The Danshui River Cultural Ecosystem as the Amis Tribal Landscape: An Asian Green-grassroots Approach

Abstract

The study compares the Taiwanese Han-culture waterfront recreational patterns to the Ames tribal aqua-cultural habitat patterns. It introduces the Ames XiZhou village migration history, while it addresses the mainstream waterfront design fashions in Taiwan. It suggests the community participatory mechanisms for re-vision the Danshui River ecosystems. It argues that the river ecosystem could support cross-cultural lifestyles for Ames tribe if the government officials and design-planning professions could alter their approaches of waterfront planning, design, and governance. The study serves as policy references for governments in different level and fields, including the environmental protection association, the urban development and community-neighborhood departments.

Full text

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 170 ( 2015 ) 463 – 473
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
1877-0428 © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of Centre for Environment-Behaviour Studies (cE-Bs), Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying,
Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia.
doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.010
AcE-Bs2014Seoul
Asian Conference on Environment-Behaviour Studies
Chung-Ang University, Seoul, S. Korea, 25-27 August 2014
" Environmental Settings in the Era of Urban Regeneration"
The Danshui River Cultural Ecosystem as the Amis Tribal
Landscape: An Asian Green-Grassroots approach
Shenglin Elijah Chang
*
Graduate Institute of Building and Planning, College of Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taiwan
Abstract
The study compares the Taiwanese Han-culture waterfront recreational patterns to the Ames tribal aqua-cultural
habitat patterns. It introduces the Ames XiZhou village migration history, while it addresses the mainstream
waterfront design fashions in Taiwan. It suggests the community participatory mechanisms for re-vision the Danshui
River ecosystems. It argues that the river ecosystem could support cross-cultural lifestyles for Ames tribe if the
government officials and design-planning professions could alter their approaches of waterfront planning, design, and
governance. The study serves as policy references for governments in different level and fields, including the
environmental protection association, the urban development and community-neighborhood departments.
© 2014 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the Centre for Environment-
Behaviour Studies (cE-Bs), Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia.
Keywords: Cultural ecosystem service (CES); cross-cultural landscape; Amis urban tribe; Danshui River
1. Introduction
Following the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment definition of ecosystem services (MA 2003 &
2005), this study investigates how the Amis cultural ecosystem services (CES) of riverside habitats
confront the modern waterfront recreational CES along the XinDian River and DanShui River in Taiwan.
The paper focuses the XiZhou Amis community in the XinDan River an upper-stream of DanShui River.
The Amis people were one of the fourteen indigenous people in Taiwan. Located at the Xindian District,
New Taipei City, the Xizhou tribe was built by Amis people who migrated to the metropolitan Taipei area
thirty-eight years ago. Amis people originally came from Hualien County and Taitung County which are
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +886233665984; fax: +886233665986.
E-mail address: shenglinchang@gmail.com.
© 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of Centre for Environment-Behaviour Studies (cE-Bs), Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying,
Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia.

