Following the disastrous floods and landslides brought to southern and central Taiwan by Typhoon Morakot, the task of rebuilding Aboriginal villages is high on the agenda for government agencies and charities, but much of the discussion has overlooked the real needs of the villagers. I visited some of the places where Aborigines from typhoon-hit villages have been given shelter, and I have observed how worried they are that their communities may disintegrate.
For Aborigines, the village community is the organization that preserves their social structure. Its functions include cooperation, mutual aid, social care and shared welfare. Over the years, when disasters have struck, the power of unity within the village community is what people have relied on before help from outside can reach them. So it is important that reconstruction should be thought of as a matter not only of building houses for individual families, but of reconstructing village communities with their collective nature intact.
The idea that mountainous areas are dangerous places to live is not necessarily true. The villages worst hit by Typhoon Morakot were mostly those that were relocated by the government over the years. Such relocated villages were hit much harder than those that were established long ago. For example, Sinhaocha Village (新好茶) in Pingtung County’s Wutai Township (霧台) was completely submerged, while the strata beneath Sindalai Village (新達來) in Sandimen Township (三地門) was displaced and destablized. In Kaohsiung County, Cinhe Village (勤和) in Taoyuan Township and several badly damaged villages in Namasiya Township (那瑪夏) had all been moved from other places at some point for the government’s convenience. In contrast, older villages are mostly standing firm.
The security and livelihood of the original villages should be preserved as the foundation for rebuilding communities. When Aborigines are separated from the land, they usually end up moving into cities where they become a new kind of refugee and in danger of oblivion.
Most prefabricated housing and other forms of temporary settlement, however, have been planned without regard for rebuilding the way of life of the original village or maintaining the villagers’ network of relations. Temporary housing may not satisfy villagers’ real needs. It reminds me of the research I did a few years ago in Haocha Village, where elderly villagers all told me they were against moving downhill from their old village to the new village of Sinhaocha.
Landslides and mudslides are different from earthquakes, and there is not much possibility of rebuilding damaged or destroyed villages at their original locations. Instead, it is necessary to find new locations where the land is stable and rebuild the villages there.
It will generally take not two or three, but five or 10 years to reconstruct sustainable village communities with an independent livelihood and legal status. The question of how to provide bigger and more comfortable transitional homes to be used for five to 10 years is, therefore, a more important consideration than hastily placing people in temporary prefabricated housing.
Unfortunately, in the wake of Morakot, many Aboriginal village communities have been treated as individual victims and “given shelter” (actually cast adrift) in 10 or 20 different locations.
RSS