| Title |
Vulnerability of coastal livelihoods to shrimp farming: Insights from Mozambique
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Ambio, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13280-014-0574-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jessica Blythe, Mark Flaherty, Grant Murray |
| Abstract |
Millions of people around the world depend on shrimp aquaculture for their livelihoods. Yet, the phenomenal growth of shrimp farming has often given rise to considerable environmental and social damage. This article examines the impacts of commercial, export-oriented shrimp aquaculture on local livelihood vulnerability by comparing the exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity of shrimp farm employees with non-farm employees in rural Mozambique. Exposure to stressors was similar between the two groups. Shrimp farm employees had higher assets and higher adaptive capacity than non-farm employees. However, because their income is heavily dependent on a single commodity, shrimp farm employees were highly susceptible to the boom crop nature of intensive shrimp farming. The implications for aquaculture policy and vulnerability research are discussed. The article argues that coastal vulnerability is dynamic, variable, and influenced by multiple processes operating at multiple scales. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 14% |
| Australia | 2 | 14% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 7% |
| Kuwait | 1 | 7% |
| United States | 1 | 7% |
| Sweden | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 6 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 43% |
| Scientists | 6 | 43% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 100 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 17% |
| Researcher | 17 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 6% |
| Lecturer | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 18 | 17% |
| Unknown | 23 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 22 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 19 | 18% |
| Social Sciences | 14 | 14% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 11% |
| Unknown | 27 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 01 May 2021.
All research outputs
#2,969,006
of 24,404,997 outputs
Outputs from Ambio
#548
of 1,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,736
of 263,676 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio
#6
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,404,997 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,743 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 263,676 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.