Abstract
Although sustainability science has been developed within the Western knowledge system, and Indigenous science has been studied at the local level, these two streams of thought are premised on a common understanding of the relationship between humans and the environment. The practitioners of each, however, have not yet engaged in productive, practical dialog. This paper used cooperative game theory to better understand the choices and tradeoffs made by Indigenous Taiwanese villagers who were in a “competitive” situation with regard to Indigenous autonomy and government-led protected areas. The aim was to understand how interactions among different groups of local people could affect community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) processes that aim to balance environmental sustainability with Indigenous autonomy. Results show that the knowledge and rights of Indigenous people could be part of a compromising collaboration with legislation-supported protected areas, if this collaboration benefits Indigenous autonomy as well as sustainability of the local environment and livelihoods. Indigenous science can inform changing landscapes, while sustainability science can provide analytical approaches and planning schemes for resilience. We suggest, though, that the trade-off process should be open and include a well-communicated mechanism through which all parties can negotiate power in a mutually agreeable way, merging Indigenous and sustainability concerns into one actionable collaboration. The types of conflicts analyzed in this study are characteristic of the conflicts typically associated with sustainable development.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Types of protected areas range from strict preservation, which allows limited access, to those where decision-making power, responsibility, and accountability are shared at different levels by the locals, government, and other stakeholders. The latter particularly refers to Indigenous cultures that still depend on the local environment (Borrini-Feyerabend et al. 2007).
The Truku tribe—officially recognized by the government in 2004—is one of 16 officially recognized tribes in Taiwan. Traditionally, Truku males are good at hunting, and females are skilled in weaving.
Another translation is Natural and Cultural Ecology Scenic Areas. Both can be found in the laws and regulation database of the Republic of China (http://www.law.moj.gov.tw/eng/index.aspx) and refer to the same thing.
Though official estimates state that 1,500 people are registered in the village, interviews reveal that only about 500–600 people live there permanently.
There are eight hydropower plants along the river within the village.
Neighborhood is the smallest unit within the contemporary administrative system.
The eight Truku clans/families are Meqmegi, Meqeboh, Meqduyon, Mekbayan, Mekuway, Mesakahen, Maheyan, Qeyjin (Liao 1984).
Interviews cited in this paper were first translated from Chinese to English by the lead author and then double-checked by a professional English editor to make sure the meanings remained the same and the language usage was correct.
Gaya is a Truku traditional belief. It provides spiritual guidelines and practical rules for Truku people to follow. Although most people no longer follow every detail of gaya, most Truku still followed the general ideas in their daily lives, as observed in 2010.
Such as Varicorhinus barbatulus, Hemimyzon taitungensis, Candidiopotamon rathbuni, etc (Hualien County Government 2005).
The TSRA argued that the fish release project in 2003 caused invasive species to damage the ecosystem.
References
Agrawal A, Gibson CC (2001) The role of community in natural resource conservation. In: Agrawal A, Gibson CC (eds) Communities and the environment: ethnicity, gender, and the state in community-based conservation. Rutgers University Press, London, pp 1–31
Anderies JM, Janssen MA, Bousquet F, Cardenas JC, Castillo D, Lopez MC, Tobias R, Vollan B, Wutich A (2011) The challenge of understanding decisions in experimental studies of common pool resource governance. Ecol Econ 70(9):1571–1579
Athanasiou T (1996) Divided planet: the ecology of rich and poor. Little, Brown and Company, New York
Bailey M, Sumaila UR, Lindroos M (2010) Application of game theory to fisheries over three decades. Fish Res 102(1–2):1–8
Barber CV (2004) Parks and people in a world of change: governance, participation and equity. In: Barber CV, Miller KR, Boness M (eds) Securing protected areas in the face of global change: issues and strategies. IUCN, Switzerland, pp 97–135
Bennett NJ, Dearden P (2014) Why local people do not support conservation: community perceptions of marine protected area livelihood impacts, governance and management in Thailand. Mar Policy 44:107–116
Berkes F (2009) Evolution of co-management: role of knowledge generation, bridging organizations and social learning. J Environ Manage 20:1692–1702
Berkes F, Folke C (2002) Back to the future: ecosystem dynamics and local knowledge. In: Gunderson LH, Holling CS (eds) Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Island Press, Washington DC, pp 121–146
Borrini-Feyerabend G (2012) Bio-cultural diversity conserved by Indigenous peoples and local communities: examples and analysis. IUCN, Switzerland
Borrini-Feyerabend G, Pimbert M, Farvar MT, Kothari A, Renard Y (2007) Sharing power: learning-by-doing in co-management of natural resources throughout the world. Earthscan, London, UK
Brosius JP, Tsing AL, Zerner C (eds) (2005) Communities and conservation: histories and politics of community-based natural resource management. Altamira Press, New York
