商業化現象( Commercialization )係指有組織的提供顧客或觀光客所需的服務和商品的一種行為過程。此種現象在觀光全球化的推波助瀾下，不僅在商業活動頻繁的都會區如此，同時也漫延到許多原本封閉，平靜的部落，並以觀光可以活絡地方經濟為由，逐一被開放，同時賦予商業化行為與商業活動，使得原本原汁原味的原始部落，開始從食衣住行育樂等基本生活模式起了變化。本研究針對部落觀光化（tourism）與商業利益的誘導下，使得原本屬於常民所居的民居，亦變成了商品，這樣的現象普遍存在許多被觀光化的部落或村落中，尤其顯見於南島語族的部落。
部落觀光（tribal tourism），一向是最具吸引力的觀光方式之一。但是，究竟什麼才是真正吸引觀光客的原因，學者大都認為是那些即將消失的文化項目（Cultural items）（謝世忠1994：184）及經驗（Foucault 1986）。但是，在商業化的驅使下，觀光客經常帶給部落許多正面與負面的影響。正面固然帶來經濟改善，增加許多工作機會，使得許多原本在外工作的遊子，也漸漸願意返鄉服務，順應觀光需求，提供各種可能的商業活動，重建亦重塑並創造許多的部落文化。
另一方面，則在快速的觀光商業化需求中，產生了許多速食化的劣質商品，捏造或抄襲的偽造文化，而觀光客卻樂此不疲。不僅文化活動如此，民居的形式變化亦然，過度繁雜的裝飾，絢麗的色彩偏離了傳統宇宙觀，甚至將原本散居的民居改以集村方式呈現，更誇張的是民居亦可買賣交易，商品化( Commercialize )程度之嚴重可見一斑。這種的現象，正如同雨後春筍般層出不窮。
本研究試圖以南島語族中最具觀光價值的民居之一--印尼蘇拉威西島Toraja族的民居（Banua）與家屋（Tongkonan），在觀光化及相關的政策引導下，如何改變了部落的民居風貌。本研究先透過文獻研讀、資料探討，和個人過去觀光經歷所見，將民居商品化現象擬訂出六大原則，包括民居交易化，民居櫥窗化，民居裝飾化，民居集村化，民居現代化，扭曲的宇宙觀等。再深入Sádan Toraja（Tana Toraja），和Mamasa Toraja，以及Bastem Toraja進行實地田野調查。
藉此六大原則，進行Toraja三個地區的田野調查後，發現每一個大原則下，有些尚可細分為小項目。調查結果顯示，民居交易化下，民居可直接買賣，可量身訂裝，可量化生產；民居櫥窗化亦可透過遊樂園式存在，抑或復原重建，或在地樣板化，甚致興建樣板民居，儼然都成為僅供參觀而不具使用功能的櫥窗﹔民居裝飾性的門面越來越花俏，屋頂越來越起翹﹔政府為了觀光化更鼓勵集村化；耐候性與耐久性材料的使用，例如水泥、鍍鋅浪板和其他工業量產化材料等，使得民居有現代化的趨勢，現代化家具引入室內，雖展現居住者的文明化，但他們似乎又保有自己的席地文化；至於宇宙觀方面，南島民居的河川方位觀，導正過去某些學者的南北座向之謬誤，亦經本次田調加以證實﹔Toraja平民逐漸因教育致富或因信仰的改變，使得階級制度漸趨淡化。
經過上述六大原則檢驗Toraja三個地區，民居商品化的差異，呈現「一個部族，三種樣貌」。究其原因，首先是因為政府推行島嶼觀光化，強烈政策誘導，影響民居集村、裝飾、起翹無所不用其極；其次是教育的普及和傳統Aluk ToDolo信仰的式微；再則是三個地區觀光化的先後順序，影響其民居樣貌改變的快慢，Sádan地區顯得較快也嚴重。然而，要如何能在觀光化的過程中，保留某些傳統價值，可經由更多學術的研究認定，再則就得靠繫鈴人也當是解鈴的政府政策，來認定何者為真正的價值保留，何者盡可任其商品化。所謂他山之石可以攻錯，借鏡他國的經驗，可以提供台灣許多傳統民居在觀光化的過程中，宜更謹慎，避免產生混淆，使得許多原汁原味的民居失去原有樣貌。

The commercialization phenomenon refers to a course of conduct of customers or tourists needed services and goods. This phenomenon in globalize tourism, not only in the metropolitan area, but also spread to many of the original closed, calm tribes one by one, and give business behavior and commercial activities, making the original authentic primitive tribes, has changed from their lifestyles recreation. In this study, for the tribe tourism and the commercial interests of the induction, making originally belonging to the vernacular houses of ordinary people are ranking also become a commodity, such a phenomenon prevalent many are tribal tourism, especially evident in the Austronesia tribes.
