Documentation:Open Case Studies/FRST522/2024/The Saisiyat Tribal Community and the Forest Bureau of Taiwan: A Case Study of Forest Co-Management

Summary of Case Study

Overview of the Saisiyat Co-Management Case

The Saisiyat Tribal Community and the Forestry and Nature Conservation Agency (FANCA) of Taiwan established a co-management partnership in 2018 to manage forest lands within traditional Saisiyat territories. This framework integrates Traditional Ecological Knowledge with modern forest governance, focusing on ecological conservation, cultural preservation, and economic development. While the forest areas remain under national ownership, the Saisiyat community has been granted use rights, enabling activities such as eco-tourism, under-forest economies, forest patrols, and ecological monitoring through a joint management committee.

Key Outcomes and Challenges

The initiative has yielded positive outcomes in three key areas: economic development through under-forest activities and eco-tourism, cultural revitalization through integration of traditional practices, and enhanced forest conservation through joint monitoring efforts. However, challenges persist, including power imbalances with FANCA retaining strategic authority, financial dependency on government support, and limited land rights that restrict autonomous decision-making.

Significance of the Co-Management Model

This case demonstrates how co-management can reconcile conservation goals with Indigenous empowerment while addressing historical injustices. The model provides valuable lessons for developing inclusive governance frameworks that integrate Indigenous rights and traditional knowledge into forest management. Despite its challenges, it serves as a blueprint for other Indigenous communities in Taiwan and globally, showing how to balance environmental sustainability with socio-economic development and aligning with Indigenous Peoples' empowerment.

Keywords

Forest co-management; Saisiyat Tribal Community; Indigenous People’s land right; Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK); Taiwan

Introduction and Description

Objectives and Scope of the Case Study

The primary objective of this case study is to analyze the effectiveness of the forest co-management model between the Saisiyat Tribal Community and the Forestry Bureau of Taiwan (now the Forestry and Nature Conservation Agency, FANCA). The study examines various dimensions, including tenure arrangements, institutional structures, stakeholder dynamics, and critical issues faced during the co-management process. By providing a comprehensive analysis, this case study aims to offer actionable recommendations to enhance Indigenous empowerment, ensure equitable governance, and promote sustainability in forest management.

Background of the Saisiyat Tribal Community and Location of the Case

The Saisiyat are one of Taiwan's recognized Indigenous Peoples, residing in the northwest mountainous region at altitudes between 500 and 1,500 meters, distributed in two administrative regions: Hsinchu County and Miaoli County separated by Ergonji Mountain. They maintain a patrilineal clan society with a hereditary system of elder families. As of 2022, the Council of Indigenous Peoples of Taiwan reported 6,838 Saisiyat people. The Saisiyat language is now classified as endangered by UNESCO due to declining population and cultural erosion. Their rich cultural heritage includes traditional ceremonies like the pas-ta'ai (Dwarf Spirit Festival), reflecting their deep spiritual connection to the land.

The Saisiyat have traditionally sustained themselves through hunting, gathering, and agriculture in their forest homeland.

Geographic distribution of Saisiyat community in Taiwan

During the Japanese occupation of Taiwan (1895-1945), the lands inhabited by the Saisiyat, as well as the mountain areas farmed by the Saisiyat , were declared "public territories". This declaration gave the Japanese significant control over these lands, severely impacting the traditional rights and practices of the community. The mountains of Miaoli—rich in cypress, cedar, and pine—were heavily logged to meet Japan's construction and wartime demands. This extensive logging devastated the Saisiyat people as authorities systematically depleted these valuable trees from the Miaoli forests.

The Saisiyat were forcibly relocated from their ancestral forests to areas along "surveillance roads” where they were closely monitored by Japanese police, fundamentally disrupting their daily lives and social structures. The authorities aggressively discouraged traditional practices like mountain hunting, severely impacting the Saisiyat's mountain-based way of life. This constant surveillance stripped away their security and independence.

After Japan's surrender in 1945, land ownership rights in mountainous areas like Miaoli remained unclear, with competing claims from Indigenous communities, repatriated Japanese settlers, and the government. This legal uncertainty prevented the Saisiyat from reclaiming their ancestral lands.

The government, prioritizing national security, regarded Indigenous communities in border regions with suspicion. They viewed the Saisiyat's traditional hunting and land use practices as incompatible with their desire to control and monitor these areas. This led to movement restrictions and further blocked their return to ancestral territories.

