Tourism-Induced Livelihood Adaptive Process in Marine Protected Area Communities Under Socio-Ecological Changes: Evidence from the Pearl River Estuary, China

Abstract

Marine protected areas (MPAs) are crucial for marine ecosystems, but they often pose significant challenges for the local fishing communities that rely on these ecosystems for their livelihoods. Identifying approaches that maintain ecological integrity while improving community livelihoods and well-being has become a central issue in marine sustainability. This study investigates the adaptive livelihood strategies of a community on Qi’ao Island, located in China’s Pearl River Estuary, which has gradually transitioned from traditional fisheries to tourism-induced livelihoods. Based on Actor–network theory (ANT), we developed a multi-level approach to examine interactions between human and non-human actors, institutions, and policies during livelihood adaptation. A mixed-methods approach was adopted, combining semi-structured interviews (n = 47), extended field observation, and policy analysis. Computational text analysis techniques included word frequency analysis, sentiment analysis, and co-occurrence network analysis using Python 3.8. These were integrated with thematic analysis and coding conducted in NVivo 15. This study demonstrates that the sustainability of tourism-based livelihood adaptation depends on equitable benefit sharing, flexible governance, and sustained community participation. Theoretically, this research extends livelihood studies by demonstrating how ANT captures the relational and processual dynamics of adaptation. Practically, it offers policy-relevant insights for designing adaptive and participatory governance strategies that reconcile conservation objectives with community well-being in MPAs.

1. Introduction

Community livelihood in protected areas faces the challenge of balancing environmental conservation and economic growth. Protected areas are helpful in safeguarding sensitive ecosystems in rural regions and alleviating rural poverty. In China, there are about 300,000 to 600,000 residents living within or surrounding protected areas, where agriculture, fisheries, and forestry remain closely tied to natural resources [1]. In 2007, the Chinese central government elevated ecological civilization construction (ECC) to a national strategy. This strategy not only addresses the challenges posed by economic progress but also effectively manages natural resources to provide a pragmatic foundation for advancing sustainable development [2]. A key goal in China’s marine governance strategy is to utilize marine protected areas (MPAs) as crucial tools for conserving marine biodiversity, restoring ecosystems, and promoting sustainable fisheries management and marine environmental protection [3]. Internationally, initiatives such as the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDG14) and the Convention on Biological Diversity promote marine biodiversity conservation [4]. Despite their ecological effectiveness, early MPA policies often insufficiently accounted for social dimensions [5]. The establishment of MPAs designates surrounding communities as key ecological protection zones, restricting industrial development and commercial activities. This has given rise to the widely observed paradox of “better conservation, poorer communities,” underscoring the need for governance approaches that integrate ecological objectives with livelihood sustainability and social equity [6,7,8].

To move beyond a sectoral understanding of conservation–livelihood trade-offs, protected area communities must be conceptualized as integrated social–ecological systems (SESs) rather than isolated social or ecological units. SESs are defined as interdependent and co-evolving human and natural subsystems characterized by reciprocal feedback, shared vulnerabilities, and mutually shaped adaptive responses. In coastal and marine contexts, socio-ecological changes emerge through shifts in ecosystem conditions, climate impacts, policy restrictions on resource extraction, and market-driven transitions such as tourism development [9]. These changes reshape access to resources, redistribute risks, and restructure community livelihood strategies [10].

Within social–ecological systems, livelihood adaptation constitutes the primary mechanism through which communities respond to environmental change, policy intervention, and emerging economic opportunities [11]. Tourism-induced livelihood adaptation refers to the processes through which households and communities adjust, reconfigure, or transform their livelihood activities in response to opportunities and constraints created by tourism growth, governance interventions, and ecosystem regulations [12]. Tourism diversification has been widely promoted as a strategy to offset declining fisheries and enhance community resilience [13,14]. It enables local people to participate in tourism development with minimal investment or institutional barrier [15], effectively promoting livelihood adaptation [16]. However, empirical evidence remains mixed: tourism may generate income and empowerment or, alternatively, produce dependence, cultural commodification, exclusionary benefit allocation, and ecological degradation [17].

In the SES of the Qi’ao community, marine resources have transcended their roles as static backgrounds to become active actants that directly mediate human agency. While traditional SES research often treats ecosystems as passive providers of resource services, the principle of generalized symmetry in Actor–network theory (ANT) conceptualizes them as sources of material commands. When the mangrove ecosystem was degraded by traditional fishery practices, it ceased to provide a sustainable material foundation for the community livelihood. Subsequently, as mangroves physically encroached upon former aquaculture zones under conservation mandates, they forcibly severing the linkages between fishermen and their fishing livelihoods. Following the completion of ecological restoration, the material attributes of the mangroves acquired a new mobilizing power, evolving into core tourism resources that facilitate an alternative livelihood strategy for the local community.

Studies rarely examine how livelihood adaptation is constructed through ongoing interactions among heterogeneous actors, including institutions, communities, markets, and non-human elements such as ecosystems and infrastructure. This study applies ANT to protected area tourism adaptation to address two research questions: which key actors constitute the actor–network of tourism-induced livelihood adaptation in protected areas, and how do negotiation, alliance formation, and power relations shape the construction and stabilization of tourism livelihood networks within marine social–ecological systems?

2. Literature Review

2.1. Sustainable Livelihood and Tourism

Emerging from the environment and development movement of the 1980s, sustainable development principles have usually been used to address environmental degradation and social conflicts arising from traditional economic growth models. The Our Common Future report was published in 1987, introducing the concept of “sustainable livelihoods,” integrating sustainability into poverty reduction practices [18]. Early scholars defined sustainable livelihoods as coping with and recovering from stresses and shocks while maintaining or enhancing capabilities and assets, ensuring intergenerational opportunities and contributing net benefits to other livelihoods locally and globally [19,20]. The sustainable livelihood framework (SLF), proposed by DFID in 1998, remains a key tool, comprising five components: vulnerability context, livelihood assets, policy and institutions, livelihood strategies, and livelihood outcomes.

Tourism has emerged as a critical strategy for poverty reduction, with ecotourism, community tourism, rural tourism, and pro-poor tourism (PPT) gaining traction since 2000 [21]. Research highlights the role of community participation, livelihood diversification, and governance in tourism development [22]. For instance, a study in rural Poland emphasizes equitable resource use and community benefits [23], while research in Ethiopia identifies systemic barriers to tourism despite abundant resources [24]. In China, rural tourism participation is influenced by financial and operational constraints [25]. Protected area community livelihood studies reveal challenges in governance and community engagement, particularly the negative impacts of top-down management on marine communities [26]. Scholars underscore the importance of fishers’ willingness to transition their livelihoods, as village-led models are more effective for sustainability in ecologically fragile regions [27]. Tourism in MPAs has enhanced community income, capacity building, and social welfare in the Philippines [28]; triggered resistance when cultural and livelihood concerns were ignored in Indonesia [29]; and emphasized issues of equity, land rights, and long-term sustainability in Pacific Island governance [30].

