IOS logo 中文版 Academia Sinica
background background
Selected Item MarkFull-time Research Fellows
 Corresponding/Adjunct  Research Fellows
 Emeritus Research Fellows
 Postdoctoral Fellows
 Doctoral Candidates with Fellowships
 Visiting Scholars
 Visiting Doctoral Students
 Administrative Staff
background Full-time Research Fellow background
柯志明 (Ka, Chih-Ming)
Tel: 886 2 2652-5119
Fax: 886 2 2652-5050
Office: Room 919

My area of expertise is historical sociology. I employ historical institutional analysis to construct a framework for the explanation and understanding of Taiwan’s long-term social change, especially state-society relations. At present, my research focuses on ethnic politics cum land rights and elite alienation of plains aborigine (熟番 shoufan, 平埔族 Pingpuzu) as well as social contentions in Qing’s Taiwan.

My previous research has found that the land tenure system between the plains aborigines and the Han people constituted an important mechanism the Qing court depended on for its rule over Taiwan. It also laid the foundation of Taiwan’s socioeconomic system. In the mid-eighteenth century, the Qing court used policies such as redefining plains aborigines’ land rights and reallocation of their land to effect a geographically discernable three-tiers distribution of ethnicities (mountain aborigines on the exterior, Han in the interior, and plains Aborigines in between), forming a solid (paramilitary) alliance with the plains aborigines in exchange for the protection of the plains aborigines' land rights in the sandwiched zone.

My current study further explores the boundary drawing and arrangements of ethnic land tenure along the frontier area to explicate the ethnic-spatial deployment by the state power in the mid-eighteenth century. It was state’s intention since 1745 to initiate a three-tiers ethnic-spatial regime, through creating a buffer zone at the foothill boundary separating head-hunting mountain aborigines and western coastal plain Chinese settlers with plains aborigines in between. The aim was to quarantine Chinese squatting of aboriginal land as well as preempt security harass beyond borderline. To serve this aim, a plains aborigine border guard (隘番 ai fan) system was implemented concomitantly, with the reallocation of plains aborigine land rights to the buffer zone for segmentation as well as providing rations to border sentry post. However, state’s effort to counter cross border reclamation and thus prevent Chinese encroachers from developing into unruly force proved in vain. Even worse, it backfired, as shown in the Lin Shuang-wen revolt (1886-1888). A comparison of the pre and post 1884 redrawing of purple borderline as well as reallocations and rearrangements of aborigine land rights, respectively blue-line in 1760 and green-line in 1790, indicates a transformation of the three-tiers ethnic-spatial regime, as witnessed in the shift of governance rationality from quarantine to active alliance with plains aborigines through fostering its militia forces (屯番 tun fan).

As surprising as the rebels erupted after the deployment of the three-tiers ethnic-spatial regime, under the institutional and legal protections provided by the three-tiers regime, the plains aborigines soon faced difficulties providing a livelihood and the subsequent disintegration of their communities. This outcome cannot be attributed solely to the incompetence of state power and local government offices’ (衙門 yamen) lax enforcement. Seen from its outcome, the three-tiers ethnic-spatial regime had backfired. With regard to state exploitation, the question of why the plains aborigines encountered difficulties ensuring their livelihood might best be approached from the “Janus faces” of the state’s favorite policy (恤番政策xufan zhengce) toward the Indigenous populations. Although they were already formally exempted from heavy taxes and hard coersive labor, rent-seeking behavior such as the extortion of fees and the abuse of power by local government offices had gone beyond that. Moreover, the appropriation of public rent and concentration of former communal land in the hands of political elite collaborating with and fostered by the state were witnessed. The accumulation and uneven distribution of wealth subsequently led to social stratification and the rise of the dominant fantongshi (番通事aboriginal interpreter/mediator) family. Upon further observation of the actual phenomenon, I found that at the same time inside the plains aborigines' society there emerged antagnism and conflict between the collaborating elite, newly propped up by the state’s favorite policy, and the general population, as specifically manifested in the inequality (stratification) of and controversy over internal interest distribution as well as in the process of power struggles (factionalism) for the strategic fantongshi position.

Through the implementation of so-called aboriginal interpreter/mediator (fantongshi), a kind of semi officer, the two types of state and local power—concentrating in the post of fantongshih officer—merged into one. Yet, not long after, due to the alienation of the fantongshih officers they split again, embodied in oppositional factions inside the community that emerged in the process of subsequent internal power struggles. The separation of the two powers stemming from different origins constitutes the main contradiction in the internal political processes of the aboriginal community. The latterr showed the aboriginal community’s processes of infighting, incurring its subsequent split and diaspora. The conflict between the two types of power constitutes the main substance of the aboriginal community’s infighting. Undoubtedly, it is also the key to the breakdown of social cohesion and the dispersion of the population in the aboriginal community.