464 Shenglin Elijah Chang / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 170 ( 2015 ) 463 – 473
located at the east of Taiwan. Due to the decline of their rural hometown, the majority of young Amis left
their home villages, and moved to an urban area and struggled for better working opportunities. Wu
(2013) pointed out, in Amis tradition, they believed that the water “came along with the spirits of
ancestors.” He affirms that all the living activities, rituals and ceremonies, were also deeply related to the
water body, river or ocean. Even it is very challenging; Amis urban migrants struggle to establish tribe
homes and living environments adjacent to waterfront areas.
While Amis appreciates riversides as their homes with their ancestors’ spirits, the mainstream
Taiwanese modern culture (Han culture) approaches urban waterfronts as its recreational sites. As the
disadvantaged socio-economic group in Taiwan, Amis urban dwellers mostly build their riverside villages
in illegal flood plains. Taipei governments had demolished the most Amis urban waterfront tribes since
the early 2000, and they had developed bike trails, jogging paths, picnic facilities and so on for citizens to
use. Within this line of thinking, the paper argues cultural ecosystem services (CES) are cultural battles
between different socio-political and economic groups. Different groups embody different identities,
values, and believe (Mokhtarshahi & Mahasti 2013). This paper points out the tensions between the Amis
riverside habitat CES and the Taiwanese modern recreational CES.
Following the research questions, the paper consists of four parts. First, it introduces the theoretical
background of cultural ecosystem service and the research methods of this paper. It also briefs the context
of metropolitan Taipei and the Danshui River, including the urban context, and the Ames XiZhou village
migration history. Second, it discusses the differences between the Amis CES riverside ritual and cultural
values and the Taiwanese modern waterfront recreational CES. It addresses the mainstream waterfront
design fashions in Taiwan. The current design trends include (1) bike trails vs. community gardens; (2)
clean up sand vs. catch more fishes, and (3) annual home flooding as a given vs. protected by dam. Third,
it analyzes the riverside habitat patterns. By describing the riverside rock ceremony, it examines how the
Amis tribal habitat patterns related to the cultural ecosystem services rooted in waters.
Finally, the study proclaims that the Taiwanese policy makers have overlooked the dynamic values of
cultural ecosystem services among different socio-economic groups. The study serves as references for
governments in different levels and various fields, including the environmental protection associations,
urban and community development related departments.
2. Theories and Methods
This section introduces the theoretical background of the cultural landscapes, cultural ecosystem
service and the research methods of this paper. It also briefs the context of metropolitan Taipei and the
Danshui River, including the urban context, population densities, and the urbanization history. It also
presents the Ames XiZhou village migration history.
2.1. Theoretical landscape for cultural landscapes and cultural ecosystem services
The most critical perspectives of cultural landscapes refer to the nonmaterial relationships between
human and their surrounding environments, including spiritual, emotional, aesthetic, and moral. The field
of the cultural landscape initiated in the early 20th century and established around 1970s. Cultural
landscapes were first defined by geographer Sauer (1925) with particular geographic units associations
with human facts. These facts include cultural relations, especially in “the habitat values as the basis for
the determination as contents”, and “natural and cultural landscape.”
In the 1960s and the 1970s, geographer Yi-fu Tuan (1974, 1979, 1996) applied theories and methods
from phenomenology and elaborated on the human perceptions of places. Tuan and his colleagues
emphasized the emotional attachments of places. Around the same time, as a writer, J.B. Jackson

465
Shenglin Elijah Chang / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 170 ( 2015 ) 463 – 473
developed his everyday life landscape that emphasize people’s ordinary behavior embodied their values
that influence how they engaged within their surrounding environments. In the 1980s and 1990s, Hayden
argued the collective memories and histories of African American urban community were critical to the
meaning of places. Zukin (1993) also echo the political-economic power of places to analyze the
symbolic meaning of landscape. From capitalist commercial power Zukin’s (2012) recent research
extends to the filed of cultural ecosystem service that I will address in the following paragraph.
The concept of cultural ecosystem (CES) has been increasingly accepted by cross-disciplinary scholars
and researchers lately. The CES is a combination of the century-long field of the cultural landscape and
the emerging field of the ecosystem services. Since early 21st century, Dr. Constazan’ quantitative-based
ecosystem service research has been evolving into the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA 2003 &
2005). CES scholars have been struggling to define the indicators and research methods of human
psychological based perceptions of ecosystem services. Reflecting on market oriented tourism CES
dominating the CES field, Kumar & Kumar (2008) first attempts to address the lacunae in valuation of
ecosystem services from a psychological perspective by arguing that the common person's perception of
the ecosystem is quite different from what is conceptualized by conventional economists.
To elaborate relationship between intangible values and ecosystem services, Gee & Burkhard (2010)
uses a case study method investigating the German North Sea coast. The paper investigates residents’
emotional reactions on wind farming. They believe the wind farming threaten the intangible local cultural
landscape values. Chan, Satterfield & Goldstein (2012) try to establish CES evaluating systems that assist
decision makings in the planning process. German researcher Bieling and her colleagues (2012 & 2013)
integrate qualitative coding and quantitative methods attempt to develop CES systems. Lately, Bieling
(2014) applies story-telling methods to the nonmaterial benefits of ecosystem in Swabian Alb, German.
This is one of the few pieces applying qualitative research methods as the core of the research. In addition
to natural and rural CES, Zukin’s identity related CES research regarding shopping street in Amsterdam
could be defined as the frontier study in the urban CES field. Following her shopping landscape research,
Zukin (2012) applied ethnographic observations, interviews, and online and archival data in this case
study. She argued “the social capital that develops in these vernacular spaces supports a unique urban
cultural ecosystem. Local shopping streets mobilize aesthetics, collective memory, and traditional forms
of social interaction to create feelings of local identity and belonging which are endangered by economic
modernization and global consumer culture.” (ibid.)
2.2. Amis urban-rural migration to the rapidly urbanized metropolitan Taipei
After introducing theoretical backdrops of cultural landscape and cultural ecosystem service, I brief on
the context of Amis urban-rural migration. Rooted in their indigenous aqua-culture, Amis “loma” (tribal
home) always associated with water. Being the largest one of the fourteen indigenous people in Taiwan,
there were about twenty thousand Amis in the official statistics from the central Council of Indigenous
Peoples, Executive Yuan in 2009. The Amis traditional territory was located at the plains of the Hualien
County and Taitung County.
At the beginning of the paper, I mentioned that Amis habitats locate close to waters, because of their
strong aqua-related belief. When they migrate to cities, they search for riversides as their “loma” home.
Due to the rapid urbanization and industrialization between the 1960s and the 1990s, many Amis had
moved away from their tribal villages in Hualin to the metropolitan Taipei in the north (Fig, 1).
According to Wu (2012) study, most of them served as low wage construction workers under harmful
working conditions in society due to the inequality of opportunity for aboriginal socio-economic groups.
Because of their low economic power, majorities of Amis people hardly afford the high rent and living
costs in the urban area. They often reside in the temporary shed within the construction site.