While the Sustainable Livelihood Framework and its extended theories on livelihood change have made significant contributions to identifying capital assets, evaluating livelihood outcomes, and informing policy formulation, they frequently overlook the inherent dynamics and contradictions characterizing the transition process. Livelihood adaptation is far more than a simple linear accumulation or substitution of diverse capitals; rather, it represents a process of reaching consensus through the intricate interplay of power dynamics and competing interests among various stakeholders. In contrast, ANT provides a relational and process-based lens that explains how livelihood adaptation is actively constructed, negotiated, and stabilized through translation among heterogeneous human and non-human actors. Furthermore, traditional livelihood frameworks, often constrained by anthropocentric perspectives, tend to neglect the roles and agency of non-human elements within livelihood transformations. In the context of MPA communities, shifts in the material properties of non-human entities often emerge as the focal point of interest conflicts between residents, local governments, and protected area management authorities.

2.2. Actor–Network Theory, Tourism, and Livelihood

Actor–network theory (ANT), developed by François Latour, examines interconnected social networks composed of human and non-human actors [31]. It highlights the important role of non-human entities in shaping these networks and explores how relationships are formed and defined [32]. The central concept of ANT is translation, which consists of four stages [33,34,35]:

• Problematization: Key actors identify mutual interests and establish an obligatory passage point (OPP);
• Interessement: Strategies reinforce these shared interests, engaging additional actors;
• Enrollment: Actors define roles, with some taking on spokesperson functions;
• Mobilization: Roles are performed, stabilizing the network in a process called “ordering” or “black-boxing”.

Since the 1990s, ANT has proven effective for analyzing various aspects of science, technology, and society (STS) [36]. For instance, Jørgensen deploys ANT to unravel the complex dynamics of tourism benefit distribution [37]. Wang’s study of China’s Guizhou Karst World Heritage Site highlighted power dynamics between actors [38]. Several studies have introduced and operationalized actor- and action-oriented approaches that recognize agency and response strategies [39], yet they remain biased toward human actors and overlook the agency of non-human forces [40].

The distinct advantage of ANT lies in its capacity to reframe livelihood adaptation in MPA communities as a process of translation. Traditional livelihood analysis frameworks typically conceptualize tourism transition as the linear accumulation of household assets. However, they often fail to deconstruct the essence of dynamic power shifts inherent in such transformations. This perspective interprets the transition as the conversion of controversial environmental policies into a stabilized consensus for tourism development among heterogeneous actants—a state defined as black-boxing. By scrutinizing not only the linkages and negotiations between actors but also instances of translation failure and nodes of resistance that refuse integration, ANT precisely captures the profound socio-ecological complexity of MPA community livelihood transitions in ecologically sensitive zones.

ANT possesses irreplaceable advantages in analyzing livelihood adaptation within MPA communities. This study uses ANT to bridge the human–nature divide, focusing on the roles of non-human actors like mangroves and fishponds in shaping tourism livelihood pathways and highlighting the complexities of actor–network formation in MPAs. ANT provides an explanatory value for why certain livelihood models become normalized while others are marginalized, addressing a theoretical gap rarely discussed in MPA community livelihood research. By framing tourism adaptation as a relational and multi-actor governance process, this research complements SES and vulnerability perspectives, offering new insights into the negotiation of power, benefit sharing, and socio-environmental trade-offs. Taking the Qi’ao community as a case study and integrating the theory of the four dynamic stages of translation, this research reveals how livelihood adaptation in protected areas evolves from an abstract policy objective into a concrete heterogeneous network through an Obligatory Passage Point (OPP). The application of ANT enables the precise localization of conflicting relationships and the specific stages at which they occur during the livelihood adaptation process, thereby helping to explain the dissent and instability concealed beneath narratives of successful transition. Furthermore, this study grants ‘actant’ status to the non-human actors, including homestead land, and other related elements. The use of ANT allows for the observation of how non-human actors participate in and reconstruct the process of livelihood adaptation, providing a more comprehensive and critical perspective for understanding sustainable livelihoods.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Data Collection and Materials

This study employed a combination of in-depth individual interviews, focus group discussions, and participatory observations during multiple field research conducted from August to November 2024. Initially, 8 key informants, including restaurant owners, homestay operators, coffee shop owners, and street vendors, were interviewed (

Table 1. Socioeconomic characteristics of partial key informants (fieldwork conducted in 2024).

Key Informants	Gender	Age	Occupation	Local Resident or Not	Personal Characteristics
K 1	Female	50	Traditional cooking studio manager	Yes	Has a certain level of community visibility and influence, passionate about public welfare, and key figure in local women’s organization.
K 2	Female	45	Local Tourism Operator	Yes	Possesses extensive experience in tourism operations and a wide social network in the community.
K 3	Female	30	Community Administrator	Yes	Familiar with community management work, previous collaborative work together, and established a trust relationship.
K 4	Female	52	Local Homestay Operator; Community Museum Director	Yes	One of the first homestay operators, community volunteer, familiar with local culture, and extensive social relationships.
K 5	Male	38	External Tourism Operator	No	Owns two souvenir shops and one homestay, actively involved in island public affairs, and one of the earliest outsiders to come to the island.
K 6	Female	36	Protected Area Researcher	No	Familiar with protected area management systems and a mangrove expert.
K 7	Male	50	Biodiversity Expert; Protected Area Volunteer	No	Senior volunteer, passionate about public welfare and environmental protection, and knowledgeable about the history of protected area development and biodiversity conservation.
K 8	Male	32	Outside Tourism Operator	No	Familiar with the status of the community tourism operations, familiar with the island tourism resources, and passionate about public welfare.

). A total of 47 valid interview samples were obtained, numbered QA1 to QA47, comprising 23 residents, 4 community committee members, 5 reserve administrators, 2 government officials, 7 non-local business owners, and 6 tourists. In addition, three focus group discussions were organized with women’s self-organized groups, fishers’ households, and external operators to triangulate individual interview findings.

