A survey of alternative livelihood options for Hong Kong's fishers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Hong Kong's largely unregulated fisheries are in a state of biological and economic decline. The government has proposed new fisheries management regulations which will likely restrict fishing effort. Thus, the purpose of this study is to investigate: fishers' willingness and capacity to switch to alternative jobs or livelihoods; and the feasibility of the marine recreation sector to provide alternative employment options for fishers. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted interviews to find out about perceptions and attitudes towards the proposed management regulations, and alternative livelihood options for fishers. They interviewed participants in the fisheries sector (mainly fishers) and the marine recreation sector. A questionnaire was also mailed or faxed to marine recreation businesses throughout Hong Kong. Findings It was found that up to 75 per cent of fishers interviewed were generally willing to leave the fishery if they were provided with adequate compensation, but they were not optimistic about finding suitable jobs due to their limited skills and education. About 55 per cent of marine recreation respondents said they would consider hiring fishers; however, there were unlikely to be sufficient jobs for all the potentially displaced fishers. Hence, fishers have to look outside the marine sector for alternative livelihoods. Practical implications The results highlight that a sizable portion of fishers are willing to depart from “their way of life” under the right conditions. This indicates that, the government can help restore Hong Kong's fisheries and fisher livelihoods by providing appropriate training and designing acceptable compensation packages for fishers. Originality/value The study reported in this paper is significant because it shows that fishing is no longer economically profitable for Hong Kong's fishers, a situation which can largely be attributed to the lack of fisheries management in Hong Kong, which has dissipated biological and economic productivity of the fisheries' resources.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".