In the 1970s, the Saisiyat tribes in Penglai Village, Nanzhuang Township in Miaoli entered into a long-term resource conflict with the Hsinchu Forest District Office of the Forestry Bureau. Government regulations prohibiting the use of forest resources led to stagnant tribal socio-economic development, causing youth to migrate to urban areas. This resulted in significant population decline, cultural discontinuity, and poor management of mountain and forest resources. Until the 2010s, local people commonly engaged in illegal logging due to limited income alternatives. This situation created various problems, particularly heightening tensions between the Saisiyat and the government. As a result, the Saisiyat people began referring to the Forestry Bureau as "Hawen" (meaning "devil").

On February 7, 2018, the Saisiyat took a step toward reconciliation. They participated in a partnership signing ceremony with the Forestry Bureau at the Legislative Yuan, formally declaring their commitment to pursuing sustainable development of both tribe and forest through mutual trust, assistance, and sharing, working together with the FANCA.

The Saisiyat tribal groups of Penglai Village are located on Jiali Shan mountain, which is known as Taiwan's Mount Fuji. Their surrounding environment, with its unique forested landforms and biodiversity, creates a distinctive nature-culture relationship for the tribal communities. The Saisiyat's connection to the natural environment is reflected in their tribal education system, knowledge of medicinal herbs and plants, coming-of-age ceremonies, and traditional sacrifices. The ruins of their old tribal sites and ancestral burial grounds are scattered throughout the vast forested landscape, preserving the wisdom of their heritage.

Landscape of the Saisiyat tribe in Penglai Village

The co-management initiative focuses on forest lands within the Saisiyat’s traditional territories, which are also designated as national forest lands under state ownership. These forests hold significant ecological and cultural value, serving as a habitat for diverse flora and fauna while also preserving the Saisiyat’s cultural practices. The case study’s geographical focus includes areas where eco-tourism activities and under-forest economies such as beekeeping and mushroom cultivation are being implemented as part of the co-management model.

Historical Context of Forest Management in Taiwan

Taiwan’s approach to forest management has evolved significantly over the past century, shaped by its colonial history and post-war governance systems. During the Japanese colonial period (1895-1945), vast tracts of forests were nationalized, and Indigenous communities were systematically excluded from their ancestral lands. The Japanese administration prioritized the exploitation of timber resources and implemented strict conservation policies that restricted Indigenous access to forests for traditional practices.

After World War II, the Republic of China (ROC) government inherited the centralized forest management system, continuing to maintain state ownership of forest lands. This approach emphasized timber production and conservation while sidelining Indigenous land-use rights. In the 1970s, logging in natural forests was banned to address deforestation, but these conservation efforts further restricted Indigenous communities’ access to forest resources.

By the late 20th century, growing awareness of Indigenous rights and environmental sustainability prompted Taiwan to reevaluate its forest management policies. Legislative advancements, such as the Indigenous Peoples Basic Law (2005), sought to recognize Indigenous rights, including participation in natural resource management. However, practical implementation of these rights remained limited, as the government retained significant control over forest governance.

Challenges and Evolution of Indigenous Land Rights in Taiwan

The struggle for Indigenous land rights in Taiwan has been marked by decades of marginalization and advocacy. The nationalization of forests during the Japanese colonial era displaced Indigenous communities from their traditional territories, severing their connection to the land. Post-war policies maintained this exclusion, framing Indigenous land-use practices as incompatible with modern conservation and economic development goals.

The passage of the Indigenous Peoples Basic Law in 2005 was a milestone, affirming the rights of Indigenous communities to their traditional territories and cultural practices. However, the implementation of these rights has been hampered by legal ambiguities and bureaucratic resistance. For example, while Indigenous communities have been granted use rights to certain lands, they lack full ownership and decision-making authority, limiting their ability to manage resources independently.

The evolution of co-management models, such as the Saisiyat initiative, reflects a growing recognition of the need to involve Indigenous communities in forest governance. These models aim to address historical injustices by integrating Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) with modern conservation practices. Despite progress, challenges remain, including power imbalances between state agencies and Indigenous groups, financial dependencies, and the risk of cultural commodification through eco-tourism. This case study explores these challenges and the efforts to overcome them, offering insights into the broader context of Indigenous land rights in Taiwan.