The determination of the sample size for qualitative interviews depends on the research objectives, the homogeneity of informants, and the depth of information required to achieve thematic saturation [41,42,43,44,45]. The sample size of 47 is methodologically robust and fully supported by established conventions in qualitative research focused on in-depth interviews and expert-driven assessments of livelihood and sustainability issues. For instance, Govindan et al. utilized a panel of 34 maritime experts to prioritize global net-zero shipping agendas [41], while Reefke and Sundaram employed an exploratory Delphi method involving an initial population of 35 experts to evaluate sustainable supply chain themes [42]. In the specific context of the Qi’ao community (comprising approximately 450 households), the sample is not only numerically sufficient but also provides high-density coverage of all key actor categories. The resident sample was selected to ensure maximum variation rather than numerical representativeness. Interviewees were drawn from different settlement clusters (Baishi Street, Wusi Street, Nanteng Street, and Wuyi Road) and covered multiple tourism-related livelihood activities. Variations in age, gender, duration of tourism involvement, and participation in community programs were also considered. Following the principle of ‘thematic saturation,’ data collection was concluded only when no new themes or ‘friction points’ emerged during the final rounds of interviews, ensuring the capture of the full socio-material complexity of the livelihood network.

Tourists were included as complementary actors rather than core decision-makers in the actor network. In line with actor–network theory, tourists influence livelihood opportunities but do not initiate or govern network translation. Accordingly, a limited number of tourist interviews (n = 6), covering different visitor types (ecotourism, family tourism, sightseeing, and conservation volunteering), were sufficient to contextualize their role without overstating their structural influence. To understand policy development and context, additional data were collected from the official websites of the Zhuhai Municipal Government, the High-Tech Zone Government, and the Qi’ao Island Mangrove Protected Area, as well as from official newspapers such as Zhuhai Special Economic Zone Daily (ZSEZD) and New Express. In total, we gathered 43 audio interview recordings; 100,000 words of processed interview transcripts; 20,000 words of field notes; and 80,000 words of secondary policy and legal texts.

To assess saturation, follow-up validation visits were conducted after initial coding, resulting in eight additional interviews (three residents, two tourists, one protected area staff member, one community worker, and one external operator). No new themes or categories emerged. Combined with prolonged field observation and focus group triangulation, this confirms that the sample size is adequate for identifying actor roles, interactions, and mechanisms within an ANT-based qualitative framework.

3.2. Study Area and Livelihood Context

3.2.1. Study Area

Estuarine regions, where rivers meet the sea, are unique natural environments with rich marine resources, serving as significant human settlements. Located in southern China, the Pearl River Estuary (PRE) is the country’s third-largest estuary, covering a drainage area of 4.5 × 10⁵ km² (Figure 1) [46]. It spans nine major cities and regions, including Hong Kong, Macau, Shenzhen, and Zhuhai. From 1980 to 2000, the PRE area experienced rapid urbanization, with its population increasing from eight million to thirty-two million, leading to severe marine ecological degradation [47]. The significant influx of nutrients and pollutants into the PRE has caused environmental disturbances, affecting the ecosystem and its biodiversity [48].

Qi’ao Island is located on the western side of the PRE, with a total area of 5093 hectares. In 1999, the natural mangrove forest on the island dwindled to just 32 hectares. To address this issue, the Zhuhai city government established the Qi’ao mangrove protected area in 2000, allocating RMB 1.2 million annually for mangrove restoration efforts [49]. In 2004, the protected area was upgraded to a provincial protected area. Strengthened policies and funding support significantly boosted restoration efforts, and by 2020, the restoration area reached 500 hectares, making it the largest mangrove restoration project in China.

3.2.2. Socio-Ecological Changes in Livelihood Context

Qi’ao community is the only administrative village on Qi’ao Island, with a population of approximately 2300. It is representative of maritime culture in the Pearl River Estuary, where fishing activities began over 5000 years ago. In the 1990s, driven by economic interests, numerous fishponds and oyster farms were established around Qi’ao Island, and by 1994, these farms covered a total area of 460.14 hectares. This extensive aquaculture activity encircled the island like a net, severely damaging its environment and mangrove resources while disrupting maritime routes and scenic landscapes. Since the establishment of the MPA, the local government, protected area authorities, and the local community committee have collaborated on long-term environmental governance efforts. These initiatives included the removal of over 333.5 hectares of oyster farms and fishponds, the forced cleanup of 80,000 m of illegal fishing nets, and the prohibition of all fishing activities within the reserve boundaries. These measures impacted over 300 fishers. Although these efforts achieved significant environmental outcomes, they also provoked strong dissatisfaction among local fishers, exacerbating social conflicts and even triggering several disputes.

Enclosed protected area management has often adopted top-down protection strategies in the past, which may achieve short-term effectiveness but frequently have negative long-term impacts on local people and their livelihoods [50,51]. Since 2010, as the mangrove ecosystem has been improved, the protected area and Qi’ao community have become popular with tourists. Qi’ao Island has rich cultural tourism resources, such as traditional food, handicrafts, and cultural festivals. The fisher lifestyle in this coastal community is also attractive to tourists. All these tourism resources make Qi’ao Island one of the most popular tourism destinations in the PRE region. Increasingly, local people have participated in local tourism development and benefited from it. However, the livelihoods of Qi’ao residents have long been a focal conflict between the community’s social–economic development and its nature reserves.

3.3. Research Methods

3.3.1. Word Frequency Analysis and Visualization

This study employs word frequency analysis to identify the main actors and actions mentioned in the interview transcripts. Identifying actors and their claims constitutes the first step in analyzing actor–networks [52]. This study employs Python3.8’s text-processing libraries for frequency analysis. The Jieba word segmentation module in Python 3.8 was used to generate tokenized statistical text. The language setting was Chinese, with a minimum word length of two characters. Prior to analysis, all textual data were manually cleaned to remove content unrelated to the study’s topics. Tokenization was conducted using the Jieba segmentation tool for Chinese-language processing, supplemented by widely used stop-word lists, synonym dictionaries, and a customized terminology lexicon tailored to the case context (e.g., Baishi Street, science-education volunteers, migrant business operators, beach cleaning, Chinese white dolphin). These refinements ensured that domain-specific concepts were accurately captured in the analysis.

The frequency analysis generated the top 100 high-occurrence terms across the dataset. These terms primarily include nouns describing human and non-human actors, verbs indicating actions or interactions between actors, and adjectives or adverbs conveying attitudes or evaluations. From the pool of nouns and verbs, the 20 most representative high-frequency terms were selected from each category. These high-frequency terms were visualized using the Word Cloud library in Python 3.8, which generated a word cloud to intuitively display the prominence of key concepts within the dataset. Furthermore, these high-frequency terms served as potential thematic codes, offering insight into the mechanisms by which actor–networks related to tourism-based livelihood transitions are formed.

3.3.2. Sentiment Analysis Method

Sentiment analysis was incorporated as a complementary analytical tool to identify how different actors perceive tourism-induced livelihood in protected area communities. Because actors’ emotions shape their motivations and actions, sentiment patterns provide an additional layer of evidence for understanding actor–network dynamics.