Tribal tourism has always been one of the most attractive tourists. However, what is the real reason to attract tourists, most of the scholars vanishing cultural items (Hsieh, Shih-Chung, 1994: 184) and experience (Foucault 1986). However, in the commercial driven, tourists often bring tribal many positive and negative affect. The positive is certainly bring economic improvement, increase the number of jobs, making their people willing to return home services, comply with the demand for tourism, offers a variety of commercial activities, reconstruction and remodeling their tribal culture.
On the other hand, the tribal tourism commercial demand, resulting in many of the fast food of the poor quality of goods, fabrication or plagiarism counterfeit culture. Not only cultural activities, changes in the form of vernacular houses, too complicated decoration, brilliant colors deviate from the traditional cosmology, and even change the original scattered houses into setting houses also buy or sell transaction, commercialize, severity and some visible
This research attempts vernacular houses one of the most attractive tourist destination in the Austronesia - Sulawesi Toraja Banua and Tongkonan, tourism and related policy guidance, how to change the tribe vernacular house style. In-depth Tana Toraja region Sádan Toraja, Mamasa Toraja and Bastem Toraja field investigation found commercialization infected tribes, and have not been commercial areas, housing commercialization of the varies greatly, display the Toraja tribe lived in the region, presenting "One nation with three different housing style ".
By this research rough literature study, explore and status of the investigation, the phenomenon of the commercialization of residential areas are summarized in six principles, including transactions, show windows, decorative, setting village, modernization, cosmology. After field investigation showed that the houses can be directly traded, quantifiable production has become a tradable commodity; as well as recovery and reconstruction, or to build templates houses without functional, decorative facade, the roof is getting warped; weather resistance and durability of the use of materials, such as cement, corrugated zinc sheet and other industrial mass production of materials to make houses with modern characterization, the introduction of modern furniture indoor show the civilization of the inhabitants.
Toraja houses originally follow their traditional cosmology under the belief of Aluk Todolo, the arrangement of the vernacular houses just follow the local environment as an axis of mountain and sea as their direction; there are many traditional taboos and rules of dualism, gradually disappeared in the process of change and commercialization of faith, where he visited as tourists, fabricated situations, the Diaspora change set the village, bamboo change wood, highlights the commercialization policies Toraja houses has been the commercialization of serious distortions, making the traditional Toraja houses cosmology and the value of getting life far from the truth!

