| Title |
The Influence of Culture on the International Management of Shark Finning
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Management, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00267-014-0291-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andrea Dell’Apa, M. Chad Smith, Mahealani Y. Kaneshiro-Pineiro |
| Abstract |
Shark finning is prohibited in many countries, but high prices for fins from the Asian market help maintain the international black-market and poaching. Traditional shark fin bans fail to recognize that the main driver of fin exploitation is linked to cultural beliefs about sharks in traditional Chinese culture. Therefore, shark finning should be addressed considering the social science approach as part of the fishery management scheme. This paper investigates the cultural significance of sharks in traditional Chinese and Hawaiian cultures, as valuable examples of how specific differences in cultural beliefs can drive individuals' attitudes toward the property of shark finning. We suggest the use of a social science approach that can be useful in the design of successful education campaigns to help change individuals' attitudes toward shark fin consumption. Finally, alternative management strategies for commercial fishers are provided to maintain self-sustainability of local coastal communities. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 226 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Singapore | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 217 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 68 | 30% |
| Student > Master | 41 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 8% |
| Researcher | 16 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 4% |
| Other | 14 | 6% |
| Unknown | 62 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 58 | 26% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 52 | 23% |
| Social Sciences | 12 | 5% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 8 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 24 | 11% |
| Unknown | 67 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 June 2023.
All research outputs
#1,550,079
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Management
#79
of 1,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,095
of 241,493 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Management
#1
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,914 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 241,493 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.