This study employs Python3.8 and relevant natural language processing (NLP) tools to conduct sentiment analysis on interview transcripts. Interview transcripts were first categorized by actor type and tokenized using Jieba. The sentiment analysis used a dictionary-based approach, utilizing the Chinese sentiment lexicon database developed by the Dalian University of Technology team, which is commonly used in Chinese semantic analysis. This dictionary included stop words, positive and negative sentiment words, negation words, and degree adverbs. To enhance analytical precision, weighted coefficients were assigned to degree adverbs (e.g., intensifiers = 2, weakeners = 0.5), allowing the sentiment calculation to reflect not only polarity but also intensity. Sentiment orientation was determined by balancing positive and negative scores; values > 0 indicated positive sentiment, <0 negative sentiment, and 0 neutral sentiment.

In accordance with the sentiment analysis criteria, a portion of the interview with a local restaurant owner is presented as an illustrative example (

Table 2. Example of sentiment scoring for actors’ perceptions of tourism-induced livelihoods.

Analysis Content	Overall Sentiment Score	Positive Score	Negative Score	Positive Words	Negative Words	Degree Words	Sentiment Judgment
I used to work outside the island, but after seeing the tourism industry in Qiao Island develop so well—and as my mother was aging and needed care—I returned last year and opened this snack shop using traditional culinary skills. Interacting with tourists makes me feel very happy, and I feel proud to promote the local food culture. However, many non-local operators have also opened shops here; they are more experienced, placing pressure on locals and even leading to unhealthy competition.	2.5	4	1.5	develop so well, happy, promote, proud	pressure, unhealthy, competition	very (2), some (0.5)	Positive

). The final overall sentiment score was then obtained by subtracting the negative score from the positive score. The results informed the coding process and supported the ANT-based interpretation of actor motivations and adaptive strategies, thereby increasing the transparency, replicability, and analytical depth of the qualitative findings.

3.3.3. Co-Occurrence Analysis of Main Actors

To further explore the interconnections between key actors involved in the livelihood adaptation network, we conducted a word co-occurrence analysis, which is a common method in social network analysis (SNA). Co-occurrence frequency indicates how often actors are mentioned together within the same segment of an interview. High-frequency co-occurring word pairs suggest semantic or functional associations between the actors, and their co-occurrence frequency serves as a baseline measurement of interaction strength within the corpus [53]. All interview transcripts were compiled into a centralized analysis database. The top twenty high-frequency terms—identified as the main actors—were selected as the co-occurring terms. A higher co-occurrence frequency reflects a stronger degree of association between two actors.

Based on the resulting co-occurrence matrix, we utilized Python 3.8 to visualize the actor network. In the co-occurrence network diagram, nodes represent the actors, and edges reflect the frequency of co-occurrence between them. The thicker or more numerous the edges, the more frequently the actors interact or are associated with one another in the interview data [54]. Network visualization offers a clear and intuitive representation of the relationships and connections between the main actors, providing valuable insights into the micro-level mechanisms of actor–network construction in the context of tourism livelihood adaptation.

3.3.4. Thematic Analysis and Coding

Using the villager interviews, this study employed the thematic analysis method to further explore the processes and mechanisms involved in the various stages of actor–network development through inductive methods. The inductive nature of thematic analysis contributes to the emergence of new theoretical directions and provides “new ways of seeing” the empirical world [55].

Interview transcripts and secondary materials were imported verbatim into NVivo 15 for systematic coding. Meaning units were condensed and coded, after which related codes were grouped into broader themes (

Table 3. Example of the thematic analysis coding process.

Meaning Unit	Condensed Meaning Unit	Code
“I originally had a job at a school. In my spare time, I participate in women’s self-organization activities, making tea snacks with my friends and selling them. Sometimes, I also teach tourists how to make tea snacks.”	Earning extra income through women’s self-organization and tea snack experience courses.	Part-time job, community self-organization
“The community has paid a lot of attention to elderly services in recent years. There is a community canteen where seniors can get lunch at an extremely low price. Additionally, there are door-to-door medical services, which are very friendly to elderly people.”	Community provides elderly care services, such as affordable meals and home medical visits.	Elder care
“In winter, I make local shrimp paste at home. When I cannot finish it, stores come to collect it. I have stable partners who sell it to tourists. I can earn twenty yuan(RMB) per jar.”	Homemade shrimp paste is sold to stores, creating stable income.	Income increase

). To guide the analysis, an initial set of sensitizing themes was derived from ANT’s four stages of translation. These themes include ecological deterioration, livelihood transition, social issues, benefit sharing, community participation, institutional constraints, advocacy, and community self-organization. These preliminary themes were adjusted during the thematic analysis process based on the results of coding, ensuring a more accurate and comprehensive representation of the livelihood adaptation process in the case study area.

4. Results

4.1. Composition of Actors and Actions

This study employed Python’s word frequency analysis to identify the top 100 most frequent words and their rankings (Appendix A.1). We categorized the top 20 high-frequency words related to actors into two main types—human actors and non-human actors—and further divided them into five distinct categories (

Table 4. Actors in the Qiao community livelihood adaptation actor–network.

Type	Category	Actor
Human Actors	Institutional Actors	Government, Protected Area, Community Committee
	Community Actors	Residents, Fishers, Community Elites, Self-Organization
	Market Actors	Tourists, External Operators
Non-human Actors	Resources and Environment	Mangroves, Ecology
		Residential Land, Fishponds, Infrastructure
	Tourism-Related Elements	Garbage, Facilities, Homestays, Attractions, Restaurants, Culture

and Appendix A.2). By visualizing actor- and action-related high-frequency terms, the word clouds demonstrate the heterogeneous human and non-human elements repeatedly invoked in interview narratives, offering an empirical entry point into the problematization and interessement stages of actor–network construction (Figure 2 and Appendix A.3).

The actor–network of tourism-induced livelihood adaptation in the Qiao community consists of interacting human and non-human actors, whose relationships shape network evolution. The key human actors include residents, the community (in local discourse, the community refers to the community committee), the protected area (in local discourse, both the MPA and its governing body are colloquially referred to as the “protected area”), the government, tourists, and external operators. Non-human actors play a crucial mediating role. Mangroves operate simultaneously as conservation objects, tourism attractions, and ecological constraints, while homestays and residential land function as material gateways that determine residents’ access to tourism participation. Fishponds represent contested sites where conservation enforcement directly triggers livelihood disruption and adaptation pressure. These non-human actors translate policy interventions into tangible livelihood effects, reinforcing their agency within the network [56].