Therefore, my main concern lies where the infiltration of state power increased the divisions and conflicts inside the plains aborigines’ society. The Qing court’s governing strategy created a heterogeneous division within Taiwanese society. Ethnic politics of “regulating the Han through the aborigines” (以番制漢 yi fan zhi han) and “regulating the mountain aborigines through the plains aborigines" (literally: “regulating the raw savages through the cooked savages” 以熟制生 yi shou zhi sheng) were used to manipulate divisions between ethnic groups. Coincidentally, divisions within groups were also escalated or instigated by the state in order to consolidate and expand its power either intentionally or unintentionally. From the standpoint of social actors, we might also ask the reverse question: While dominated under the regime deployed by state power, why is there no more opportunity for social cohesion? Or is social cohesion, and thereby collective action capable of challenging the extant regime, still possible? What conditions would be needed for the agency of social actors?

In terms of the richness and detail of written source material, the Pazih tribe (岸裡社 Anli she) can be regarded as the most comprehensive case of a plains aborigine community. However, source material was not the only reason why I chose the Pazih tribe. The Pazih tribe serves as an example for a powerful plains aborigines' community with strategic importance that received preferential tax treatment as a reward for their meritorious service in a key military conflict. A plains aborigines' community that—although actively won over and meticulously protected by the Qing court—was the earliest to see intense infighting and the first to disintegrate. Because its external exploitation was comparatively minor, the Pazih tribe’s internal divisions and conflicts present themselves more clearly, thereby helping us to find out how those factors led to its breakdown and diaspora. What gives the Pazih community’s indicative case such prominence is the fact that it provides ample evidence to elucidate aspects of internal causes, processes, and actions.


Journal Articles

柯志明,2018,〈臺灣社會變遷研究的歷史轉向:對整體觀與貶抑歷史敘事的一點反思〉,《臺灣社會學刊》,第63卷,頁1-62。(TSSCI) (Chih-Ming Ka, 2018, “The Historic Turn of the Taiwanese Social Change Study: Rethinking Totalizing Holism and the Degradation of Historical Narrative”, Taiwanese Journal of Sociology)(全文)
Chih-ming Ka, 1991, “Agrarian Development, Family Farms and Sugar Capital in Colonial Taiwan, 1895-1945”, The Journal of Peasant Studies, 18, 206-240. (SSCI) (IF: 4.149; SSCI ranking: 3.6%,1.2%)
柯志明、Mark Selden,1988,〈原始積累、平等與工業化:以社會主義中國與資本主義臺灣案例之分析〉,《臺灣社會研究季刊》,第1卷,頁11-51。(TSSCI)
Chih-ming Ka and Mark Selden, 1986, “Original Accumulation, Equity, and Late Industrialization: The Cases of Socialist China and Capitalist Taiwan”, World Development, 14, 1293-1310. (SSCI) (IF: 2.848; SSCI ranking: 9.2%,9.1%)


Ka, Chih-Ming. , 1995, Japanese Colonialism in Taiwan: Land Tenure, Development, and Dependency, 1895-1945,, 226 pages, Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.
柯志明, 1993, 臺灣都市小型製造業的創業、經營與生產組織--以五分埔成衣製造業為案例的分析, 253 pages, 臺北: 中央研究院民族學研究所.

Book Chapters

柯志明, 2012, “跨學科的歷史研究法”, editor(s): 瞿海源、畢恆達、劉長萱、楊國樞, 社會及行為科學研究法(二):質性研究法, pp. 211-239, 臺北: 東華書局.
柯志明,1996,〈農民、國家與農工部門關係--臺灣農業發展過程中家庭農場之存續與轉型 (1895-1945)〉,徐正光、蕭新煌編,《臺灣的國家與社會》,頁15-38,台北市:東大出版社。
柯志明,1993,〈Crisis of the Colonial Sugar Industry and the Restructuring of Indigenous Class Structure -- Impact and Change in the Contradictory Relationship between Rice and Sugar (1925-42)〉,張秀蓉等編,《日據時代臺灣史國際學術研討會論文集》,頁311-381,台北市:國立臺灣大學歷史學系。
柯志明,1992,〈糖業資本、農民、與米糖部門關係--從土地關係作臺灣 (1895-1945) 與爪哇 (1830-1940) 殖民地發展的比較分析〉,陳秋坤、許雪姬編,《臺灣歷史上的土地問題》,頁227-253,台北市:中央研究院臺灣史田野研究室。

