探討威權政體型態與溫室氣體排放之間的關聯性：1972-2014年

Abstract

由於威權主義的研究為我們呈現文官威權、皇室與軍事等各類型威權政體型態的多元性，本研究欲探討的問題為不同的威權政體型態是否針對氣候變遷危機的應對能力亦有所差異？依據氣候變遷危機在政治層面上，特別是威權國家，所形成的挑戰，本研究提出威權政體型態在攏絡社會與穩定統治之兩種面向的能力上可能發展出差異，且分別以文官威權、君主政體型態為具備該項優勢的代表。\n透過從1972年到2014年間的威權政體型態作為研究的主要解釋變數，以及人均二氧化碳排放量作為結果變數，本研究依據大樣本數據的量化分析後發現：在所有威權政體型態中，君主威權政體型態對於排放量的傾向是負向影響，顯示其為表現較好的威權政體型態；軍事政體的表現則次之，以包含一黨、有限多黨政體型態的文官威權作為表現最差的類型。前述的排序在納入經濟、資源消耗、人口等控制變數後並沒有改變，此外，使用其他作者所分類的威權政體型態也大抵呈現君主政體型態的優勢以及文官威權政體型態的劣勢。\n據此，本研究認為有關於攏絡社會能力與穩定統治能力對氣候治理之表現差異所形成的競爭性解釋，以君主政體型態之減碳表現具備統計上的顯著影響而以穩定統治作為較具影響力的解釋。本研究最後認為未來的探討方現有針對中東與北非地區之君主國家形成較深入的個案研究，亦或是形成比較研究之必要，以幫助我們增進威權主義與氣候治理之間的學術對話。

Since the study of authoritarianism has revealed the diversity of various types of authoritarian regimes, such as civil, monarchy and military, the question to be explored in this study is whether different types of authoritarian regimes are also different in their ability to cope with climate change crisis. In light of the political challenges posed by the climate change crisis, especially in authoritarian states, this study suggests that authoritarian regimes may develop differences in their ability to integrate society and stabilize governance, with civil authoritarianism and monarchical regimes as the representatives of this advantage respectively.\nThrough the type of authoritarian regime from 1972 to 2014 as the research main independent variables, as well as the carbon emissions per capita as the dependent variables, this study based on large sample data of quantitative analysis showed: among all the authoritarian regime type, tendency of the monarchy regime type for emissions has the most negative impact, indicating that it has best performance; The military regime is the on the second place, while the civil authoritarianism which includes one party and limited multi-party regime is the worst.\nThe above ranking does not change when controlling variables such as economy, resource consumption and population are taken into account. In addition, the authoritarian regimes classified by other authors generally show the advantages of the monarchy and the disadvantages of the civil authoritarian regimes. Accordingly, this study considers the debate over the competing explanations formed by the ability of cooption and the ability of stability can be justified with the monarchy regimes being the type whose carbon reduction performance has statistically significant influence, which explains to stabilize the rule is the more influential factor. In the end, this study suggests that further case studies or comparative studies of monarchies in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) may be necessary in order to enhance the academic dialogue between authoritarianism and climate governance.