The livelihood adaptation in Qi’ao is characterized not by static behaviors, but by a dynamic mechanism of heterogeneous translation. Institutional actors, acting as the architects of the network, utilize administrative directives to forcibly reconfigure the socio-ecological landscape, effectively creating a legitimacy black box for the emerging tourism livelihood network. However, this top-level design faces structural tensions when it intersects with the practical logic of community actors. These practitioners do not merely follow directives; they translate abstract plans into localized survival strategies, where their ‘enrolment’ is contingent upon the perceived stability of the network. Furthermore, the market actors function as a catalytic mechanism, bridging localized ecological assets with macro-market demands to complete the value cycle. It is important to note that non-human actors are not merely a passive background for network construction but function as “mediators” with active agencies. When fishponds are dismantled, land is expropriated, or the use of mangrove wetland resources is restricted, human actors—particularly the residents—are compelled to adjust and adapt their livelihood strategies. Ultimately, the livelihood adaptation process manifests as a “translation game” among diverse types of actors, where they navigate the space for sustainable development amidst various constraints and drivers.

4.2. Sentiment Analysis of Different Actors

In ANT, sentiment serves as a barometer for the success of interessement and the presence of dissident. A comparison of attitudes across the five respondent groups (Figure 3; Appendix B) reveals asymmetrical positioning and latent tensions within the tourism livelihood actor–network. The protected area administration (72.51%) and tourists (71.43%) showed the most positive attitude toward residents’ participation in tourism. The highest positive sentiment indicates that the protected area management has successfully ‘black-boxed’ the ecological conservation objective, establishing it as the legitimate prerequisite for livelihood transition. As noted by a representative from the MPA department: “the ecological restoration, characterized by an abundance of fiddler crabs and mudskippers, has successfully attracted family tourists. This progress is supported by a new reservation mechanism and volunteer-led educational programs designed to balance service quality with ecological protection.” High visitor satisfaction (71.43%) further provides a continuous economic mobilization force for the network. Community institutions (69.25% positive) also exhibit high levels of positive sentiment, suggesting that through ‘market coordination’ and ‘administrative support,’ they have substantially completed the interessement process within the tourism-oriented livelihood network.

By contrast, residents display the lowest proportion of positive sentiment and the highest levels of neutrality and negativity. Negative sentiment among residents (10.94%) is the highest among all human actors, reflecting unequal access to benefits, lingering livelihood insecurity, and limited bargaining power within the network. As one resident highlighted during the interviews: “popular tourist corridors like Baishi Street are suffering from severe infrastructure constraints. Because parking is limited and expensive, tourists just park wherever they can along the road. Combined with merchants illegally occupying the roadside space, our narrow streets have become completely congested, disrupting the local order.” Furthermore, residents’ attitudes are strongly moderated by the material properties of non-human actors. During the initial stages of the protected area’s establishment, the forced dismantling of fishponds, land expropriation, and restricted access to mangrove ecological resources directly triggered resistance toward enrollment activities. This ambivalence among resident’s signals ‘partial enrollment,’ where actors remain functionally connected to the network but are not substantively convinced of its long-term gains [51].

Community and outside operators also support the development of tourism-based livelihood networks, hoping to drive local economic growth and gain more economic benefits through tourism development [57]. However, the sentiment of outside operators (64.50% positive; 10.69% negative) reflects the tension between external capital and local resource access. Ultimately, the sentiment analysis demonstrates that the sustainability of the Qi’ao Island tourism livelihood network is threatened by network betrayal. The 32.81% neutral sentiment among residents is a critical indicator of a failed translation. The divergence in sentiment distributions reveals not consensus but negotiated alignment, highlighting how power asymmetries and uneven benefit realization shape interaction patterns and conflict within the evolving actor network.

4.3. Co-Occurrence Analysis of Actors’ Interconnections

Based on the co-occurrence frequency, the analysis results categorize relationships into three strength levels: high intensity for co-occurrences greater than or equal to 30, moderate intensity for those between 20 and 10, and low intensity for those below 10. From the perspective of ANT, the co-occurrence frequency among actants serves as a materialized manifestation of translation strength (

Table 5. Co-occurrence analysis results of actors.

Association Strength	Co-Occurrence Phrases and Frequency
High Intensity	Community—Residents 72; Protected Area—Tourist 54; Mangroves—Garbage 49; Residents—Government 49; Residents—Protected Area 45; Protected Area—Government 33; Protected Area—Mangroves 33.
Medium Intensity	Community—Government 28; Government—Mangroves 27; Government—Ecology 26; Residents—External Operators 25; Tourist—Mangroves 25; Community—Protected Area 24; Residents—Tourist 23; Residents—Homestay 22; Residential Land—Garbage 22; External Operators—Homestay 21; Tourist—Garbage 21; Residents—Fish Pond 20; Residents—Restaurant 15; Homestay—Restaurant 15; Government—External Operators 14; Community—External Operators 12; Protected Area—Homestay 12; Protected Area—Garbage 12; Government—Tourist 12; Government—Fish Pond 12; Government—Residential Land 11; External Operators—Tourist 10.
Low Intensity	Residents—Fishermen 9; Community—Tourist 8; Fishermen—Government 8; Government—Culture 8; External Operators—Restaurant 8; Residential Land—Fish Pond 7; Residents—Attractions 6; Protected Area—Culture 6; Attractions—External Operators 6; Attractions—Tourist 6; Government—Infrastructure 6; Residential Land—Mangroves 6; Ecology—Garbage 6; Community—Culture 5; Residents—Residential Land 5; Protected Area—Ecology 5; Protected Area—Restaurant 5; Tourist—Homestay 5; Restaurant—Garbage 5; Ecology—Mangroves 5; Restaurant—Mangroves 4; Tourist—Residential Land 4; Tourist—Culture 4; Protected Area—Fishermen 4; Protected Area—Fish Pond 4; Residents—Self—organization 4; Residents—Mangroves 4.

), reflecting the culmination of power negotiations and the stabilization of interest lock-in. The co-occurrence network (Figure 4) visually maps the structural differentiation of the Qi’ao community’s livelihood adaptation process.

High-intensity co-occurrence associations constitute the stabilized core of the livelihood adaptation network, signaling the successful lock-in of core translation pathways. As shown in Table 5, extremely high interaction intensities are observed between community management organizations and residents, as well as between mangroves and tourism demand. In the context of Qi’ao, conservation policies and livelihood transitions have evolved into a frequently coupled entity. Community managers, in executing macro-ecological policies, have effectively enrolled residents into a specific tourism-based network and established standardized community-level market rules. Simultaneously, mangroves have been re-translated from mere marine resources or natural landscapes into active actants endowed with “material commands,” illustrating the profound socio-material integration of their physical attributes with policy-driven livelihood objectives.

