原住民部落資源自主治理（self-governing）之概念已陸續地推展於原住民地區，過去有關於部落資源自主治理相關議題之討論與研究鮮少從原住民族土地問題切入，少數結合原住民族土地問題與部落資源自主治理者，研究場景也僅著重於原住民族單一族群內的自主治理組織發起與運作過程描述分析，至於在現實政經環境背景下，不同族群間自主治理的過程究竟該如何運作？以及藉由分析其運作過程產生的相關問題，進一步檢視現行原住民族自主治理部落土地資源之政策與地權及地用等相關法令規定者，尚乏相關論著。 本研究選取苗栗縣南庄鄉蓬萊村為實證研究對象，以Elinor Ostrom（1990）所提出的成功自主治理共用資源（common pool resources）八個設計原則（design principles）為檢驗基礎，分析蓬萊溪封溪護魚與八卦力民宿村部落土地資源自主治理制度設計成功與否、歸納制度脆弱或未成功的原因，並且透過社會關係網絡（social context）與取得權（access theory）等相關概念，分析兩案例之社會關係網絡與利益流樣態，以理解制度規範建構之互動過程與核心理由，發掘置於國家權力統治與資本主義貨幣經濟（cash economy）之現實場景下，原╱漢「多族群間」、以及「同族群內部」到「多族群間」自主治理部落土地資源之問題，並指出現行部落自主治理之地用與地權政策規劃與部落現實場景間之差距。 由實證案例分析可知，原住民族傳統部落組織的瓦解與重構過程中，原住民與平地人之間的政經稟賦差異加大，原住民族自主治理之立意往往被扭曲，平地人卻能掌控部落土地資源進而分享大部分之利得。此外，原住民族自主治理部落土地資源之政策走向，忽略漢人使用原住民族傳統領域土地亦有其特殊歷史背景或政策因素，是以在政策層面上當有再深入研究及通盤檢討之必要。而多族群間亦須放棄成見、加強溝通以謀求彼此共識，增加地方自主治理的社會資本，方可妥善管理部落土地資源，朝共同治理之目標邁進。 / The concept of indigenous resources self-governing has been promoted to the indigenous areas one after another. However, there have been few issues and studies about tribal resources self-governing observed from the viewpoint of indigenous land management. Even though minority of issues and studies link up indigenous land problems with tribal resources self-governing, their research background also only puts emphasis on the analysis of a single indigenous race, which describes the establishment of organization and operation for self-governing. How is the self-governing mechanism operated among different races under the realistic political and economical background? How is the self-governing policy of tribal land resources manipulated further? How are laws related to land ownership and land use implemented? All of these topics still lack correlative studies. Therefore, this research takes the tribe of the Penglai Village in Nanjhuang Township Miaoli County as an example, using eight design principles proposed by Elinor Ostrom (1990) to examine the case, which the Penglai stream blocking for fishing resources protection and the self-governing for tribal land resources in the Baguali B&B(bed-and-breakfast) village. The context of illustrations are: (1) analyzing whether the design of institution for the case is successful; (2) inducing the reason why institution is unsuccessful or weak; (3) analyzing the social context and benefit flows of the case to understand the interactive process and the core reason for the establishment of institution standard by the concept of social context and access theory; (4) finding the self-governing problems of tribal land resources among indigenous /Han multi-races(the case of Penglai River) and from one single race to multi-races(the case of Baguali B&B Village) under the realistic background of state right governing and cash economy of capitalism; and (5) pointing out the gap between the current land use and landownership policy plan for tribal self-governing and the realistic situation of tribe. By the analysis of the case, we can find that the disintegration and restructuring of the indigenous tribal organization because of the difference of the political and economical endowment from Han people results in the phenomenon, which the purpose of the indigenous tribe self-governing for land common pool resources has been twisted. In addition, the formulation of the self-governing policy for indigenous land resources ignores that the Han people using the indigenous traditional territory also have its special historical background or resulted from policy implementation. Therefore, it is necessary to study further and overall review, to strengthen the communication to seek a consensus among multi-races and to gain the social capital of local self-governing. In this way, it will be possible to manage the tribal land resources well and achieve the goal of common governance.