466 Shenglin Elijah Chang / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 170 ( 2015 ) 463 – 473
Fig. 1. Map of Taipei Basin in the north Taiwan with information of the Danshui watershed and metropolitan Taipei
The Amis people established this new urban tribe response to their cultural needs and community
consensus. Based on their traditional knowledge of the cultural landscape, they carefully choose this
particular site as their homes and created a new tribe by themselves. In the case of the XiZhou waterside
village, back in the mid of 1960s, a few Amis people occasionally found this particular waterfront site
along the XinDian River where was very similar to their hometown in many ways. Located on the
riverside highland, this site is adjacent to the Xindian River, and surrounded by grass plains where could
be used for vegetable gardens and agricultural farms. The XinDian River where the Xizhou urban Amis
tribe located is the southeast branch of the Danshui River. According to urban plan zoning control system,
the riverside area was under flood plan zone that was not for residential developments. The pioneers
strategically started by building small sheds for fishing and gardening tools, and they start vegetable
gardens. Applying their construction skills and recycling building materials, these Amis gradually extend
to small village make-shift houses and develop the XiZhou urban tribe. More importantly, they have been
holding Amis annual festival yearly since it is one of very few urban waterfront villages for all homesick
Amis urban migrants in the metropolitan Taipei.
3. Methodology
Based on qualitative methods, my team interviewed more than hundred residents in the Xizhou tribe.
Similar to Zukin (2012) and Bieling (2014), we also applied ethnographic observations(since 2008),
interviews(three communities, more than 200 interviewees), and online and archival data analysis. In
order to understand the Amis cultural values, we investigate two Han cultural communities along the
Danshui River, as well as the Xizhou tribe in the upper stream XinDian River. We conduct quantitative
surveys to understand how residents of the three communities perceive their relationships with their
adjacent river. We apply qualitative interviews to understand their personal stories and emotional
attachments with the river. For the Xizhou community, we operate the additional observation to learn how
they use riverfront environment and the river in their everyday lives.

467
Shenglin Elijah Chang / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 170 ( 2015 ) 463 – 473
4. Findings
As mentioned above, the research team conducted quantitative surveys in three riverfront
communities including two of Han mainstream culture, and one of Amis indigenous culture. According to
the survey data, I compare the Han community CES to the Amis CES in the following paragraphs (Figure
2). The three communities all locate along the DanShui River. However, they have different relationships
with the river. Among the three, communities of GuanDu and XiZhou directly connect with the river,
while there is a tall levy blocking the HuaJiang community and the river. More importantly, among the
three, only the XiZhou community is Amis culture. The other two are the Han cultural dominated
communities. Two parts consist of this section: (1) I display images to explain the three communities
landscape characteristics and the survey results; and (2) I outline the mainstream Han recreational CES
associating with rivers in urban areas.
Fig. 2. Three field sites and the survey results of how survey participants identify their CES relationships with their neigh borhood
Danshui River
4.1. The CES survey results for three communities – landscapes and identities
x GuanDu waterfront community (Figure 3) Survey number: 128 (total population: 11,052)
Fig. 3. Three field sites and the survey results of how survey participants identify their CES relationships with their neigh borhood
Danshui River

