社群支持型農業之部落鑲嵌性

Abstract

本研究檢視當前台灣原住民部落中的社群支持型農業（community supported agriculture, CSA）發展，探討CSA鑲嵌於部落的可能意義；以Mark Granovetter（1985）的社會鑲嵌理論（social embeddedness theory）及CSA相關概念，結合台灣原住民部落發展相關文獻作為本文檢視部落CSA發展對原住民部落的部落鑲嵌意義之分析架構依據。本研究選擇五個部落CSA案例進行訪談及參與式觀察，訪問核心推動者和原住民參與者。 本研究認為當代以漢人推動者為主的部落CSA以部落經濟與社會發展為目標，其中CSA的社會鑲嵌意義以解決部落問題為主，鑲嵌的過程也強化了部落社會連帶關係網絡；然而如何有效的吸引部落青年回鄉仍為未解之題。文化鑲嵌的意義顯示部落CSA的運作嘗試與原住民的文化及生活結合，同時試圖強化部落族人的文化認同；但是尚未見傳統文化創新之處。自然鑲嵌的意義在於農法的使用與推廣，對部落生產者而言是一個「再教育」的過程，更重要的是能夠與傳統農耕知識對話，重新將農業生產行為鑲嵌回自然環境中。此外，本研究也發現部落CSA與原住民部落具有互惠的關係。 本研究也針對CSA部落推動者及漢人推動者進行比較與討論，發現漢人推動者多以解決部落問題，或是發展有機、自然農業為導向，然而部落推動者卻是以發展部落產業的角度出發。此外，在糧食主權議題的討論上，本研究認為，部落CSA種類多元的經濟作物對族人而言亦可作為糧食，在農場尚未穩定發展的情況下，確實有必要發展符合漢人消費者需求的經濟作物。 本研究貢獻在於提出部落CSA發展的部落鑲嵌性意義，增加學術上部落CSA與西方脈絡CSA對話的空間，並提供檢視現階段部落CSA發展的依據及未來發展部落CSA的參考基礎，了解部落CSA的契機與挑戰。

The article is aimed to exam community supported agriculture (CSA) development in contemporary Taiwan indigenous tribes, preliminarily exploring the meaning of tribal embeddedness. The article adopts Mark Granovetter’s (1985) social embddedness theory and CSA related concepts, combining Taiwan indigenous tribal development related literature as the basic analysis framework to exam the meaning of tribal CSA development for indigenous tribes. We choose five tribal CSAs as examples, intervewing core propellents and indigenous producers. The article indicates that contemporary tribal CSAs try to target on both tribal economic development and social development. The implication of social embeddedness is tribal problems solving – oriented. The process of embedding also possesses the meaning of enhancing tribal social solidarity. However, it is still difficult to figure out effective ways to draw indigenous young people back to hometown.The implication of cultural embeddedness is trying to merge indigenous people’s culture and daily life, simultaneously enhancing indigenous people’s cultural identity. Yet, we seldom observe any traditional culture innovation. The implication of natural embeddedness is about adopting and promoting natural or organic farming. For indigenous producer, it is a process of reeducation. More important, it highlights an intimate relationship with traditional farming knowledge and reembeddeds agricultural production into natural environment. Besides, the article finds out that tribal CSA and indigenous tribe holds a reciprocal relationship with each other. The article also compares and discusses the differences between tribal and Han propellents of CSA. The article shows that Han propellents are tribal problems solving or organic farming developing– oriented. However, tribal propellents focus on developing tribal industries. More over, in the discussion of food sovereignty issue, the article assumes that to indigenous people, the diversity produce of tribal CSA is also considered as food. To ensure a stable development, it is essential to develop cash crops that match the needs of Hans consumers. The contribution of the article is to propose the meaning of tribal embeddedness in CSA development, encouraging the interaction and conversation of CSA between tribal and Western context. In addition, it provides the foundation to exam CSA development nowadays and in the future, realizing the challenges and chances of tribal CSA development.