*5.3. Who Defines the Scale and Levels at Which Social-ecological System Governance Issues are Addressed*

Before 2000, the DFA region was regarded by the central government as a base to support national economic development, given the fact that the sugar industry was once one of Taiwan's main sources of foreign exchange income. This history has had both negative and positive socio-economic effects on various local communities, but these were incidental effects and not the focus of policy considerations. After 2000, the DFA was mandated by the central government and mainstream society to support national ecosystem resilience goals. This has also brought benefits and hidden costs to local communities, but again, these are incidental effects rather than the focus of the policy. From focusing on economic development to highlighting the social-ecological system's resilience, Taiwanese society has indeed undergone significant changes. However, what has not changed is that the DFA continues to be treated as a place that should support the country's overall goals. As for the fate of the DFA itself as a local social-ecological system, it is optional, according to policy needs.

After 2011, the pressure of the indigenous movement, policy changes within the Forestry Bureau, and the efforts of some academics have jointly contributed to the emergence of a new governance platform. This marked a milestone in revising previous national-scale viewpoints and an attempt to sincerely reconcile national- and local-scale views. Different groups of stakeholders

have gradually joined the governance network, for different reasons. Han community organizations hope to develop ecotourism, whereas citizen scientists are motivated by conservation. The ecotourism platform developed later is basically a subnetwork derived from the first two. The three subnetworks, with experienced and active members of civil society, joined the governance network and collaborate with the public sector and academia. These actors are mostly wealthier, well-educated, and have sufficient work experience in an urban area. Their vision for the DFA is basically consistent with that of the public sector, and they are also familiar with how the public sector, civil society, and academia operate, so they can collaborate with other stakeholders relatively smoothly and play active and significant roles in the governance network. Their views, mixed with local and national scales, and actions therefore affect the governance process to a considerable extent.