Tenure Arrangements

Legal Status of Forest Land in Taiwan and Evolution of Indigenous People's Land Rights

Time Period	Key Events and Developments
Pre-1895 Pre-Japanese Colonial Period	• Indigenous communities exercised customary rights over their territories, including forests
	• 'Pao-an-lin' (保安林 forest reserves) practiced informally by Indigenous and Han communities
	• Forest conservation practiced for windbreaks, water protection, and defense
1895-1945 Japanese Colonial Period	• 1895: Colonial government issues 'Control Regulations for Government-owned Forest and Woodland'(官有林野取締規則)
	• 1895-1942: Establishment of forest reserves ('pao-an-lin') reaching 362,580 hectares
	• 1901-1945: Enactment of private forest management and product regulation policies
	• 1910-1914: Investigation distinguishing government-owned from private-owned woodlands
	• 1919: 'Taiwan Forest Law' (臺灣森林令) enacted, consolidating colonial control over forests
1945-1989 Post-World War II and Authoritarian Period	• 1945: Establishment of Forestry Bureau under provincial government
	• 1945-1970: 'Dark Period of Natural Conservation' with extensive deforestation
	• 1972: Hunting Prohibition Act（禁獵令）declared
	• 1975: Shift from deforestation to conservation policy
	• Limited Indigenous land rights recognition and exclusion from management decisions
1990-Present Democratization and Indigenous Rights Recognition	• 1989: Wildlife Conservation Act（野生動物保育法）reinforces hunting ban
	• 1990s: Emergence of Indigenous rights movement
	• 2000s: Community Forestry Program implementation
	• 2005: The Indigenous Peoples Basic Law (原住民族基本法）enacted
	• 2000-2016: Implementation of Indigenous Traditional Territory Survey
	• 2017-Present: Development of co-management partnerships

• The legal status of forest land in Taiwan has historically been characterized by state control, evolving from the centralized authority of the Japanese colonial government to the Republic of China's emphasis on resource management and conservation.
• Indigenous communities' tenure rights have been significantly impacted by this history, facing restrictions on their traditional land use practices and limited recognition of their customary rights.
• Recent decades have witnessed a gradual shift towards recognizing Indigenous land rights and promoting co-management approaches, albeit with ongoing challenges in implementation and power-sharing.
• The evolving legal landscape and the increasing focus on co-management initiatives offer potential for more equitable and sustainable forest governance in Taiwan, recognizing the importance of Indigenous knowledge systems and ensuring the participation of local communities in decision-making processes.

Institutional Arrangements

Roles and Responsibilities of FANCA and the Saisiyat Tribal Community

The forest honey produced at Penglai in Miaoli’s Nanzhuang Township has different natural flavors depending upon the season and the location of the hives.

The patrol team of the Saisiyat Cooperative will regularly patrol the mountains

The co-management partnership establishes distinct yet complementary roles for both parties. The FANCA primarily provides institutional support through financial subsidies, technical assistance, and capacity-building programs. Specifically, FANCA offers grants for under-forest economic activities like beekeeping and mushroom cultivation, delivers training in forest monitoring and afforestation techniques, and ensures alignment with national conservation policies. The agency also plays a crucial role in formalizing the co-management agreement, thereby legitimizing the Saisiyat's traditional rights over forest resources. The Saisiyat Tribal Community, through the Miaoli County Saisiyat Indigenous Peoples Forestry and Worker Limited Liability Cooperative (hereafter Saisiyat Cooperative), takes on operational responsibilities including forest patrols, ecological monitoring, and under-forest economic development. The community leads cultural education and eco-tourism initiatives, such as the "Journey to Saisiyat's Hidden Realm" project, integrating traditional ecological knowledge into forest management practices. This institutional arrangement represents a shift from top-down governance to shared decision-making, where FANCA provides the enabling framework and resources while the Saisiyat community contributes local expertise and maintains day-to-day management responsibilities.

Organizational Structure for the Co-management

The co-management partnership between FANCA and the Saisiyat community is structured through formal agreements, with the 2018 partnership agreement serving as the foundational framework for resource conservation and cultural promotion. At the center of this organizational structure is the Saisiyat Cooperative, which functions as the primary interface between the community and FANCA. The Cooperative manages key responsibilities including forest patrol organization, under-forest industry development, equitable benefit-sharing among community members, and community representation in dialogues with FANCA.

On the government side, FANCA operates through a multi-level engagement approach. The Hsinchu Forest District Office serves as the local-level agency, working directly with the Saisiyat Cooperative to provide guidance and resources. The higher-level Forestry Bureau oversees broader policy decisions and strategic direction. This decentralized approach enables more responsive and localized decision-making while maintaining alignment with national policies.

