台灣原住民運動自一九八○年代發展至今經歷數個演變階段，其中族群正名（或復名）最引人注意。自二○○○年起先後有五個民族申請正名成功：邵族、噶瑪蘭族、太魯閣族、撒奇萊雅族與賽德克族。這些新興族群除了建構自我認同外，更致力區隔其與原來族群間的細微差異。然而此一正名風潮有其結構性困境。它除了與近年本土化、強調鄉土意識的政策有關外，國家機器透過制度設計，讓原住民相關訴求不會因為選舉而取得全國性關注，將原鄉問題侷限在政府與部落之間的協商。同時當所有原住民承受現代化對其文化傳承衝擊時，正名的渴望反而賦予國家機器決定了族群的發展與內涵，成為國家釋放族群發展不公義的安全閥，正名成功之後仍需面對原住民已國家化、新的世代對族群面貌逐漸模糊的現實。因此當正名成為區域性族群分出的手段，「我的民族認同」得自他者的公開承認，並願意接受他者的保護時，「我的民族」主體性無形中已被鑲嵌在一個更大的群體中。原住民族內部排他性的認同建構不但無損單一國族想像，反而鼓勵了更少數的人從少數人分出，致力於他、我區辨的結果，強化了不同族群對文化歷史論述權的競爭，族群之間的內部矛盾更為難解，也讓原住民議題開始走向部落化與地方化。此一波正名風潮對原住民族內部政治的影響值得進一步觀察。

There were experienced several stages about indigenous movement in
Taiwan from 1980s to the present. The recertificated issue of ethnic groups is usually influence on the internal politic among indigenes. There were five ethnic groups got recognition in past decade: Thao, Kavalan, Truku,Sakizaya and Sediq. The promoters reconstructed the culture, put on effects in grassroots and asked for the support in specific council. They attempted to express the cultural differences in order to distinguish the others. The sate apparatus permitted and transferred the injustice of ethnic policy into the problems of tribe development.It exists a dilemma in recertification movement. The identification of indigenes was shaped by policies of localization. The characters of electoral and institutional system had set the barriers which the aboriginal issues couldn’t get attention from the public. Is it necessary to build exclusive identification when the indigenes are willing to be patronized and be a part of national image? This movement will encourage the fewer to separate from the minority, and let the claim localize and tribalize gradually. It is worthy to study further about the influence on indigenous politic.