The Spatial Mosaic of San-ho Village, PingTung County: Collective Replacement and Adaptation of the Aboriginal peoples

• Main Authors: Ting-Hsiang Chen, 陳丁祥
• Other Authors: Shew-Jiuan B. Su, Ph.D.
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2003
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/06745640552781280359

碩士 === 國立高雄師範大學 === 地理學系 === 91 === This study explores the developmental history of San-ho Village, Pingtung County, to delineate the mechanism and agency of its landscape mosaic. The diversity of San-ho’s areal landscape and the mixture of its people warrant an interesting historical and geographical process. In retrospect, the facade of San-ho village manifests a history that was forced by various apparatuses and shaped by the physical setting that the village has situated. The areal representation of San-ho, thus, is an outcome of integrating “materials” and “adhesives”. While materials represent the touchable and physical settings of San-ho village, adhesives refer to various actions and policies taken by the state, church, and family. Three important forces were significant to the shaping of people’s daily life here, i.e. the state, church, and family. The landscape of the village is mainly cultivated both by the forced migration (initiated by state policy), people’s adaptation to the area, and foreign aids in between. After their migration, the villagers first kept close contacts with former settlements due to basic needs. While such linkage was kept tight during the first ten years, the Protestant Church then launched in the village a so-called “I-Liao Mountain Community Development Project”. The project introduced various material resources, technologies, and cultural values, which soon contributed to the change of production mode, social order and then San-ho’s place making. Policies initiated then by the republic government compounded by the self-pursuit of the people in San-ho village reinforced the shaping of the village to become more like a mixture of stately conditioned and ethnically determined landscape. The state and its policies, church and its values, and family and its social and material presentation are important to the development of the area. The agents and their agency introduce a series of changes to the spatial formation of the village. Changes include promotion of technology, concept of land ownership, family value and social mobility, participation in the Han’s economy, etc. These changes further collapse traditional social-class, promote new identity, rouse new political agendas and agents, and involve new local relationship.