468 Shenglin Elijah Chang / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 170 ( 2015 ) 463 – 473
x HuaJiang river levy community (Figure 4) Survey number: 56 (total population: 14,114)
Fig. 4. Three field sites and the survey results of how survey participants identify their CES relationships with th eir neighborhood
Danshui River
x Xizhou riverside urban tribe community (Figure 5) Survey number: 30 (total population: 180)
Fig. 5. Three field sites and the survey results of how survey participants identify their CES relationships with th eir neighborhood
Danshui River
4.2. The Han modern culture dominated riverside recreational planning and design
According to the usage patterns survey, for respondents from HuaJiang and GuanDu communities,
they identify riverfront areas as their recreational places to get relax or do exercises (figure 6), the Amis
respondents identify XiZhou and the river as their homes to reside.

469
Shenglin Elijah Chang / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 170 ( 2015 ) 463 – 473
Fig. 6. Bike trails are one of the most popular modern waterfront designs for today’s sustainable city lifestyles
Today, residing in high density cities, urban dwellers often appreciate waterfront parks provide
opportunities for picnicking, biking, jogging, strolling, dating, and natural watching etc.. Politicians, and
Park and Planning Agencies in different countries and cities also target waterfront park designs as the
developments with a very high priority. However, these popular modern waterfront recreations are
different from the experiences of living with rivers. For example, in order to build bike trails, the
riverbank need to be concretized. However, for Amis fishing, they need natural riverbank, shallow water
areas to catch fishes. Planning professions overlook the land use conflicts between waterfront park
developments and riverside villages. I will explain the Amis aqua-habitat culture in the next section.
5. Discussion
5.1. Amis Cultural Ecosystem Services - we are “here” at our Aqua-bound spiritual home
As mentioned above, according to Wu (2012), Amis believed that the water came along with the spirits
of ancestors. Therefore, they always consciously chose the tribe site and living environments near to the
waters (Figure 7). All the living activities, rituals and ceremonies were also deeply related to the water
body, river or ocean. Based on ethnographic observations and interviews for six years, I introduce three
Amis cultural ecosystem services in this section. As Mazlan and Omar (2012) introduced the indigenous
knowledge of Malay tribes, the three patterns are deeply rooted in the water close to their home villages.
The critical Amis CES includes qualities of spirit, emotion, moral and ethics related behaviors. The
riverside Zizhou tribe plays a very critical role for Amis urban young generation who were born in the
metropolitan Taipei. These young people have been learning Amis aqua-culture via the XinDian River.
Without the XinDian River, Amis would lose their water related spirits and socio-cultural practices in
their urban lives.

470 Shenglin Elijah Chang / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 170 ( 2015 ) 463 – 473
Fig. 7. Amis tribal riverside lifestyles. (Drawing provided by Jin-yong Wu)
5.2. Burying sacred river stones
Sacred stones from the river nearby Amis home village symbolize the Amis ancestor spirits and
stabilize the foundation of XiZhou as villagers’ urban homes. The burying stones ceremony refers to the
leader of the Xizhou tribe goes back to their tribal home and search for stones chosen by their ancestors’
spirits along the river of their home village in Hualian. As the symbol of spiritual foundations, these
chosen stones would be brought back to their new urban home and buried along the new riverbank.
It has been challenging for Amis to stay in their XiZhou tribal homes, because the location is not legal.
They have protest many times to fight for their aboriginal habitat rights to stay close to rivers. Amis could
not understand why they are not forbidden to live close to waters in city areas. Why the zoning controls in
modern cities could disturb their waterside living traditions? Even thought the XiZhou urban tribe
location is not legal from the perspectives of the Taiwanese urban zoning control system, the tribe people
decide to permanent habit here since they have lived here for thirty-eight years. In order to make Xizhou
as their permanent urban tribal homes, the ceremony of burying sacred river stones become very critical.
The general chief of Xizhou tribe had to return to their hometown Hualian, the east of Taiwan. As an
elected chief, he was the leader of the social organization in Taiwanese society and the spiritual symbol of
Xizhou tribe in Amis culture. He socially and spiritually represented the entire Xizhou tribe to establish
linkages between hometown and Xizhou tribe in this trip.
To make the Xizhou tribe as their permanent home, first of all, the Chief is in charge of searching for
the sacred stones along the river in their Amis home village. During the ceremony, the Chief teams up
with the tribe’s priest when they tried to identify the sacred stones. They prayed together in the name of
God, as well as the Amis ancestors. The tribe people also serve the stones traditional rice wine, fruits and
sacrifice oblations. After the riverside ceremony at HuanLian home village, they drove the sacred stones
back to XiZhou tribe and they identify a riverside location to bury the sacred stones (figure 8). In the
XiZhou ceremony, they repeat the same rituals step by step as what they had done in their Huanlian
homes.