Moderate-intensity co-occurrence frequencies (10–20) reveal the dynamic “interessement” and ongoing tug-of-war among heterogeneous actants. Elements such as infrastructure, environmental remediation, and the relationships between external operators and residents occupy this tier. These actants frequently appear together in discussions regarding community public services or benefit distribution. For instance, negotiations over the management of tourism-related waste and the usage of public facilities serve as “boundary objects” that necessitate constant coordination. Furthermore, the interaction between external operators and residents reflects the power asymmetries inherent in livelihood translation. The intervention of market logic has disrupted the traditional fishery-based networks of the once-closed island community, redefining livelihood trajectories and introducing dynamic, tension-filled nodes into the network [58].

Low-intensity weak associations expose structural exclusions and translation failures within the livelihood adaptation network. Grassroots self-organizations, traditional fishermen, and certain vulnerable groups exhibit minimal co-occurrence frequencies, indicating their peripheral status and failure to be successfully enrolled into the dominant tourism-protection network. From an ANT lens, these weak associations are not merely statistical artifacts but signify incomplete mobilization. In the face of external policy fluctuations or market downturns, these marginalized nodes are prone to triggering network dissolution, representing the most fragile links that undermine the overall resilience of the community’s livelihood system.

4.4. Livelihood Adaptation Process Analysis

Based on the thematic analysis method, we analyzed the textual data from 47 semi-structured interviews. Through comparison and induction, 17 themes and 86 codes were identified (

Table 6. Themes analysis and coding for ANT.

Theoretical Categories	Themes	Key Codes
Problematization and OPP	Ecological Deterioration	Fish Trap, Illegal Catching, Waste, Invasive Species, Fishing Shed
	Livelihood Transition	Fishing, Oyster Farming, Risks, Hardship, Fishing Ban, Fishpond, Lack Skills
	Social Issues	Illegal Fishing, Officials, Public Resources, Benefit, Distribution, Corruption, Residential Land
	Infrastructure Issues	Planning, Traffic, Commercial Street, Parking, Electricity
Interessement	Benefit Sharing	Insurance, Rental, Collective Dividend, Part-time Jobs Poverty Subsidy, Ecological Compensation, Income Increase
	Community Participation	Representative, Collective Economy, Oversight, Voting, Election
	Employment Support	Law, Free, Training, Recruitment Information, Certification
	Cultural Identity	Baishi Street, Memorial, Temples, Celebrities, Festival, Community Workshop
Enrollment	Institutional Constraints	Seizure, Inspection, Consultation
	Advocacy	Notice Board, Activities, Waste Sorting, Legal, Education, Social Media
	Communication	Research, Voting, Consolation, Survey, Discussion
	Operation Management	Renovation, Shares, Contracts, Tourism Projects, Investment, Leasing
	Public Services	Children’s Programs, Welfare, Women’s Care, Vulnerable Groups, Elder Care
Mobilization	Community Self-organization	Traditional Pastry, Entrepreneurship, Skills, Socialization
	Youth Return	Innovation, Competence, Education, Resources
	Business Alliance	Cooperation, Feedback, Customers, Information Sharing
	Volunteering	Supervision, Guide, Volunteer

). Based on the four stages of the ANT translation process, we developed four theoretical categories. Additionally, we created a preliminary theme estimation list before coding. During the coding process, we refined the theme structure based on the emerging codes, resulting in 18 themes and 85 key codes (Table 6). Figure 5 illustrates how heterogeneous human and non-human actors articulate distinct livelihood, ecological, and governance-related interests, problems, and obligatory passage point (OPP) in community livelihood adaptation.

4.4.1. Problematization and OPP

This stage identifies and synthesizes fragmented empirical crises—specifically the tension between ecological deterioration and livelihood instability—to establish a benefit sharing mechanism as the OPP. The results of theme analysis reveal a convergence of ecological degradation, livelihood transition pressures, social conflicts, and infrastructural constraints, as reflected by codes related to illegal fishing, invasive species, livelihood risks, benefit distribution, and planning deficiencies (Figure 5).

For human actors, residents face livelihood uncertainty due to declining traditional fisheries and uneven access to tourism opportunities [59]. The community committee is constrained by weak governance capacity and declining trust, while the local government encounters persistent tensions between livelihood development and conservation objectives. The protected area authority confronts ecological degradation, particularly mangrove ecosystem stress and human-induced disturbances, alongside growing management pressures [60]. Tourists experience inadequate reception facilities and service constraints, whereas external operators face infrastructure limitations and regulatory uncertainty that hinder stable business operations.

In the problematization stage, non-human actors function not as a passive background but as active mediators that define the problem space through specific material constraints. The ecological imperatives of mangroves exert a material command that necessitates strict conservation. Similarly, homestays act as material gatekeepers: their geographic positioning, and strict renovation standards encompassing both aesthetic and functional dimensions. Furthermore, the forced demolition of fishponds represents a profound material severance, where the physical removal of traditional production means compels a radical rupture in existing livelihood trajectories.

These heterogeneous socio-ecological tensions converge to establish the OPP, framed as a benefit sharing mechanism. The OPP is thus not merely a policy consensus, but a socio-ecological bottleneck where the survival of the mangrove ecosystem, the availability of land assets, and the acquisition and utilization of infrastructure collectively force all human actors to negotiate their livelihood adaptation within a strictly defined allowable space. Ultimately, the OPP serves as the only viable pathway through which diverse actors can simultaneously address livelihood insecurity, ecological conservation, governance legitimacy, and development coordination.

4.4.2. Interessement

By deploying a suite of economic and material interessement devices, the institutional authorities try to lock actors into the emerging tourism-oriented livelihood network. In this phase, key actors attempt to establish symbiotic relationships with other actors through intervention and benefit sharing, locking in the roles of other actors and fostering mutual trust, thereby joining the interest alliance network [61]. The key actors in this stage remain the local government, the community, and the protected area. Their target audiences are residents, external businesses, and tourists. The primary content of the interest endowment by key actors includes benefit sharing, community participation, employment support, and cultural recognition (Table 6). At this stage of the actor–network, key actors share the benefits of tourism, participation incentives, and institutional support to stabilize alliances, align heterogeneous interests, and secure actors’ commitment to the proposed obligatory passage point (Figure 5). The community committee leverages benefit sharing arrangements to rebuild trust, strengthen governance legitimacy, and promote more equitable participation [62]. For the protected area authority, the OPP facilitates ecological conservation by linking residents’ participation to biodiversity protection and environmental stewardship. The local government integrates socioeconomic development goals with conservation priorities, using benefit sharing to mitigate conflict and legitimize regulatory interventions [63]. Since 2018, the government has provided RMB 5 million in ecological support funds annually to the Qi’ao community. The per capita collective dividend for residents has increased, from RMB 1388 in 2014 to RMB 9500. Tourists are attracted by improved service satisfaction and enhanced experiential quality, while external operators are attracted by clearer market regulation and a more favorable business environment [64].

