CHAPTER 3. LITERATURE REVIEW
3.1 Indigenous Peoples’ Urban Migration
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
CHAPTER 3. LITERATURE REVIEW
3.1 Indigenous Peoples’ Urban Migration
3.1.1 Contexts of Urban Indigenous Peoples
Indigenous peoples’ decision to move out or to remain in their original communities has unavoidably, invoked a decision-making process regarding the pushing and pulling forces in living in indigenous communities or the cities. Those two forces are containment for indigenous as they chose to stay in their original community or move to the cities. The length of time people spend in one place may influence the construction of sense of place.
Cho’s (2002) argument by compiling scholars’ findings of Taiwan indigenous
migration illustrates two main forces (push and pull) leading the indigenous migration to urban areas.
Cho (2002) argues: “The push force for indigenous peoples to leave their original community are poverty, marriage, military service, schooling, cracks between family and friends, avoiding social control, and avoiding rural lifestyle. As for the pulling forces that make people remain in their original community are a familial obligation, inherit land property, family, additional job opportunity, and
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Indigenous peoples reassess the pros and cons of living in the original
community and urban area over time. However, the pros of living in urban areas are seen better than living in their original communities, mainly due to job opportunities of an urban setting, which ultimately leads to massive indigenous migration to the cities. However, the reason for indigenous peoples to leave or remain in their community varies depending on each family’s contexts.
According to the current law, urban indigenous is defined as indigenous peoples whose household registration is not within indigenous an area that implies a familial migration (Liu, 2013).
In his book, Chen (1997) provides a comprehensive definition of urban
indigenous people: “Indigenous peoples from both mountain, and plain areas move from their original residence to the urban area permanently or semi-permanently for work, regardless of their official household registration.”
Urban indigenous peoples, living apart from where they come from, have experienced a different lifestyle from their origins. They have less access than those living in an indigenous area to learn their traditional culture and languages and be immersed in their cultural context. Urban indigenous peoples are facing direct assimilation into mainstream society, especially urban indigenous youths, since they are exposed in an urban context at a young age and go to school with a majority of non-indigenous students.
However, many indigenous youths think that young people, especially students, should go to an urban school for education (Chi, 1996). Because the educational
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
resources and competitive learning environment, which make many indigenous families think it is more optimal to go to schools in an urban area rather than going to local schools in an indigenous district. Thus, many urban indigenous youths
nowadays face identity crisis because of the separation from their original community.
Their indigenous status in an urban context and their physical appearance have regularly invited questions from Han-Taiwanese on their knowledge of indigenous culture, and proficiency of their indigenous languages. Those questions about them from other peoples would trigger indigenous youth's identity and make them rethink their culture and where they come from.
Indigenous youths feel hopeful but fear in returning to their original communities due to the lack of cultural experiences with the local people and language barrier (Hsu, 2008). Moreover, for both urban and local indigenous youths, Christianity plays an essential role in their identification and mental health (Hsu, 2008).
3.1.2 Indigenous Peoples’ Social Network in Urban Contexts
The social network in the past is dependent on kinship and geographical proximity. However, urban areas have a high number of non-relatives. The
mainstream culture of urban contexts may gradually assimilate minorities and thus influence the minorities’ inter-group and intra-groups relations. However, minorities may utilize such an urban setting to maintain their culture and improve in-group cohesion (Su, 2007).
Su’s (2007) research suggests that due to the overlapping social network among
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
indigenous people work in similar occupations and are also dynamic in terms of their occupational patterns.
According to Su (2007), despite living away from their hometowns, urban
indigenous people still have an indigenous identity, which suggests the significance of the urban social network in maintaining their indigenous identity.
3.1.3 Urban Indigenous Youths
People ages 20 to 40 years old are, by definition, the young populations.
Coincidently, indigenous parents that migrated to cities during and after the 1960s are now age between 45-55, and most of their kids are between 25-35 years old (He, 2006). Adult youths are mentally matured and have an awareness of independence.
Thus, their decision to return to their hometowns and identity is more or less personal.
Furthermore, the indigenous parents expect their kids to get a college degree to have a middle-class income, and a college degree enables indigenous youths to be selective and flexible in their occupations instead of being limited to a labor-intensive job (He, 2016).
Despite the various age groups among those indigenous youths, they are commonly educated in an urban school, surrounded by the majority of Han-
Taiwanese people. Their identity process differs from those indigenous peoples raised in an indigenous area since urban indigenous youth’s intensive interactions with people outside their original indigenous communities from a young age. Thus, I intend to find out the elements that construct urban indigenous youths’ sense of place of their original communities from their interactions with people in urban areas and
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
those in their hometowns.
Urban indigenous youths are those with an indigenous status, living and educated in an urban area, thus in a non-indigenous area, where spend most of their time working and schooling in urban areas.
There are various definitions of youth, depending on the research purpose. For this research, I would specify those youths of Tjuvecekadan whose parents moved to the city during and after the 1960s and who received educations in urban areas, who are currently between 25 to 35 years old and who are the core members of the Tjuvecekadan Youth Project. Furthermore, those indigenous youths held a least a bachelor's degree; in other words, they are elites with higher education.
A variety of studies on indigenous youths focus on their educational experiences across different levels of schoolings in terms of their academic performances,
adapting to an urban school context. (Cho, 2002; Liu，2006; Tsai，2003; Wu & Liu, 2006).
Researches about urban indigenous youths suggest that the participation of indigenous students’ club in college has a significant influence in enlightening
indigenous students’ ethnic identity (Tsai, 2003; Huang, 1999; Yang, 2000). However, urban indigenous youths’ lack of knowledge about their culture and loss of their indigenous languages has led to a genealogy-based identity construction on their indigenous identity (Tsai, 2003).
He’s (2006) study of indigenous youths’ experiences of returning to their hometowns interviewed seven indigenous college students from six different ethnic
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
indigenous traditional culture is crucial to motivate indigenous youth to return home, and they searched for reasons for going back home and self-identification through learning local cultures (He, 2006) — their need for indigenous identity was evoked in an urban area.
Additionally, their familial identity is dependent on their parents’ attitudes (He, 2006). The research findings show that their parents’ possible attitudes include work-based measurement, traditional culture, and indigenous youths’ dynamic identity through their life stage (He, 2006)
However, firstly the study did not include interviewees’ contexts of their communities and did not specify their life experiences in both urban and community settings. Secondly, the selection of interviewees did not reflect the sense of place of a specific locality. Thirdly, the study focuses on their experiences as practitioners of returning home rather than how their social interrelation within and outside their communities produces a sense of place of their original communities.