The organizational structure extends beyond the bilateral relationship between FANCA and the Saisiyat community to include a broader network of stakeholders. Educational institutions contribute through research and capacity building, local government partners on community development initiatives, and NGOs provide support for community development and international initiatives like the Satoyama Initiative. While this multi-stakeholder collaboration enhances the co-management system's effectiveness, the structure continues to evolve as both parties work to overcome historical power imbalances and build trust in their partnership.

Decision-making and Reporting Mechanisms

The co-management system between FANCA and the Saisiyat community incorporates both formal and informal channels for decision-making and reporting. At the community level, the Saisiyat Cooperative conducts monthly meetings where social affairs are discussed, income is distributed, and community needs are addressed. These meetings serve as the primary platform for internal decision-making and initial reporting of co-management activities.

The reporting structure follows a hierarchical pattern, with the Saisiyat Cooperative reporting to the Hsinchu Forest District Office, which then communicates with higher levels within the FANCA. This reporting mechanism is formalized through several channels: annual progress reports for specific initiatives like the Satoyama Initiative, project-based reporting for collaborative activities, and regular updates as stipulated in the 2018 partnership agreement.

Joint decision-making occurs through various platforms, including workshops and conferences that bring together FANCA officials, Saisiyat community representatives, and other stakeholders. These gatherings facilitate knowledge exchange, strategy development, and adaptive management decisions. Additionally, informal communication channels between FANCA officials and the Saisiyat community complement the formal reporting structure, enabling more responsive and flexible decision-making processes while building trust between the partners.

Affected Stakeholders

Affected Stakeholders

Stakeholder	Key Characteristics
Saisiyat Tribal Community Members	• Primary custodians of the forest • Depend on forest for under-forest economic activities • Cultural and spiritual practices tied to forest • Limited autonomy in resource management
Saisiyat Cooperative	• Manages daily operations (forest patrols, eco-tourism) • Community representation in co-management • Resource monitoring and implementation • Limited strategic decision-making power
Elders in the community	• Hold Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) • Essential for sustainable management • Cultural preservation role • High influence over community practises

Interested Stakeholders

Interested Stakeholders

Stakeholder	Key Characteristics
Forestry and Nature Conservation Agency (FANCA)	• Oversees co-management implementation • Controls funding allocation • Policy enforcement authority • Strategic decision-making power
Ministry of Agriculture (MoA)	• Sets national conservation policies • Influences funding allocation • Indirect policy influence • No direct operational involvement
Private Sector Partners (e.g., China Airlines)	• Fund specific projects • Corporate social responsibility goals • Limited operational involvement • Economic interest in sustainability
Academic Institutions	• Provide technical support • Research and documentation • Capacity building • Evidence-based recommendations
NGOs and International Organizations (e.g., Satoyama Initiative)	• Advocacy for Indigenous rights • Capacity building support • International recognition • Funding support

Significant Outcome

The co-management partnership between the Saisiyat Tribal Community and FANCA has achieved notable successes across three key dimensions:

Revitalization of Cultural Practices and Sustainable Livelihoods

• The co-management framework has led to the revitalization of traditional practices, such as the Saisiyat's beekeeping and mushroom farming. These activities form part of the under-forest economy, promoting sustainable livelihoods while integrating traditional ecological knowledge.

• The partnership also facilitated the revival of cultural ceremonies such as the Saisiyat coming-of-age ceremony, which had been discontinued for over 50 years. This cultural resurgence has strengthened community cohesion and helped in retaining youth who otherwise might have migrated away from their ancestral lands.

Community Empowerment and Income Generation

• The establishment of the Saisiyat Cooperative has empowered the Saisiyat community by providing a formal entity through which they manage forest resources, produce and sell non-timber products, and coordinate forest patrols.

• The economic activities promoted under this partnership, such as eco-tourism and under-forest economic initiatives, have provided sustainable income opportunities for community members. Eco-tourism programs, like "Journey to Saisiyat’s Hidden Realm," offer cultural and environmental tours that foster cultural pride while attracting external visitors.

Environmental Conservation Efforts

• The co-management partnership has led to notable achievements in environmental conservation. The forest patrol teams established by the cooperative conduct regular surveillance of forest areas, helping to curb illegal activities like poaching and unauthorized logging, which have been historical issues.