During the interessement stage, non-human actants are reconfigured from isolated physical entities into strategic interessement devices that substantively anchor the heterogeneous network. Mangroves transition toward biodiversity enhancement and ecosystem service provision serves as a material stabilization mechanism that aligns ecological health with the institutional goals of conservation. Residential land allocation is reframed as a spatial equalizer, where its physical distribution functions as a device to lock community actors into the livelihood network by ensuring equitable access to tourism. Similarly, the homestays transform into hybrid nodes that balance cultural integrity with economic utilization. Finally, the repurpose of former fishpond areas represents a shift from unilateral control to negotiated resource utilization. By altering the non-human actors’ use-value, the network utilizes the land’s physical versatility to settle prior conflicts, thereby preventing “betrayal” by disgruntled stakeholders. Overall, through these reconfigurations, non-human actants exert relational agency, functioning as the material glue that reinforces the OPP and secures the enrollment of diverse human actors.

4.4.3. Enrollment

During the enrolment stage, through continuous coordination and negotiation by institutional actors, the community actors, market actors, and non-human actors began to accept and perform the new identities assigned by the network. This process effectively reified the abstract intention of livelihood transition into concrete actions and institutional arrangements. The gradual expansion of tourism enterprises reflects partial enrollment success, while episodes of protest and governance crisis expose the fragility of actor commitments. Based on interview data and longitudinal records of tourism enterprise development since 2010, obtained from Tianyancha and official enterprise credit databases (see Appendix C), the enrollment process of the Qi’ao community’s tourism livelihood actor–network can be analytically divided into three stages (Figure 6). The proliferation of enterprises within the actor–network is not merely background data of tourism growth, but an empirical manifestation of the network’s enrolment capacity. During the nascent stages of network formation, a greater density of enterprises provides a more diverse array of interessement devices, which facilitates the recruitment of local residents. However, as supply reaches saturation and tourist influx intensifies, this growth inevitably generates internal frictions and contradictions within the network.

1. Transformation exploration phase (2000–2009)

During this nascent phase, the actor–network remained in a state of conceptual enrolment driven by top-down policy discourse rather than material practice. While the expansion of mangrove coverage established the physical foundation of the OPP, infrastructural deficits and incomplete restoration meant that specialized tourism visits remained negligible, preventing the demonstrative effect of the industry from materializing. As the focal actor, the government primarily conducted initial policy enrolment through the macro-narrative of marine ecological protection. However, due to the absence of enterprises as demonstrative interessement devices, this recruitment remained largely at a conceptual level rather than manifesting in material practice. Enrollment mechanisms focused on institutional constraints, including legal enforcement, inspection, and the removal of illegal structures and fishing practices. Residents were enrolled largely as regulated subjects rather than active participants, and tourism livelihoods remained marginal and informal.

Although environmental awareness campaigns and advocacy were introduced, enrollment at this stage relied heavily on coercive and top-down instruments, resulting in fragile alignment and persistent resistance within the actor network [65].

2. Tourism participation phase (2010–2019)

The explosive growth of tourism enterprises during this stage marked a pivotal shift from administrative advocacy to economic mobilization. This surge signifies that the network has moved beyond conceptual discourse, utilizing market-driven intersegments devices to substantively anchor stakeholders within the new livelihood structure. In 2010, the first catering business began operations, and the number of enterprises has grown each year since. By 2019, the number of new tourism enterprises had exceeded 20. The community committee emerged as a key intermediary, facilitating communication, organizing elections, and rebuilding trust after governance crises. External operators and community elites were selectively enrolled through investment opportunities and operational collaboration, while residents gradually transitioned from passive recipients to conditional participants. Enrollment during this stage remained uneven, shaped by governance instability, land disputes, and power asymmetries, but marked a critical expansion of the actor network.

In 2013, the local government cleared about 433.55 hectares of oyster farming areas, involving 17 local individuals and organizations. Fishponds have begun to detach from the traditional livelihood network; conversely, the functions and properties of homesteads, commercialize properties, and mangroves have been re-translated. These elements have now emerged as the critical capital enabling residents to enroll and navigate the tourism-based livelihood network. In ANT terms, this phase represents a negotiated form of enrollment, in which government, community committees, and protected area authorities stabilized actor roles by linking livelihood compensation and participation incentives to conservation objectives, producing an expanding but still conditional alignment based on material benefits and policy mediation rather than fully internalized commitments [66].

3. Diversified development phase (2019-Present)

While the saturation of enterprise growth and normalized local participation signifies the black-boxing of the new livelihood order. In the diversified development phase, as the number of enterprises approaches saturation with observable fluctuations, the increasing participation of local operators and tourism practitioners signifies that the actor–network is trending toward ‘black-boxing.’ This stabilization indicates that the complex negotiations of the livelihood transition have become standardized, with the new socio-economic order gaining a level of self-evident legitimacy [67]. The protected area has greatly improved the ecological environment of Qi’ao Island, and the number of tourists has continued to increase. From 2019 to 2024, the protected area hosted more than 1 million visitors and held 417 natural education courses, with approximately 94,000 participants. The number of new enterprises reached 45 in 2023. Community colleges, volunteer teams, cultural workshops, and business alliances functioned as enrollment infrastructures that stabilized actor roles and expectations. Residents were enrolled as co-producers of tourism services, while youth return migration and women-led self-organizations strengthened internal network reproduction. The community college expanded its curriculum, offering 48 courses by 2023 and helping 114 residents obtain vocational skills certificates. More than 200 residents have achieved employment through the program. As one resident explained,

“Previously, we lacked skills and steady jobs, but now at the Qi’ao Community College, I not only learned new skills but also found a stable job in a local business. After taking part in the first session of the Qi’ao Community College’s food heritage and innovation training, Ms. Liang, a Qi’ao resident working away from home, decided to start her own business. She now runs a tea and dessert shop in Bai Shi Street on Qi’ao Island. ‘Now I can increase my income and take care of my family.”

(Resident interview, QA15)

Overall, at this stage, certain enrollment mechanisms—such as training systems and participatory forums—became black-boxed, operating as routine governance arrangements. In 2024, the number of tourism businesses on Qi’ao Island showed a downward trend. It was because the COVID-19 pandemic introduced prolonged uncertainty into Qi’ao Island’s tourism system, despite relatively high regional tourism resilience [68]. Short-term rebound consumption was accompanied by consumption downgrading, declining overnight stays, and increased price sensitivity. Given the island’s heavy reliance on homestay-based tourism, these shifts weakened investor confidence and reinforced residents’ cautious attitudes toward further tourism engagement. From an ANT perspective, these shocks reveal that the tourism livelihood Actor–network remains only conditionally aligned, with mobilization outcomes vulnerable to external disturbances and far from being fully black-boxed.

