Written by Valagas Gadeljeman; translated by Yu-Chen Chuang
Image credit: 瑪家的謝英俊永久屋 by うみ 目覚めたら / Flickr, license CC-BY-SA-2.0 Deed
Since Typhoon Morakot, the government and academia have not thoroughly explored why Indigenous knowledge is fading and why Indigenous adaptation is becoming more difficult for Indigenous communities. Why can’t Indigenous people have the same freedom and right to choose where their tribe lives as they once did? What policies and laws have limited their ability to move freely? In short, there’s a lack of Indigenous perspectives in Taiwan’s post-disaster recovery discussions, especially when it comes to the importance of ancestral traditional territories. In this article, I’ll discuss the traditional decision-making processes and negotiation strategies in Indigenous communities, with a focus on Paiwan women leaders’ insights.
Paiwan’s Naming Culture and Ancestral Land Knowledge
The naming system is a crucial component of Paiwan culture. Through naming, the Paiwan people understand the relationship among individuals, as well as the origins and ongoing connections between people, houses, tribes, and even the land itself. This culture of naming bestows a sense of “personhood” upon the land, viewing it as having its own life and spirituality. Therefore, Mamazangiljan vusam (traditional leaders) personify the natural environment by naming the land. Importantly, after Typhoon Morakot, the Paiwan people followed the ancestral land names to seek a more suitable and enduring home within their traditional territory. In this process, they demonstrated their profound knowledge of the land and how to engage in collective negotiation and decision-making when choosing a tribal homeland.
This site-selection process has revealed the richness of Indigenous knowledge and practices. The primary criterion for choosing a tribal location must be a traditional territory recognized by the elders, an area where the ancestors have arrived and lived. Based on my post-disaster reconstruction fieldwork interviews, tribal members consider whether the land is within their traditional territory as the first identified condition when selecting post-disaster relocation sites. Even when the government offers various favourable conditions and suitable locations for relocation, they still prioritize land within their traditional territory, following in the pathway of their ancestors. This is because tribal members are accustomed to the intricate ecological networks and a well-developed land naming system within their traditional territory. Their knowledge of land naming is based on a system of ecological knowledge accumulated over generations on how to adapt to local topography, terrain, climate, natural resources, and flora and fauna. This knowledge is the living experiences passed down by their ancestors. Furthermore, it is essential to recognize that even among the same Paiwan ethnicity, there are differences in territorial identity between different tribes. Failure to acknowledge this distinction in site selection could risk encroaching on the traditional territory of another group, which Indigenous peoples strongly avoid.
However, non-Indigenous policymakers often overlook Indigenous people’s knowledge and decision-making practices when selecting relocation sites. Instead, they tend to lean heavily on Western scientific methods to devise strategies for disaster risk reduction. During the post-disaster reconstruction, I observed that the Paiwan people’s traditional knowledge and cultural norms played a pivotal role in the decision-making process. Moreover, Indigenous knowledge and experiences can collaborate with modern scientific knowledge. The traditional social structures and decision-making mechanisms within these communities are also crucial in guiding decisions about post-disaster evacuations, resettlements, and relocations.
Decision-Making and Land Sovereignty in Post-Disaster Negotiations
Tribal members discuss, negotiate, and make decisions through ‘tribal meetings.’ The Mamazangiljan vusam (traditional leader) is an important listener and guide in these meetings. Their role is to integrate everyone’s opinions and suggestions and, ultimately, make the decisions based on the tribe’s best interest. When the Mamazangiljan taljaljak (elders/sages) come together, they form an influential leadership group for the tribe, carrying significant responsibility and holding the final decision-making and executive power.
The main function of tribal meetings is to maintain the tribe’s ongoing operation. All discussions are negotiated in these meetings, and the traditional leader makes the final consensus decision. Paiwan people place significant emphasis on the discussion process, where members spend long periods discussing, understanding, negotiating, and communicating on conflicting matters, collectively proposing solutions. Major topics, such as where to relocate the tribe after a disaster and how to allocate post-disaster spaces, are deliberated upon.
Furthermore, in Paiwan’s animistic culture, not only the ‘living’ can participate in negotiations during these meetings, but the ‘deceased’ (ancestral spirits) can as well. For example, in response to post-disaster relocation, the Taiwanese central government initiated a ‘cross-tribal consultant meeting.’ The tribal head of Makazayazaya, Vavuleneng eleng, participated in this meeting and engaged in negotiation through traditional mechanisms. In this reconstruction plan, the government relocated the severely affected tribes of Makazayazaya, Kucapungane, and Paridrayan into a new ‘Rinari Tribe,’ which is located on Makazayazaya’s traditional territory. Vavuleneng eleng reiterated the traditional land ties during this meeting and criticized the government’s site selection, pointing out its lack of cultural and historical sensitivity. Using pinaljaui na sevalitang—reciting the names of ancestors to seek acknowledgement—Vavuleneng eleng asserted and reaffirmed the tribe’s traditional territory. She declared:
You might think this piece of land belongs to the government, but you shouldn’t say that. This land used to belong to the head of Makazayazaya. Our brother tribe, Masilid, have also once farmed here. I am a member of Paridrayan’s descendants. I’m your descendant, and I’m also your grandmother. I belong to the house of Talimalaw, which is the house of Paridrayan’s leader, and my grandmother is Ngelengele. Why is this important? Each tribe has its own boundaries. Because we have a concept of boundaries, we cannot easily occupy someone else’s land; we have respect and love. The spirits of the tribe also do not allow us to occupy the land of others. Governmental officials don’t choose the land carelessly; you shouldn’t do that.
Through the method of pinaljaui na sevalitang, the traditional leader of Makazayazaya started by reciting the names of generations of ancestors. By doing this, she validated the sovereignty over the tribe’s traditional territory while also confirming kinship relationships with the families of other tribal leaders. Pinaljaui na sevalitang is a unique negotiation model, where the ‘living’ recites the names of the ‘ancestors’ to obtain acknowledgement, as well as to affirm kinship ties between parties, facilitating subsequent negotiations and discussions.
Indigenous people have long interacted with the natural environment, often relying on local practices, knowledge, and traditional decision-making mechanisms to guide their community in anticipating and adapting to the future. Therefore, each tribe has its own way of decision-making and deliberation. From the recent post-disaster relocation processes, it’s evident how the Paiwan people use their traditional social systems and tribal decision-making mechanisms to mitigate the severity of natural disasters. Policymakers should acknowledge the discussions and opinions generated through traditional decision-making mechanisms and uphold Indigenous sovereignty during the policy-making process. This is the starting point for resolving conflicts between different governance and knowledge systems. Moreover, as Paiwan’s naming system carries local environmental knowledge and inter-tribal territorial politics passed down through generations when formulating disaster adaptation plans, this knowledge is an indispensable component.
It is necessary to respect the culture of the affected tribes. Without direct engagement from the local communities and ensuring that Indigenous peoples continue to lead, it’s impossible to develop precise and effective plans for disaster risk reduction. Understanding the diverse cultures, beliefs, and lifestyles within Indigenous communities is key to successful post-disaster reconstruction. Conversely, if governments and professionals overlook these cultural nuances, it can result in uncertainties in Indigenous peoples’ disaster response capacity and the efficacy of post-disaster initiatives, leading to further conflicts and disaster risks.
Valagas Gadeljeman is a PhD candidate at the Graduate Institute of Building and Planning, National Taiwan University. He also serves as the Director of the Indigenous Student Resource Center at I-Shou University.
This article was published as part of a special issue on Indigenous Peoples and Disaster Justice in Taiwan.