(一) 中文文獻
1.林憲德（2012），《迷霧原鄉—百越民居文化探索》，新自然主義股份有限公司
2.林憲德（2007），〈神祕的排列---卑南遺址石板棺方位之謎〉，經典雜誌, p.58-63
3.林憲德（2008），《綠色建築》詹氏圖書, 台北
4.林憲德（1994），《現代人類的居住環境》ISBN957-575-036-5胡氏圖書, 台北
5.謝世忠（2004），《族群人類學的宏觀探索-台灣原住民論集》，國立台灣大學出版中心,台北市
6.黃潮岳﹙2005﹚，〈溼熱環境建築與室內空間之研究:以馬來傳統干欄式住宅為例〉，2005中原大學室內設計系第四屆國際學術研討會論文集，桃園：中原大學主辦
7.黃潮岳﹙2006﹚，〈印尼西松巴風土建築與文化之研究〉，2006中原大學室內設計系第五屆國際學術研討會論文集，桃園：中原大學主辦
8.黃潮岳﹙2008﹚，〈印尼托拉加族的宇宙觀與家屋建築之空間構成研究〉，2008中原大學室內設計系第七屆國際學術研討會論文集，桃園：中原大學主辦
9.李壬癸（1992），《台灣風物：台灣平埔族的分類及其相互關係》，台灣風物雜誌社
10.李美賢（2005），《印尼史-異中求同的海上神鷹》，三民書局股份有限公司,台北
11.馮久玲（2002），《文化是好生意》，臉譜出版社,台北
12.徐雨村﹙2005﹚，《文化人類學—文化多樣性之探索》，台北：桂冠圖書公司。11. 全峰梅 侯其強 ( 2008 )，《居所的圖景—東南亞民居》東南大学出版社
13.《發現南島 》民90年七日ISBN957-97726-4-9 ,經典雜誌編著,台北市
14.《南島新世界 》 民90年九日ISBN957-97726-6-5, 經典雜誌編著,台北

(二) 日文文獻
1.鳥越憲三郎、若林弘子（1995），《倭族トうジヤ》 大修館書店
2.《トうジヤの傳統的家屋--トソコナソ修復支援活動の記錄》 (2001) トソコナソ修復支援活動委員會The Cooperative Committee for Restoration of Tongkonan in Tana Toraja
3.《インドネシア共和國タナ•トラジャ縣傳統的家屋バヌア•タンベン保存修理工事報告書》(1997)財團法人 文化財建造物保存技術協會The Japanese Association for Conservationof Architectural Monuments, Tokyo, Japan
4.千千岩助太郎, 1960《台灣高砂族之住家》丸善出版
5.若林弘子, 1986《高床式建築の源流》弘文社
6.木村建一 (1999) , 《民家の自然ェネルギー技術》彰国社刊
7.淺川滋男, 1991.02〈海南島の住家〉《 日本建築学會東海支部研究報告》日木建築學會
8.布野修司等, (1982) 《地域の生態系に基づく住居システムに關する研究(I) 》住宅建築研究所

(三) 英文文獻
1. Teow Ngak Ng, Hsien-Te Lin (2013): An Analysis on Microclimate and Construction of Tongkonan and Alang-alang in Tana Toraja of Sulawesi, Indonesia. Applied Mechanics and Materials Vol. 311(2013) pp375-379,Trans Tech Publications, Switzerland.
2. Teow Ngak Ng, Hsien-Te Lin (2012): An Analysis on Microclimate and Construction of the Vernacular Architecture in Minangkabau of Sumatra, Indonesia. Advanced Materials Research Vols.518-523 (2012) pp4455-4460,Trans Tech Publications, Switzerland.
3. Teow Ngak Ng, Hsien-Te Lin (2012): A Study on Changing of Minangkabau houses from Sumatra to Malay Peninsula Advanced Materials Research Vol 461(2012) pp565-570,Trans Tech Publications, Switzerland.
4. Teow Ngak Ng, Hsien-Te Lin (2012): A Study on Culture and Construction Changing of Tongkonan under Tourism in Toraja, Indonesia.02-inta12-16, iNTA 2012 4th International Network for tropical Architecture Conference, National University of Singapore
5. Teow Ngak Ng, Hsien-Te Lin (2006): An Analysis on Microclimate of West Sumbanase Vernacular Architecture, 2nd International Conference on Sustainable Architecture and Urban Design inTropical Regions, Jogjakarta,Indonesia.(2006), p.B2-1-B2-8
6. Imelda Irmawati Damanik (2012): Tongkonan between tradition and technology 03-inta12-63, iNTA 2012 4th International Network for tropical Architecture Conference, National University of Singapore
7. Eunike Kristi Julistiono. 2005. The sustainable traditional structural system of ‘Tongkonan’in Celebes, Indonesia, 2005 World Sustainable Building Conference, Japan.
