This is greatly different from the situation in the late 1990s and early 2000s when more people in Taiwan had double identities than those with sole Chinese or Taiwanese identity,and more people agreed with unification with the mainland under favorable conditions than those opposed to this option.According to Liu Yi-chou,while about 70.5%of interviewees identified themselves as part of Chinese in the late 1990s,74.5%of interviewees wanted to self-decide the future of Taiwan,revealing the inconsistency between cultural and political dimensions of national identity.In particular,38.1%of interviewees considered Taiwan as part of China and people in Taiwan as part of "the Chinese",but still wanted to self-decide the future of Taiwan.7 As Chiang Yi-hua pointed out in his early work Liberalism,Nationalism and National Identity,as long as cultural and ethnic identity played a key role in national identity,people were not expected to have a clear concept of statehood.Even though one hundred years of separation of Taiwan from the mainland had prepared a base for an independent statehood,it still could not replace the long memory of the two sides as the same country,and different generations in Taiwan were divided on this matter.According to Chiang,the common language,similar religions,overlapping historical memory,geographic closeness and economic division of labor of the two sides of the Taiwan Strait were advantageous conditions for future unification,and political institutions were key factors in shaping the future relations between the two sides.8 It should be recognized that even though most people in Taiwan now only identity themselves as Taiwanese,close to one third of the population have not given up their Chinese (hongguoren)identity.It means that Taiwan is still a divided society when it comes to the basic concept of national identity.Moreover,among people who solely identified themselves as Taiwanese,59.6%of them considered themselves as part of the Chinese nation (zhonghua minzu) and 15.8%of them thought they were both part of the Chinese nation and Chinese(zhongguoren), when being asked to answer the question from blood and cultural perspective.This suggests that concepts of Taiwanese and the Chinese nation could be highly overlapped in a certain sense. While 45.1%of people who identified as Taiwanese understood the concept from historical and cultural perspective,43.7%of them thought Taiwanese mainly meant those who lived and worked in Taiwan.36.3%of Taiwan identifiers could accept the idea of "one China with different interpretations"in dealing with the mainland,and only 46.5%of them disagreed.In other words, only about one-thirds of all interviewees (45.1%X 67.4%=30.4%)identify themselves as Taiwanese and understand the concept from blood or historical and cultural aspects.Among this group of people,38.2%preferred instant or later independence in the SJTU October 2014 survey.10 It seems reasonable to regard 11.6%of people (67.4%X 45.1%X 38.2%=11.6%)in Taiwan as core elements of Taiwanese nationalists.However,16.8%of this small group of people can still accept unification with the Mainland under favorable conditions(democracy). People who identified as Taiwanese seemed to have a clearer understanding of the national identity issue from political/civil/state aspects.For example,77.3%of them disagreed that the people of the Republic of China(ROC)were also Chinese,even when they were reminded that China could be the short name of the ROC (zhongguo as the short name of zhonghua minguo),and only 15%of them agreed that people living in the ROC were also Chinese.Moreover,79%of 7 Liu Yi-chou,"National Identity of People in Taiwan-A New Measurement Way,"Paper delivered at the 1998 annual meeting of Association of Chinese Political Science(Taiwan),January 14,1998,Taipei. 8 Chiang Yi-hua,Liberalism,Nationalism and National Identity (Taipei:Yangchi Cultural Press,1998),217-222. Yang Zhong&Yana Zuo,"Explaining National Identity Shift in Taiwan"(Manuscript). 0 Database of Center for Taiwan Studies,Shanghai Jiao Tong University. 77 This is greatly different from the situation in the late 1990s and early 2000s when more people in Taiwan had double identities than those with sole Chinese or Taiwanese identity, and more people agreed with unification with the mainland under favorable conditions than those opposed to this option. According to Liu Yi-chou, while about 70.5% of interviewees identified themselves as part of Chinese in the late 1990s, 74.5% of interviewees wanted to self-decide the future of Taiwan, revealing the inconsistency between cultural and political dimensions of national identity. In particular, 38.1% of interviewees considered Taiwan as part of China and people in Taiwan as part of “the Chinese”, but still wanted to self-decide the future of Taiwan.7 As Chiang Yi-hua pointed out in his early work Liberalism, Nationalism and National Identity, as long as cultural and ethnic identity played a key role in national identity, people were not expected to have a clear concept of statehood. Even though one hundred years of separation of Taiwan from the mainland had prepared a base for an independent statehood, it still could not replace the long memory of the two sides as the same country, and different generations in Taiwan were divided on this matter. According to Chiang, the common language, similar religions, overlapping historical memory, geographic closeness and economic division of labor of the two sides of the Taiwan Strait were advantageous conditions for future unification, and political institutions were key factors in shaping the future relations between the two sides.8 It should be recognized that even though most people in Taiwan now only identity themselves as Taiwanese, close to one third of the population have not given up their Chinese (zhongguoren) identity. It means that Taiwan is still a divided society when it comes to the basic concept of national identity.9 Moreover, among people who solely identified themselves as Taiwanese, 59.6% of them considered themselves as part of the Chinese nation (zhonghua minzu) and 15.8% of them thought they were both part of the Chinese nation and Chinese (zhongguoren), when being asked to answer the question from blood and cultural perspective. This suggests that concepts of Taiwanese and the Chinese nation could be highly overlapped in a certain sense. While 45.1% of people who identified as Taiwanese understood the concept from historical and cultural perspective, 43.7% of them thought Taiwanese mainly meant those who lived and worked in Taiwan. 36.3% of Taiwan identifiers could accept the idea of “one China with different interpretations” in dealing with the mainland, and only 46.5% of them disagreed. In other words, only about one-thirds of all interviewees (45.1% X 67.4% = 30.4%) identify themselves as Taiwanese and understand the concept from blood or historical and cultural aspects. Among this group of people, 38.2% preferred instant or later independence in the SJTU October 2014 survey.10 It seems reasonable to regard 11.6% of people (67.4%×45.1%×38.2% = 11.6%) in Taiwan as core elements of Taiwanese nationalists. However, 16.8% of this small group of people can still accept unification with the Mainland under favorable conditions (democracy). People who identified as Taiwanese seemed to have a clearer understanding of the national identity issue from political/civil/state aspects. For example, 77.3% of them disagreed that the people of the Republic of China (ROC) were also Chinese, even when they were reminded that China could be the short name of the ROC (zhongguo as the short name of zhonghua minguo), and only 15% of them agreed that people living in the ROC were also Chinese. Moreover, 79% of 7 Liu Yi-chou, “National Identity of People in Taiwan—A New Measurement Way,” Paper delivered at the 1998 annual meeting of Association of Chinese Political Science (Taiwan), January 14, 1998, Taipei. 8 Chiang Yi-hua, Liberalism, Nationalism and National Identity (Taipei: Yangchi Cultural Press, 1998), 217-222. 9 Yang Zhong & Yana Zuo, “Explaining National Identity Shift in Taiwan” (Manuscript). 10 Database of Center for Taiwan Studies, Shanghai Jiao Tong University