國家自然資源管理體制下的再共有化 : 臺灣野生動物共管制度的興起與最新趨勢

Abstract

This paper aims to study the “re-commoning” process of natural resources in Taiwan, in particular related to indigenous context. As one of the most typical and important types of common-pool resources, wildlife has been, and still is the core of Taiwan indigenous society’s daily life and culture practice. To highlight the significance of indigenous struggle toward reclaiming their natural resources rights, we study the latest trends of the rise of indigenous- state wildlife co-management regime in Taiwan. Indigenous commons regime, including the traditional wildlife hunting and management institutions, once dominated the land and natural resources in Taiwan. In the case of wildlife, the invasion of modern state regime did to certain extent exerted influences on indigenous institutions. The state, however, has never absolutely taken over the indigenous wildlife use and management rights until 1980s. In 1989, the Wildlife Conservation Act was passed by the parliament, which absolutely prohibits wildlife hunting, ignores the de facto indigenous institutions, and virtually includes wildlife as part of the state-centric, command-and-control natural resources management regime. The strict Wildlife Conservation Act causes serious, negative impacts on indigenous wildlife hunting practice, as well as its institutions. This has also been one of the focuses of indigenous movement’s claims. The indigenous claim of legal rights of wildlife hunting and management is steadily withstand by both the state authority and the mainstream society. Meanwhile some activists in the indigenous movement, environmental organizations, and academics achieved some sort of consensus, and formed a coalition to pursue a co-management wildlife regime in recent years. For some people, the goal might be an autonomous, self-governed indigenous wildlife management regime. In 2016, a new window of opportunity arose. The new Taiwan President, Tsai In-Wen, declared a new indigenous policy toward pursuing transitional justice for indigenous rights. The policy significantly changed the traditional route of the state authority, the Forestry Bureau, which is in charge of the wildlife conservation. The Forestry Bureau actively initiated eight pioneer projects, trying to build up step by step an indigenous-state wildlife co-management regime, in which the academics are also involved. To illustrate the deliberate re-commoning process, we study a case of Truku Tribe. The case study unpacks some of the key challenges and current achievements, including the support and/or resistance of external institutions, intra-community dynamics, management capacity, and the roles of academics and non-governmental organizations. These novel experiences may offer critical insights for a possible paradigm shift of commons governance in Taiwan.