• Another significant achievement is the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification, which validates the sustainable forest management practices implemented through the partnership. This certification has bolstered the credibility of their conservation efforts and opened up new opportunities for sustainable forest product sales.

Critical Issues

The co-management initiative aims to create a balanced governance structure for the management of forest resources, but several critical aspects of power dynamics continue to influence the effectiveness and equity of this partnership.

1. Distribution of Responsibilities and Decision-Making

• In the current co-management framework, FANCA provides crucial technical expertise, training, and financial support. It holds authority over major initiatives, including commercial activities, FSC certification processes, and forest resource allocation. This means the Saisiyat Cooperative depends on FANCA's approval for most forest use and management initiatives.
• Saisiyat Participation and Local Autonomy: The Saisiyat Cooperative represents community interests and manages daily forest activities, including forest patrols, resource monitoring, and developing eco-tourism initiatives. While this grants them a role in land management, their autonomy remains constrained by FANCA's control over higher-level decisions. For instance, FANCA oversees funding for habitat restoration and resource cycling, limiting the Saisiyat's independent action.

2. Economic Power Dynamics and Dependency

• Financial Dependence on FANCA: Financial control shapes the power dynamic between FANCA and the Saisiyat community. The under-forest economy activities (such as beekeeping and mushroom cultivation) rely on short-term government subsidies from FANCA. This dependency undermines the Saisiyat's ability to operate independently and creates a power imbalance where FANCA's support becomes essential for community development.

3. Legal Rights and Tenure Issues

• Limited Land Rights: Taiwan's legal framework falls short of granting full land ownership to the Saisiyat community. Their forest management role rests on use rights rather than ownership. With forests under state jurisdiction and FANCA's oversight, this limited tenure arrangement restricts the Saisiyat's authority over their traditional territories.
• Legislative Barriers: Though the Indigenous Peoples Basic Law (2005) acknowledges Indigenous rights, it lacks comprehensive legal empowerment for land governance. FANCA's control over land tenure reinforces the state-community power imbalance. Without formal ownership rights, the Saisiyat cannot make independent forest management decisions.

4. Knowledge and Capacity Asymmetries

• Knowledge Hierarchies: While the co-management model aims to blend the Saisiyat's traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) with FANCA's scientific management practices, scientific expertise often takes precedence. Though the Saisiyat's TEK offers valuable ecosystem insights, it frequently takes second place to FANCA's data-driven approaches, leading to community input being overlooked for state-defined priorities.
• Capacity Building and Dependency: FANCA's capacity-building programs offer some empowerment, training community members in sustainable forestry, FSC certification, and resource management. However, reliance on FANCA for technical knowledge hampers autonomous community governance. This expertise dependency ensures FANCA's continued influence over management activities.

5. Co-management: Collaborative yet Unequal

• The collaborative governance structure aims for mutual benefit through shared management. Yet power remains unequally distributed, with FANCA holding final authority on key decisions. Its oversight of the broader framework limits the Saisiyat community's control over their traditional lands.
• Symbolic Participation vs. Meaningful Involvement: While the co-management framework includes symbolic participation in high-level meetings, the Saisiyat's strategic influence remains limited. Though they handle operational activities like forest patrols and eco-tourism, FANCA controls crucial decisions about resource use, regulations, and project funding.

Efforts to Balance Power Dynamics

• Despite these imbalances, efforts have been made to address these issues. FANCA has introduced more inclusive policies, such as monthly community meetings, to enhance transparency and trust. These meetings give the Saisiyat a platform to voice concerns and influence decisions.
• The Saisiyat Cooperative pursues initiatives to increase community autonomy through advocacy for stronger forest resource rights. Partnerships with NGOs and academic institutions have strengthened the Saisiyat's voice in negotiating better co-management terms.

Assessment

The power dynamics and assessment of governance of the Saisiyat-FANCA co-management case can be analyzed through both stakeholder power distribution and the extent of power devolution from state to community actors.