471
Shenglin Elijah Chang / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 170 ( 2015 ) 463 – 473
Fig. 8. The XiZhou tribe leader brought the sacred stones back to XiZhou and buried them in the riverside of the XinDian Rive r.
(Images provided by Jin-yong Wu)
5.3. Mifoting (Amis language for fishing)
Mifoting means fishing in Amis language. Amis has many fishing related activities and wisdoms,
because they are an aqua people. Fishing activities contain Amis moral system and their environmental
ethical systems (figure 9).
Fig. 9. The XiZhou tribe residents perform “mifoting” in the XinDian River. (Images provided by Jin-yong Wu)
Traditionally, areas along the river including the river consider as the tribal territories shared by
everyone, especial male. They often go fishing in the shallow side of a river or stream close to home.
Shallow water is important, because they often build some provisional barriers to catch fishes. Everyone
shares these areas and fishing together. From a practical aspect, they still need ways to temporarily define
which areas belong to whom when they go fishing together. During the fishing season or before the
fishing festival, the senior male of the household would set a bunch of Miscanthus (a type of strong grass)
to mark the center of his temporary fishing territory. Therefore, others would not interfere with this
fisherman. This way could also prevent the area from overfishing and sustain the fish sources of their
home river.

472 Shenglin Elijah Chang / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 170 ( 2015 ) 463 – 473
In order to sustain the fishing culture, Amis develop various ways to engage the youth to join. For
example, when they celebrate the Harvest Festival in the mid of the year, usually August, the Xizhou tribe
will send out the youth group to catch fishes from the adjacent Xindian River. Even thought the XiZhou
tribe is an urban tribe, young Amis still get fishing training from tribe seniors. Young people supposedly
practice how to use Amis special fishnets after school, and then perform fishing during the Harvest
Festival. In addition to the XiZhou tribe youth, many young Amis from other communities in the
metropolitan Taipei come to XiZhou to join the fishing performance. However, most of these kids might
not have a shallow water to practice fishing.
The Xizhou annual Harvest Festival is the most significant event for urban Amis. Every year, hundreds
of Amis come to XiZhou to celebrate. For every urban Amis, the Xizhou tribe is everyone’s urban
waterfront home village. They go fishing, dance, eat, and sing together as what they do in their remote
home villages in Hualian and Taidong. XiZhou is not just an illegal riverside slum for urban Amis. It is
everyone’s symbolic new home in urban Taipei.
5.4. Badaosi (Amis language for gathering and sharing food)
Badaosi originally means Amis tribe people share their fishes together after mifoting-fishing (figure
10). Lately, they badaosi any types of food, including Taiwanese snacks. Traditionally, tribe people get
together to cheer for the male mifoting-fishing. After they get fishes, they will cook, eat, drink and sing
together at outdoor areas together. Two types of Badaosi places are important. One is front door Badaosi
places. The other is waterfront Badaosi places. Both are public areas.
For the front door Badaosi places, the traditional Amis houses were built by the bamboo and wood
which were collected from surrounding natural environments. Most of the Amis houses provide small
open outdoor places for neighbors’ gatherings. Everyone passed by could join. Everything shall be
shared. In terms of the waterfront Badaosi places, the locations are in a flat area of riverbank. This type is
usually for large group gathering, so that it needs a wide open area. Obviously, the riverside Badaosi
often starts from mifoting-fishing.
Because of the changes of lifestyles, the XiZhou Amis people need to work in the city to during day
time. Badaosi is adjust to be an evening or night time casual events during weekdays, and all time events
during weekends. In this sense, night time lighting facilities become quite important for XiZhou Badaosi.
Every Fridaynight, if you visit XiZhou tribe, you can join neighbors’ Badaosi one after another!
Fig. 10. The XiZhou tribe residents have “badaosi” parties during daytime and after dark. (Images provided by Jin-yong Wu)

