2009年8月8日發生莫拉克風災，重創南臺灣，7成以上的受災戸為原住民族。莫拉克災後重建之初，政府本標舉「離災不離村、離村不離郷」的原鄉重建原則，嗣後短短不到20天，重建方向卻有別於921地 震與日、中等國的救災經驗，確立了「一次到位」，略過中繼階段，直接選擇永久屋為主的安置政策，並配合立法院制訂《莫拉克颱風災後重建特別條例》第20條作為啟動強制遷村機制的依據。在接受永久屋安置的3,096戸中，2,746戸都屬於「離郷」的異地安置，占88.7%。當政府數度為重建進度慶賀之際，場外的原住民族卻高喊著「原鄉零重建、迫遷達九成」、「我們不要普羅旺斯、我們要原鄉重建」等標語。災後已近4年，歌頌與批判聲均仍持續。本文透過文獻與檔案分析，期望回顧與探討此ー「沒有中繼的永久」政策當時究竟如何形成？藉由呈現其間重要的事件與脈絡轉折，為此ー在臺灣災後重建史，乃至於原住民族遷徒史上飽受爭議的ー頁，留下記錄。文中並適時比對921地震、日本311地震、中國汶川地震，及世界銀行所彙集關於異地安置的重建經驗，發現對於異地安置的高風險，各國多有體認，故縱使納入考量，亦非主要選項並相當尊重住民自決，且審慎為之。然而莫拉克災後非政府組織在政策形成過程中的主張與主導能量，與當時政府災後カ圓修補國家治理正當性的壓カ，一拍即合。為了満足一次到位的重建目的，組合屋的問題被擴大論述，政府與NGOs聯手發展與執行永久屋政策，表面上雖達成亮麗的重建速率，但實際上卻建造了不適切的居住硬體與生活環境。異地安置崩解了部落族人與村民共同議事及原鄉生活的機制，此等問題必須被正視，以作為下一次災後重建的借鏡。

This article examines the reconstruction, in relocated site after the strike or Typhoon Morakot. The important events and the transition process of policy in the phases of relocation (including the formulating policy, the follow-up assessment and consultation phase, etc.) are discussed through the archive analysis and the field interview. For this purpose, this study focuses on: (1) identifying the position of relocation within the whole reconstruction, (2) the forming process of relocation, (3) the assertion and the canvass during the formation of NGり s policy, and (4) how permanent housing substitutes transitional resettlement after agency-driven reconstruction in relocated sites becomes the major gateway of reconstruction. Thirdly, by cutting to the chase from “Village Relocation Clause under “The Special Law of Reconstruction After Morakot Typhoon Disaster Art. 20, discusses scopes of assessment, procedures of assessment, the report of assessment, etc. And also explores the issues of safety assessment phase in practice and the inadequate institutional regulation in the original settlement. Additionally, the paper also explains the rebound and the cause which were brought about in the consultation process. To respond to original residents，opinion and avoid the annoyance resulting from reaching a consultative agreement, the government adopts the strategy of “breaking the whole into parts.” The remaining aftereffects are discussed. Finally, address the completion of forming the reconstruction in relocated site, the assessment, and the suggestion of consultative phase.