspective from which it is considered is Public Administration. Good governance is a conceptual problematique. It is multi-dimensional, value-laden, trans-contextual and nebulous. The question of what good governance means is a subject of contestation. Good governance is used in NEPAD as a principle without the attempt to clarify its meaning at the conceptual level. Much of the existing body of scholarship on NEPAD also considers good governance largely as a principle rather than a concept. This erroneously presupposes unanimity on its meaning. The African leadership is divided on what good governance means in the context of NEPAD. In this regard scholarship largely fails to provide an intellectual solution. The extent of complexity of the concept in the study lies in the fact that the context of its consideration [NEPAD] is itself a subject of contestation whereas the disciplinary perspective [Public Administration] from which it is considered has not yet reached a consensus with itself about its theoretical base. Against this background the question that the study asks is, what does the concept good governance in the context of NEPAD mean for Public Administration? The study examines this question to make a contribution towards a better insight into, and broadening of, the body of scientific knowledge by engaging in conceptual, theoretical and philosophical studies to understand good governance in the context of NEPAD and determine its meaning for Public Administration. The study finds that the paradigm of engagement in the existing body of literature is framed in the binary logic, which is rooted in realist epistemology or positivism. This approach to scientific discourse is limited in dealing with complex conceptual, theoretical and philosophical questions. The study develops, as a contribution to science, an alternative epistemological framework from which good governance in the context of NEPAD could be understood. Such epistemological framework is, for the purpose of this study, termed the contingent co-existence of opposites. It is used to conceptualise good governance in the context of NEPAD and determine its meaning for Public Administration. / Public Administration / D.Litt. et Phil. (Public Administration)

隨著氣候變遷及其不利影響的科學證據日益明確，國際社會與主權國家從1980年代以來關懷思考如何因應氣候議題。台灣受限於特殊的國際地位，難以參與《氣候變遷綱要公約》與《京都議定書》為主的國際氣候談判，但是台灣如何因應氣候議題，對於國內與國際都具有重要性。對於國內而言，氣候變遷產生議題連結的效果，加劇環境退化現象，觸發極端氣候事件的頻率與程度，衝擊處於生態脆弱的台灣。對於國際而言，台灣屬於主要的排放溫室氣體國家，意謂台灣是否願意承諾積極的減排責任，對於全球氣候行動舉足輕重。然而，當台灣從2005年推動《溫室氣體減量法》的立法過程，卻採取消極的政治立場，不僅不願意建立積極的減量目標與期程，同時立法院也不願意通過該法以因應全球氣候倡議。本研究討論不同國家面對國際氣候行動採取各自的政治立場，台灣為何選擇消極的政治立場。 在研究理論與方法上，本研究提出修正的利益解釋模型，該模型認為有兩個因素得以解釋國家因應國際環境倡議的立場。第一個因素是風險認知，其認為國家面對國際環境倡議的政治立場，考量國內民眾對於生態脆弱性的風險認知。第二個因素是考量污染減量經濟成本，國內決策者基於各自的成本與利益考量，在決策過程中彼此協商，形塑國家減量成本與利益盤算，當減量成本越低，則國家越傾向於支持國際環境行動，反之亦然。基於修正模型的假定，本研究利用不同的研究方法與資料，分析上述兩項因素。在風險認知面向，本研究利用中央研究院社會學研究所進行台灣社會變遷基本調查2010年六期一次問卷Ⅱ環境題組的實證資料進行統計分析。在減量成本面向，本研究就《溫室氣體減量法》立法過程涉及相關行為者進行深度訪談，透過質化分析理解不同行為者在決策過程的互動。 在研究結果上，本研究發現在風險認知上，台灣民眾儘管認知氣候風險的嚴重性，但是考量氣候變遷的不利影響與後續因應都具有長期特性，降低民眾支持台灣採取積極的政治立場以因應氣候議題的意願。在減量成本上，因應氣候議題的決策形成一種姿態政治（gestural politics），儘管積極倡議台灣必須因應國際氣候議題，但是卻不願意制訂涵蓋積極減量目標與總量管制的《溫室氣體減量法》，其原因在於氣候決策嵌入能源與產業結構的挑戰。在能源結構上，台灣面對核能使用的政治爭議，加以再生能源短期難以巨幅成長，使得台灣仍然呈現以化石燃料為主的能源結構。在產業結構上，既有發展型國家的思維使得政治菁英傾向於強調發展的重要性，依賴高污染、高耗能與高排碳產業推動國家經濟發展，而難以透過調整能源價格等政治策略，改變依賴高排碳產業的產業結構。

The object of this study is good governance, the context for its consideration is the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), and the disciplinary perspective from which it is considered is Public Administration. Good governance is a conceptual problematique. It is multi-dimensional, value-laden, trans-contextual and nebulous. The question of what good governance means is a subject of contestation. Good governance is used in NEPAD as a principle without the attempt to clarify its meaning at the conceptual level. Much of the existing body of scholarship on NEPAD also considers good governance largely as a principle rather than a concept. This erroneously presupposes unanimity on its meaning. The African leadership is divided on what good governance means in the context of NEPAD. In this regard scholarship largely fails to provide an intellectual solution. The extent of complexity of the concept in the study lies in the fact that the context of its consideration [NEPAD] is itself a subject of contestation whereas the disciplinary perspective [Public Administration] from which it is considered has not yet reached a consensus with itself about its theoretical base. Against this background the question that the study asks is, what does the concept good governance in the context of NEPAD mean for Public Administration? The study examines this question to make a contribution towards a better insight into, and broadening of, the body of scientific knowledge by engaging in conceptual, theoretical and philosophical studies to understand good governance in the context of NEPAD and determine its meaning for Public Administration. The study finds that the paradigm of engagement in the existing body of literature is framed in the binary logic, which is rooted in realist epistemology or positivism. This approach to scientific discourse is limited in dealing with complex conceptual, theoretical and philosophical questions. The study develops, as a contribution to science, an alternative epistemological framework from which good governance in the context of NEPAD could be understood. Such epistemological framework is, for the purpose of this study, termed the contingent co-existence of opposites. It is used to conceptualise good governance in the context of NEPAD and determine its meaning for Public Administration. / Public Administration and Management / D.Litt. et Phil. (Public Administration)