臺灣礦業採掘有關的政治環境衝突往往被概念化為治理問題。也就是說，治理政策產生的衝突，是由於礦業採掘活動中「收益分配、政治參與、透明度和原住民社區的就業機會」等四個指標。然而，在治理層面忽略了原住民族長期受到邊緣化的歷史過程以及持續接受殖民的統治的治理模式，因此本文的主要論述是， 礦業採掘活動有關的政治環境衝突並非源自 “治理” 問題， 而更重要的是，此問題本身超越了現行的政治體制架構，因為國家、礦業採掘公司、原住民部落之間在土地議題上顯現出不同的本質觀點，雙方在政治體制的範圍上，以及文化、社會體系上，兩者皆沒有共同之處，而基於這一論點，本研究將對於南澳泰雅族人土地議題的奮鬥案立加以研究。 / Political-environmental conflicts related to extractive industries in Taiwan tend to be conceptualized as problems of governance. These conflicts are generated from ill-designed policies that manage the distribution of revenues from extractive industries, formal political participation, transparency and employment opportunities for the indigenous community. The governance approach, however, does not take into account the history of marginalization and resistance of indigenous groups, or the permanence of colonial patterns of domination in Taiwan. The main argument of this paper is that the political-environmental conflicts related to extractive activities do not derive from problems of ‘governance’, but more significantly, they emerge as a consequence of divergences that transcend the current institutional framework. The different political ontologies among state, corporate, and the indigenous community over land revealed, each party operates within institutional parameters and socio-cultural systems which have nothing in common. This argument will be developed in the case study of the Atayal people’s territorial struggles in Nan’ao, Taiwan.