Conference Papers

柯志明, 2015, “熟番與姦民:清代臺灣族群政治與社會抗爭”, 22 pages, paper presented at 「第4屆族群、歷史與地域社會」學術研討會, 中央研究院人文社會科學館: 中央研究院臺灣史研究, 2015-11-20 ~ 2015-11-21.
柯志明,2013,〈菁英轉型與社會抗爭:清代臺灣番政變革後平埔族社會內部的分化與衝突,以岸裡社為案例的分析〉,共89頁,發表於族群歷史、文化與認同:臺灣平埔原住民國際學術研討會,台南:國立臺灣歷史博物館,2013-03-21 ~ 2013-03-22。
柯志明, 2013, “從界外到帝國邊陲:國家權力的進入與岸裡地域屯番保留區空間秩序的形成”, 108 pages, paper presented at 中央研究院歷史語言所第22屆歷史研習營:「帝國•邊疆•異域」, 中央研究院,台北: 中央研究院歷史語言所, 2013-01-28 ~ 2013-02-01.
柯志明,2012,〈國家權力的進入與屯番保留區空間秩序的形成:〉,共92頁,發表於第二屆沿山地區聚落與族群,中央研究院人文社會科學館北棟3樓第一會議室:中央研究院臺灣史研究所,2012-06-19 ~ 2012-06-20。
柯志明,2011,〈界外私墾與岸裡地域土牛界外保留區的進入和開墾〉,共80頁,發表於族群、歷史與地域社會學術研討會,中央研究院,臺北:中央研究院臺灣史研究所,2011-09-23 ~ 2011-09-24。(全文)
柯志明,2009,〈從權力組織與土地利益安排的形成與演變看平埔族地域社會的內部整合與衝突:〉,共82頁,發表於族群、歷史與地域社會,中央研究院人文社會科學館:中央研究院臺灣史研究所,2009-11-12 ~ 2009-11-13。
柯志明,2007,〈岸裡新社地域社番口糧田的租佃安排:番小租的形成與演變〉,發表於族群、歷史與地域社會學術研討會,台北市:中央研究院臺灣史研究所,2007-12-20 ~ 2007-12-21。
柯志明、陳兆勇,2004,〈米糖相剋:耕地的爭奪或利益的衝突〉,發表於走過台灣:世代、歷史與社會研討會,新竹市:清華大學與臺灣社會學會,2004-12-04 ~ 2004-12-05。
柯志明,1999,〈清代台灣番租的分類與演變〉,發表於契約文書與社會生活,台灣與華南社會 (1600-1900) 研討會,台北市:中央研究院台灣史研究所籌備處,1999-03。
柯志明,1998,〈族群政策、土地租佃關係與開墾:十八世紀臺灣的番政變革與岸裡社的危機〉,發表於國科會 84-86 學年度社會組專題計畫補助成果發表會,台北市:台灣社會學社與中研院社會學研究所,1998-01。
Ka and Chih-Ming, 1990, “Agrarian Development, Family Farms and Sugar Capital in Colonial Taiwan, 1895-1945”, paper presented at the Conference on Asian Societies in Comparative Perspective, Denmark: Nordic Association for Southeast Asian Studies, 1990-10.

Ph.D. in Sociology, State University of New York at Binghamton, USA (1988)
Current Positions
Distinguished Research Fellow, Institute of Sociology, Academia Sinica (2006-)
Jointly-Appointed Research Fellow, Institute of Taiwan History, Academia Sinica (2001-)
Adjunct Professor, Sociology Department, National Taiwan University (1993-)
Professional Experiences
Director, Institute of Sociology, Academia Sinica (2003-2006)
Editor in Chief, "Taiwanese Sociology" (2001-2003)
Editor in Chief, "Taiwanese Journal of Sociology" (1999-2001)
Research Fellow, Institute of Sociology, Academia Sinica (1995-2006)
Research Fellow, Institute of Ethnology, Academia Sinica (1993-1995)
Adjunct Associate Professor, Graduate Institute of Sociology and Anthropology, National Tsing Hua University (1989-1993)
Adjunct Associate Professor, Sociology Department, National Taiwan University (1989-1993)
Associate Research Fellow, Institute of Ethnology, Academia Sinica (1988-1993)
Awards and Honors
National Science Council Outstanding Research Award (2003-2005)
MOE's the 47th Academic Award (2003)
WuSanLien Awards (2001)
National Science Council Outstanding Research Award (1995-1997)
National Science Council Outstanding Research Award (1993-1995)
Research Fields and Interests
Development Study, Peasant Study, Industrial and Labor Relations
"Land Tenure, Development and Dependency in Colonial Taiwan, 1895-1945", Sociology, State University of New York at Binghamton. (1988)

<< Back to the top >>
background   background
background background
IOS logo
IE(v. 6.0 and above) Or Firefox(v. 1.0 and above) recommended; 1024x768 recommended
Tel: 886 2 2652-5100         Fax: 886 2 2652-5050         E-mail:
Address: Institute Of Sociology, South Wing, Humanities and Social Sciences Building, Academia Sinica, 128 Sec. 2 Academia Rd., Nankang, Taipei 11529, Taiwan
Copyright©2015 Institute of Sociology, Academia Sinica