473
Shenglin Elijah Chang / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 170 ( 2015 ) 463 – 473
6. Conclusion: Whose CES is the CES - dynamics between the Modern Han CES and the Amis CES
While scholars in the field of CES devote efforts to establish the field, most of them study mono-
cultural cases. This study expresses the tensions between the recreational orientated Han CES and the
habitat orientated Amis CES along the urban waterfront of Taipei. Living in a global era, we are more
likely to confront values of CES in our towns, cities and regions (Awang-Shuib, Sahari, & Ali, 2012).
This case is a pioneering study and it suggests establishing open framework community participatory
mechanisms for re-vision the Danshui River ecosystems. Indeed, in the metropolitan Taipei, we are
urgently needs establish grassroots based cross-cultural design, planning, and governing mechanisms to
both support Amis urban riverside tribes and Han cultural citizens. Within a participatory way of planning
and design waterfronts and shaping hybrid identities, ethnic groups could open up the opportunities to
understand each other’s spiritual needs and emotional attachments of their surrounding landscapes.
Acknowledgement
This contribution was funded by the National Science Council (NSC 100-2621-M-002-034). Research
assistants include Jin-yong Wu, Shane Lee, and Ding-xiong Xiao. I very much appreciate their efforts for
the comprehensive research work.
References
Awang-Shuib, A.-R., Sahari, S.-H., & Ali, A. J. (2012). Multicultural Awareness and Urban Communities: Validating a
Multicultural Awareness Scale. Journal Of Asian Behavioural Studies, 2(6), 50.
Bieling, C. (2014 (forthcoming)). Cultural ecosystem services as revealed through short stories from residents of the Swabian Alb
(Germany). Ecosystem Services(0).
Bieling, C., & Plieninger, T. (2012). Recording Manifestations of Cultural Ecosystem Services in the Landscape. Landscape
Research, 6(16), 1-19.
Chan, K. M. A., Satterfield, T., & Goldstein, J. (2012). Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values.
Ecological Economics, 74(0), 8-18.
Gee, K., & Burkhard, B. (2010). Cultural ecosystem services in the context of offshore wind farming: A case study from the west
coast of Schleswig-Holstein. Ecological Complexity, 7(3), 349-358.
Hernández-Morcillo, M., Plieninger, T., & Bieling, C. (2013). An empirical review of cultural ecosystem service indicators.
Ecological Indicators, 29(0), 434-444.
Kumar, M., & Kumar, P. (2008). Valuation of the ecosystem services: A psycho-cultural perspective. Ecological Economics, 64(4),
808-819.
MA. (2003). Ecosystems and HumanWell-being:A Framework for Assessment. Washington, DC (Millennium Ecosystem
Assessment). Island Press.
MA. (2005). .Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Washington, DC (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment): Island Press.
Sani, R. M., & Mahasti, P. (2013). Sustainable Tourism Design through Preserving Regional Identity: Iran. Journal Of Asian
Behavioural Studies, 3(8), 101-113.
Soh, M. C., & Omar, S. K. a. (2012). Journey of Indigenous Knowledge for Sustainable Livelihood: Story from East Coast,
Malaysia. Journal Of Asian Behavioural Studies, 2(7), 23-36.
Tuan, Y.-f. (1974). Topophilia. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Tuan, Y.-f. (1979). Landscape of Fear. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.
Tuan, Y.-f. (1996). Cosmos and Hearth: A Cosmopolite's Viewpoint. Minneapolis, MN.: University of Minnesota Press.
Wu, J.-y. (2012). Amis Aborigine Migrants' Territorilization in Metropolitan Taipei. East Asian Culture and History Review, 1(1),
102-130.
Zukin, S. (1993). Landscape of Power. Berkeley and Los Angles: University of California Press.
Zukin, S. (2012). The social production of urban cultural heritage: Identity and ecosystem on an Amsterdam shopping street. City,
Culture and Society, 3(4), 281-291.