Taiwan has six national parks. It has been 18 years since the establishment of the first one, in Kenting. Although the development of the parks has generally been well received, there still remain difficulties in the area of park management. The main problem is that local communities -- particularly our Aboriginal friends -- share a lack of understanding about the creation and management of parks.
Local communities' (especially Aboriginal tribes') demands for collective management of the parks have prompted several recent disputes. Research shows that there are two general trends in the management of protected areas: "exclusive" and "inclusive" management.
The world's first national park -- Yellowstone in the US -- was designed with the goal of protecting a large, majestic tract of land uninhabited by humans. In the early days, the management of the US' parks, including Yellowstone, was completely "exclusive." Tak-ing the US system as its blueprint, Taiwan's parks for the most part adopted a similar policy.
In the US and Canada, implementation of this system was not particularly problematic, because of the immense land area involved and the nations' vast natural resources. Applied in Taiwan, however, exclusive management produces less favorable results.
National parks with inclusive management schemes are largely concentrated in Europe. Britain perhaps provides the most typical example. As there is human activity in the majority of areas in the UK, the demarcation and management of protected areas could not possibly avoid affecting communities. Apart from protecting natural resources, the benefits to local communities also had to be considered before any measures could be deemed acceptable.
Taiwan's adoption of exclusive management models is due to the fact that for years the US was the main destination for Taiwanese going abroad to study. People were familiar with US laws. As Taiwan has democratized, however, the unsuitability of these models has become apparent.
Legislative amendments are the key to resolving disputes between Aboriginals and national parks. In May, during the review of amendments to the National Parks Law (
But what exactly can park managements do about the issue of allowing Aboriginals and other local communities to participate in decision-making? What kinds of channels exist to ensure that the opinions of these communities are clearly presented and acknowledged? Working on a "tribal map" would be an important start.
A "tribal map" involves giving a corresponding geographical position to the history of human activity in a certain region. It is also capable of telling a story. The interview process involved in gathering information for such maps often inspires communities to consider and debate issues. This interaction often provides a picture of the local methods of resource utilization, as well as traces of culture and history. A tribal map can be as simple as a hand-sketched diagram, or it could make use of modern geographical information tools to integrate the information.
Patterns of local community life -- such as tribal distribution and movement and traditional hunting grounds -- would be included on such maps. The "ecological wisdom" contained in these maps would be especially valuable in terms of improving the understanding of certain ecological issues.
Perhaps a tribal map isn't the solution to every problem, but it could advance understanding among those whose rights and interests are at stake, helping them to establish partnerships in which rights and privileges are shared.
Yeh Shih-wen is superintendent of the Taroko National Park.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations