Chih-Pei Hu, Yao-Hsu Tsai, Yan-Yi Chang, Chen-Kuo Shih


In order to highlight the spirit of serving people and to understand the effectiveness of the tax service and its ethics in a selected case study, two empirical investigation methods were conducted: one took the form of face-to-face interviews, and the other was a telephone questionnaire survey. The survey was conducted from October 16 to November 15, 2019, at between 09:00 and 17:00 every day, and mainly included two types of respondents – land administration agents and public consultants. It collected 142 valid responses, to which descriptive statistics and Chi-squared analysis were applied. Based on the results of the empirical analysis of the survey, the respondents gave good assessments of service quality and ethical performance, with both achieving more than 80% satisfaction, and an overall assessment score of 88.9%. This score shows that the Taxation Bureau’s service is generally well regarded. On the other hand, based on the results of cross analysis, we found that “occupation” and “status” are both key background factors that affect respondents’ assessments of the Taxation Bureau. Finally, the survey results also show that some groups with specific backgrounds are willing to expose illegal behaviors. These results correspond with previous research which suggests that local residents with a college education or above have a low tolerance for government corruption.


public service, integrity and ethics, service quality, anti-corruption

Full Text:



Borins,S. 2000. Public-Service Awards Programs: An Exploratory Analysis. Canadian Public Administration 43(3): 321–42.

Bourgon, Jocelyne. 2007. Responsive, Responsible and Respected Government: Towards a New Public Administration Theory. International Review of Administrative Sciences 73(1): 7–26.

Briggs, L. 2009. Testing APS Ethics: Where’s the Integrity? The Australian Journal of Public Administration 68(2): 119–36.

Canache, Damays, and Michael E. Allison. 2005. Perceptions of Political Corruption in Latin American democracies. Latin American Politics and Society 47(3): 91–111.

Carroll, James D., and Dahlia Bradshaw Lynn. 1996. The Future of Federal Reinvention: Congressional Perspectives. Public Administration Review 56: 290–305.

Chih-Tung Hsiao, and Jie-Shin Lin. 2008. A Study of Service Quality in Public Sector. International Journal of Electronic Business Management 6(1): 29–37.

Connor, P. E. 1997. Total Quality Management: A Selective Commentary on its Human Dimensions, with Special Reference to its Downside. Public Administration Review 57: 501–9.

Creyke, R. 2012. An “integrity” Branch. Australian Institute of Administrative Law Forum 70: 33–41.

Executive Yuan:Promote Administrative Reform Program. (Archival Exhibition of Organizational Reform in Chinese). [2020-04-27].

Hartley, J., and J. Downe. 2007. The Shining Lights? The Effectiveness of the Beacon Council Scheme as a Public Service Award. Public Administration 85(2): 329–53.

Heidenheimer, A. J., M. Johnston, and V. T. LeVine. 1989. Introduction. In Political Corruption: A Handbook. Edited by A. J. Heidenheimer, M. Johnston and V. T. LeVine. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers: 3–14.

Holzer, M., E. Charbonneau, and Y. Kim. 2009. Mapping the Terrain of Public Service Quality Improvement: Twenty-Five Years of Trends and Practices in the United States. International Review of Administrative Sciences 75(3): 403–18.

Howe, S. W., and Y. Haigh. 2016. Anti-Corruption Watchdog Accountability: The Limitations of Judicial Review’s Ability to Guard the Guardians. Australian Journal of Public Administration 75(3): 305–17.

Huberts, L. 2014. The Integrity of Governance: What It Is, What We Know, What Is Done and Where to go. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Kim, P. S., and T. Yun. 2017. Strengthening Public Service Ethics in Government: The South Korean Experience. Public Integrity 19: 607–23.

LÖffler, E. 2001. Quality Awards as a Public Sector Benchmarking Concept in OECD Member Countries: Some Gridlines for Quality Award Organizers. Public Administration & Development 21: 27–40.

Maniam, K., and D. Magiswary. 2008. Providing Government Services Online: An Empirical Survey of E-Government at Majlis Perbandaran Subang Jaya (MPSJ). Public Sector ICT Management Review 2(1): 22–28.

Maniam, K., P. Fadilah, and D. Magiswary. 2014. Measuring Service Quality in Malaysian Local Government: The SERVQUAL Approach. Paper presented at the Knowledge Management International Conference (KMICe), 12th August to the 15th August, Malaysia.: Langkawi.

Meier, K. J.,and T. M. Holbrook .1992. I Seen My Opportunities and I Took’em: Political Corruption in the American States. The Journal of Politics, 54(1):135-155.

Meyer-Sahling, J. H., K. S. Mikkelsen, and C. Schuster. 2018. Civil Service Management and Corruption: What We Know and What We don’t. Public Administration 96: 276–85.

Misangyi, V., G. Weaver, and H. Elms. 2008. Ending Corruption: The Interplay among the Institutional Logics, Resources, and Institutional Entrepreneurs. The Academy of Management Review 33(3): 750–70.

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). 2000. Public Sector Corruption: An International Survey of Prevention Measures. France: Paris.

Parasuraman, A. 2002. Service Quality and Productivity: A Synergistic Perspective. Journal of Service Theory and Practice 12(1): 6–9.

Parasuraman, A., V. A. Zeithaml, and L. L. Berry. 1985. A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and its Implications for Future Research. Journal of Marketing 49: 41–50.

Quah, J. S. T. 1999. Comparing Anti-Corruption Measures in Asian Countries: Lessons to be Learn. Asian Review of Public Administration 6: 71–90.

Rohr, J. A. 1998. Public Service, Ethics and Constitutional Practice. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.

Terry, Larry D. 1993. Why We Should Abandon the Misconceived Quest to Reconcile Public Entrepreneurship with Democracy. Public Administration Review 53(4): 393–95.

Transparency International: What is Corruption? [2020-04-27].



  • There are currently no refbacks.

"Public Policy and Administration" ISSN online 2029-2872 / ISSN print 1648-2603