Women Shellfish Collectors: Economic and Social Implications of the Shellfish Extractivism Perna perna (Linnaeus) in Paraná Coast, Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to elaborate a diagnosis of the situation experienced by women who practice the collection of shellfish from Paraná Coast, revealing the economic and social implications of shellfish collection that may be limiting the activity. The study showed that women are predominant in the activity, and they are developing the activities related to the extraction of mollusks since adolescence. The study also revealed that women shellfish collector had an average of 4 children and had a low level of education and high levels of illiteracy. The average income obtained was on average of USD 107.90, with the majority of the interviewees (n = 93%) having in the activity the only source of income. It should be noted in relation to the income obtained, these women can be classified in the group of people living on the “poverty line” who are the people who receive an income of up to US$ 5.5 (approximately R$ 22.00) per day. 86% of the interviewees reported that, due to the humidity in the workplace and the repetitive movements, they already had some health problem. The main implications of the activity were associated to the low income measured with the activity and the unhealthy environment, and the potentialities such as income generation and the possibility of reconciling professional activities with domestic ones were the most positively highlighted. The collective organization can be considered the main alternative of this group of women in the fight for better remuneration, work environment and quality of life.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".