Cascio AL, Beilin R (2010) Of biodiversity and boundaries: a case study of community-based natural resource management practice in the Cardamom Mountains. Cambodia Environ Conserv 37(3):347–355
Chapin FS III, Carpenter SR, Kofinas GP, Folke C, Abel N, Clark WC, Olsson P, Smith DMS, Walker B, Young OR, Berkes F, Biggs R, Grove JM, Naylor RL, Pinkerton E, SteffenW Swanson FJ (2009) Ecosystem stewardship: sustainability strategies for a rapidly changing planet. Trends Ecol Evol 25(4):241–249
Coleman J (1988) Social capital in the creation of human capital. J Sociol 94:95–120
d’Aquino P, Seck SM (2002) Et si les approches participatives étaient inadaptées à la gestion décentralisée de territoire (What about if participatory approaches do not fit decentralized land management scopes)? Géocarrefour 76(3):233–240
Davidson DJ (2010) The applicability of the concept of resilience to social systems: some sources of optimism and nagging doubts. Soc Nat Resour 23:1135–1149
Folke C, Berkes F, Colding J (1998) Ecological practices and social mechanisms for building resilience and sustainability. In: Berkes F, Folke C (eds) Linking social and ecological systems: management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience. Cambridge University Press, UK, pp 414–436
Gooch M, Rigano D (2010) Enhancing community-scale social resilience: what is the connection between healthy communities and healthy waterways? Aust Geogr 41(4):507–520
Grix J (2004) The foundations of research. Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Hardin G (1968) The tragedy of the commons. Science 162:1243–1248
Hipwell WY (2007) Taiwan aboriginal ecotourism: Tanayiku national ecology park. Ann Tourism Res 34(4):876–897
Howitt R, Suchet-Pearson S (2006) Rethinking the building blocks: ontological pluralism and the idea of “management”. Geogr. Ann 88 B(3):323–335
Hualien County Government (2005) Hualien River travel book no. 2: the Cingshuei River and Emerald Valley in Tongmen. Hualien County Government, Taiwan (in Chinese)
Liao SC (1984) Culture of the Atayal: tribal migration and expansion. World News Junior College, Taipei (in Chinese)
Lin PS, Chang CY (2011) Towards sustainable community-based natural resource management in the Indigenous Meqmegi community in Taiwan: rethinking impacts of local participation. Nat Resour Forum 35:134–144
Lin KH, Chang CY (2013) Everyday crises: marginal society livelihood vulnerability and adaptability to hazards. ProgDevel St 13(1):1–18
Lu DJ, Chueh HC, Huang SJ, Lin HC, Wang CR (2011) Community empowerment and resource conservation: reviewing the community forestry policy in Taiwan. Taiw Polit Sci Rev 15(1):137–204 (in Chinese)
Lu DJ, Chueh HC, Kao CW (2012) Why they cannot work together: a study of the co-management of natural resources with Indigenous people in Taiwan. Soc Natur Resour 25:105–112
Madani K (2010) Game theory and water resources. J Hydrol 381(3):225–238
Martinez A (1995) The new regional planning and implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity. In: Saunier RE, Meganck RA (eds) Conservation of biodiversity and the new regional planning. Organization of American States/IUCN, Washington, pp 93–99
Measham TG, Lumbasi JA (2013) Success factors for community-based natural resource management: lessons from Kenya and Australia. Environ Manage 52:649–659
Ministry of Justice (2011) Act for the development of tourism. Laws and regulation database of the Republic of China. http://www.law.moj.gov.tw/Eng/LawClass/LawContent.aspx?PCODE=K0110001. Accessed 28 August 2014
Mitchell B (1989) Geography and resource analysis, 2nd edn. Longman, UK
Oppenheimer J, Frohlich N (2007) Demystifying social welfare: foundations for constitutional design. Maryland Law Rev 67(1):85–122
Ostrom E (1990) Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press, New York
Rousseau JJ (1763) The social contract. Simon and Schuster, New York
Saglie IL (2006) Fragmented institutions:the problem facing natural resource management. In: Rydin Y, Falleth E (eds) Networks and Institutions in natural resource management. Edward Elgar, UK, pp 1–14
Scheyvens R (1999) Ecotourism and the empowerment of local communities. Tour Manage 20:245–249
Slocum R, Wichhart L, Rocheleau D, Thomas-Slayter B (eds) (1995) Power, process and participation: tools for change. Intermediate Technology Publications, London
Sudtongkong C, Webb EL (2008) Outcomes of state-vs community-based mangrove management in Southern Thailand. Ecol Soc 13(2):27
Sun DC (2006) Pgkla nsgan bsuring (local history of Sioulin Township). Hualien County Government, Taiwan (in Chinese)
Tai HS (2007) Development through conservation: an institutional analysis of Indigenous community-based conservation in Taiwan. World Dev 35(7):1186–1203
Trochim WMK, Donnelly JP (2007) Research methods knowledge base, 3rd edn. Thomson Custom Pub, Ohio
Tsai FN (ed) (2011) Twenty years after the Ofelia: back to Tongmen. Sioulin Township Office, Taiwan (in Chinese)
Tsai BW, Lo YC (2013) The spatial knowledge of Indigenous people in mountainous environments: a case study of three Taiwanese Indigenous tribes. Geogr Rev 103(3):390–408
Williams JF, Chang CY (2008) Taiwan’s environmental struggle: toward a green silicon island. Routledge, New York
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Handled by Renee Pualani Louis, The University of Kansas, USA.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lin, PS.S., Liu, YL. Niching sustainability in an Indigenous community: protected areas, autonomous initiatives, and negotiating power in natural resource management. Sustain Sci 11, 103–113 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0294-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0294-8