8. Wasilah et. al.(2011) :Comparative study of traditional Architecture Toraja and Mamasa.International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Vol.3 No.7.
9. Jowa Imre Kris Jovak et. al. 1988. Banua Toraja .Royal Tropical Institute of The
Netherlands., Printed inNetherlands.
10.Reimar Schefold, Peter J.M. Nas and Gaudenz Zomenig (2004), Indonesian houses vol.1,Singapore University Press, Singapore
11.Ling, Shun-Sheng. 1967. The Dolmen Culture of Taiwan, East Asia and The SouthwesternPacific.. ,Published by Institute of Ethnology Academia. Sinica No10, Taipei, Taiwan.
12.Bigalke, Terrence William.（1981），A Social History of ‘Tana Toraja’ 1870-1965. Ph.D. dissertation, The Univ. of Wiscounsin-Madison.
13.Hardjono, J. （1971）， Indonesia, Land and People. Jakarta：Gunung Agung.
14.Veen, van der. （1965）， The Merok-Feast of the Sa’dan Toraja. s’Gravenhage：Martinus Nijhoff.
15.Roxana Waterson. 1990. The Living House ： AnAnthropology of Architecture in South-East Asia.Thames and Hudson, London, Printed inSingapore.
16. Roxana Waterson: The Architecture of South-Eost Asia through Travelers’ Eyes, Oxford University Press, New York 1998.
17.Stanislaus Sandarupa（1986），Life and Death in Toraja （1991），Printed by 21 Computer Ujung Pandang, South Sulawesi,Indonesia.
18.Amir Achsin Toraja Tongkonan ＆ Funeral Ceremony （1991）Ananda Graphia Press ,Ujung Pandang,South Sulawesi,Indonesia.
19. Ronald G..Knapp（2003），Asia’s Old Dnellings-Tradition, Resilience,and Change，Oxford Univorsity Press Inc.，New York Fist published
20.Jacques Dumarcay (1987), Images of Asia-The Houses in South-East Asia, Oxford University Press.
21.Gunawan Tjahjono (1999), Indonesian Heritage Architecture Published by Archipelago Press. Singapore.
22.Rapoport, Amos. 1969. House Form and Culture, New Jersey：Prentice-Hall Publishing House,
23. Martin Evans. Housing, Climate and Comfort, Published by The Architecture Press Limited,London(1980), p.49.
24.Abaul Halim Nasir: The Traditional Malay house (Penerbit Fajar Bakti Sdn. Bhd, 1997).
25. Nellie S. L Tan Wong: Adat Perpatih-A Matrilineal System in Negeii Sembilan (Malaysia,Wintrac (WWB/Malaysia) SDN. BHD, 1992).
26.Lin Jee Yuan: The Malay House (Institut Masyarakat, 1987).
27. Raja Nafida Binti Raja Shahminan: “Evolusi Senibina Balai Adat di Negeri Sembilan”(Institut Pengajian Siswazah dan Penyelidikan University Malaysia, 1999)..
28. Wang Renping and Cai Zhenyu : Building and Environment 41 (2006)687-697
29.Ryozo Ooka : Building and Environment 37 (2002) 319-329
30.Andaya, Leonard Y.（1981），The Heritage of Arung Palakka：A History pf South Sulawesi（Celebes）in the Seventeenth Century. The Hague：Martinus Nijhoff.31.Sherwin, D.(1979),“From Batak to Minangkabau : An Architectural Trajectory”,Majallah Akitek, 1(79)
32.Abdul Azis Said (2004) ，Toraja---Simbolisme unsure visual rumah tradisional，Makassar, Indonesia