The Role Livelihood Outcomes and Strategies Play in the Adaptive Co-management of the Sea Urchin Fisheries in Barbados and St. Lucia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The sea urchin fisheries of Barbados and St Lucia have provided supplemental income for families living in coastal communities for many years.These fisheries have also shaped the social history and influenced the culture of communities that traditionally take part in harvesting and related activities.In recent times, low abundance of sea urchins has resulted in legislated multi-year closures of the fisheries.In Barbados the last open season occurred in 2004, while St. Lucia had only a three-day open season in 2009 after being closed for the prior four years.These closures suggest that current regulatory management measures are not producing results that sustain livelihoods in the fishery.The adoption of an adaptive co-management (ACM) approach which empowers resource users and other stakeholders to manage their resources and protect their livelihood may provide a solution.Implementing such an arrangement requires commitment to a long term institution building process.It is likely to encounter many challenges.Assessing the feasibility of implementing this innovative approach to management is part of doctoral research in five sea urchin harvesting communities in Barbados and St. Lucia.Livelihoods analyses were conducted in Silver Sands and Consett Bay in Barbados and Anse Ger, Laborie and Vieux Fort in St. Lucia.In each community a short questionnaire was administered at the household level to investigate assets, vulnerabilities, institutions, livelihood strategies and outcomes.This paper presents preliminary findings and suggests how livelihood strategies and outcomes can develop and sustain conditions that favour successful ACM.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".