Power Distribution of Stakeholders

High Importance, Low Influence	High Importance, High Influence
Individual Saisiyat community members Direct forest dependency Cultural/spiritual connection Limited individual decision power Saisiyat Cooperative Operational implementation Daily management activities Limited strategic decision-making power Dependent on FANCA's approval	Elders (as Traditional Authorities) Traditional governance authority Cultural decision-making power Custodians of Traditional Knowledge Influence over community practices FANCA Strategic decision-making power Resource allocation control Policy enforcement authority Final approval power
Low Importance, Low Influence	Low Importance, High Influence
Academic Institutions Research support role Advisory capacity only Private Sector Partners External support providers CSR-based engagement Limited operational involvement	Ministry of Agriculture Policy influence Funding authority NGOs and International Organizations Advocacy and standard-setting influence International connections and networks Support through funding and capacity building Influence on policy and practice (e.g., Satoyama Initiative)

Power Devolution in the Co-management

Management Area	Powers Devolved to Community	Powers Retained by FANCA (State)
Operational Management	• Day-to-day forest management activities • Forest patrols and monitoring • Under-forest economic activities (beekeeping, mushroom cultivation) • Implementation of conservation activities	• Strategic planning and policy making • Resource allocation decisions • Budget control and financial oversight • Final approval of management plans
Resource Monitoring & Enforcement	• Regular forest patrols • Local resource inventories • Monitoring of illegal activities • Ecological monitoring	• Setting enforcement policies • Legal authority over violations • Definition of monitoring standards • Final enforcement decisions
Cultural & Economic Activities	• Eco-tourism program development • Cultural education initiatives • Traditional knowledge application • Under-forest product development	• Approval of commercial activities • Marketing and branding control • Revenue collection frameworks • Economic development policies
Decision-Making Process	• Monthly community meetings • Operational planning • Community-level decisions • Local activity coordination	• Strategic decision-making authority • Policy formulation • Funding allocation decisions • Legal and regulatory control
Land and Resource Rights	• Use rights for traditional activities • Access to forest resources • Local resource management • Traditional practice areas	• Land ownership rights • Resource extraction permits • Land use change decisions • Legal jurisdiction

The power dynamics between the Saisiyat Tribal Community and FANCA blend collaboration and control. Despite progress in integrating the Saisiyat into traditional forest area management, FANCA maintains substantial authority over legal, financial, and regulatory matters. While co-management empowers the Saisiyat community, financial dependence, limited legal rights, and knowledge asymmetries sustain an unequal relationship. Building trust, developing capacity, and advocating for legislative reform remain essential for achieving greater autonomy and a more balanced partnership in forest governance.

Recommendations

The recommendations aim to address the critical issues identified while building on existing successes.

1. Strengthen Legal Rights and Land Tenure

The most fundamental recommendation is to strengthen the legal foundation of the Saisiyat community's rights. While the current arrangement provides use rights, transitioning to formal land ownership would significantly enhance the community's autonomy in resource management. This requires advocating for amendments to the Indigenous Peoples Basic Law, developing clear legal frameworks for Indigenous land governance, and supporting community-led legislative advocacy efforts. Success in this area would address the root cause of power imbalances and provide the legal basis for genuine co-management. International standards and successful cases of Indigenous land rights recognition could be used to support this reform process.

2. Establish Financial Independence

Creating financial autonomy is crucial for reducing the community's dependency on FANCA. This could be achieved through developing community-controlled funding mechanisms, establishing sustainable revenue streams from eco-tourism user fees, and creating independent markets for under-forest products. Strategic partnerships with private sector entities aligned with ESG goals could provide additional investment while maintaining community control. A diversified funding model would enable the community to sustain their initiatives independently and make autonomous decisions about resource allocation. This could include establishing a community trust fund for long-term financial sustainability.

3. Reform Decision-Making Structure

The current decision-making structure needs reform to transform symbolic participation into meaningful involvement. Establishing joint management committees with equal representation from both parties and granting the community veto power over major decisions would ensure genuine co-management. This should include formal mechanisms for incorporating traditional ecological knowledge into planning processes and ensuring Saisiyat co-authorship of management plans. Regular evaluation of decision-making processes would help identify and address power imbalances. The structure should clearly define roles, responsibilities, and accountability mechanisms for both parties.

4. Build Community Capacity and Leadership

Sustainable co-management requires strong local capacity and leadership. This involves providing comprehensive training in technical and administrative skills, developing youth engagement programs for intergenerational knowledge transfer, and supporting community-led monitoring systems. Partnerships with NGOs and academic institutions can provide additional resources and expertise while maintaining community autonomy. Focus should be placed on developing a new generation of community leaders who can bridge traditional knowledge with modern management practices. This includes creating mentorship programs, supporting formal education opportunities, and establishing clear pathways for community members to take on leadership roles.