4.4.4. Mobilization

During the mobilization stage, collective action within the tourism livelihood network is sustained through institutionalized instruments. However, the frictional points identified in the thematic analysis also reveal underlying objections within the network. In Qi’ao, mobilization is evident in residents’ entrepreneurial initiatives, youth return migration, community self-organization, volunteer services, and inter-business alliances. These actions indicate a shift from policy-driven participation to network self-reproduction. Crucially, certain practices—such as community colleges, volunteer teams, and cultural workshops—have become black-boxed, operating as taken-for-granted governance and livelihood devices that no longer require continuous negotiation. Mobilization thus represents a provisional stabilization of the tourism livelihood network rather than its closure, remaining susceptible to future objections and reconfiguration [69].

The transition from strategic enrollment to stable mobilization is most tangibly evidenced by the dramatic ecological recovery of the Qi’ao Island ecosystem. In the actor–network, the restoration of the ecosystem is not merely a biological achievement but a materialization of the socio-spatial compromise between institutional goals and local livelihoods. As a senior staff member of the MPA reflected during the interview:

“Twenty years ago, the mangroves here were almost decimated, clinging to a mere 32.2 hectares. Rebuilding them to the current 500 hectares was far more than just planting trees; it was a persistent negotiation with the landscape and local residents. Today, we have moved from conflict to a state of ‘co-existence with the sea.’ It is a shared victory of collaborative governance where the environment and the community now sustain each other.”

(MPA stuff interview, QA9)

The expansion of the mangrove physically redefined the island’s boundaries, effectively a new set of permissible behaviors for the residents. This socio-ecological synergy demonstrates that the black-boxing of the new livelihood order is maintained by the visible physical health of the mangroves, which reinforces the legitimacy of the transition for all actors involved.

4.4.5. Objections and Negotiation in the Translation Process

The livelihood adaptation network in the Qiao community consists of heterogeneous human and non-human actors whose interactions are both cooperative and contested (Figure 7). In the Qi’ao case, such objections arise from residents’ distrust, unequal benefit distribution, land disputes, and tourism-related environmental and social pressures. These tensions indicate that the livelihood actor–network remains only partially stabilized and requires continuous negotiation rather than being fully consolidated.

1. Institutional distrust and failure of interessement

In the early stages of the actor–network formation, the interessement devices deployed by institutional actors largely failed to stabilize the network, leading to widespread dissidence among local residents. While the local government and community committees attempted to “lock in” residents through regulatory frameworks and compensation schemes, these efforts were undermined by a profound crisis of legitimacy. However, the perceived legitimacy of the community committee as a focal orchestrator was eroded by governance deficits, including institutional malfeasance, non-transparent land transactions, and information asymmetry. Consequently, residents did not view the transition toward a protected area as an opportunity for development, but rather as a mechanism for resource dispossession. This breakdown in trust prompted a return to informal “resistance” strategies, such as illicit fishing, as residents sought to bypass official channels and re-establish their own resource-access networks.

“Our livelihood once revolved entirely around oyster farming. But everything changed with the new protected area; the management is so strict now, with constant patrols for illegal fishing, that nearly all the local villagers have had to give up fishing altogether. I’ve transitioned to working as a waitress in the restaurant. The work is certainly easier on my body, but the pay just doesn’t compare to what we used to earn.”

(Resident interview, QA12)

2. Friction between market logic and local spatial and cultural order

The external actors introduced dominant market logic that produced significant friction with the long-standing socio-cultural fabric of the community. External operators, leveraging superior financial resources, often marginalized local stakeholders, leading to a dual sense of economic and cultural exclusion. This tension is most visible in the repurposing of ancestral spaces. For instance, the conversion of ancestral halls into commercial homestays, a process where a “sacred node” is translated into a “commercial asset”, was met with intense indignation. As one local cultural leader noted, such actions are perceived not as development, but as a desecration of collective identity. This represents a fundamental translation conflict: where operators see an underutilized building, and residents see an irreplaceable anchor of kinship and heritage.

3. Non-human agency and the rupture of the “Black Box”

While non-human actants are foundational to network stability, their instrumentalization or degradation can trigger betrayal, rupturing the established black box. When tourist misconduct impedes ecological restoration in mangrove ecosystems, the protected area mandates closure as a form of resistance against network over-expansion. Similarly, when visitor volumes exceed carrying capacity, infrastructure actants manifest functional failure, ceasing to sustain the tourism livelihood network. The resultant negative feedback from tourists introduces volatility, threatening the overall equilibrium of the actor–network.

Taken together, the evolution of the livelihood adaptation network is not a linear progression toward stabilization but rather a dynamic arena characterized by dissident and conflicts. This inherent friction often stems from institutional distrust. Such conceptual conflicts and misunderstandings prompt stakeholders to engage in counter-enrolment through informal resistance. Tensions within the actor–network also manifest as struggles between external actors and local socio-cultural values. The re-labeling of these sacralized spaces as commercial assets triggers a profound clash of meaning and collective indignation, exposing the structural fragility of a “black-boxing” process that overlooks local culture and knowledge. Parallel to these human negotiations, non-human actants exercise their agency through material betrayal. When mangrove ecosystems degrade due to over-tourism or infrastructure failures, these material elements effectively rebel, rupturing the stabilized black box and forcing the entire network back into the stage of problematization.

Consequently, the livelihood network in Qi’ao Island maintains a tenuous stability. The resilience of this transition depends not on the elimination of conflict, but on the capacity of institutional actants to continuously re-translate emerging dissidence into a higher-order socio-ecological consensus.

5. Discussion

The characteristics of actors dictate the efficiency of network translation. In the process of livelihood adaptation in the Qi’ao community, the Community Committee—as the focal actor for implementing top-down policies and coordinating external stakeholder interests—has exhibited significant functional dysfunction. Meanwhile, external capital has rapidly secured a dominant position within the network by leveraging its powerful operational advantages, leading to the marginalization of local residents. It was the emergence of returning youth and grassroots self-organizations that allowed local inhabitants to gradually reclaim discursive power in business operations. The policy instruments of the nature reserve have shown limited effectiveness in enrolling residents, highlighting the need to strengthen communication and negotiation to consolidate mobilization effects. Furthermore, non-human actors act as a double-edged sword in network formation: they provide the material foundation for tourism development but also possess the potential for overt acts of ‘betrayal.’ The imbalanced actor structure is the fundamental cause of instability within the community livelihood network, and a trust-based benefit sharing mechanism would help address the challenges in the process of livelihood adaptation.

From a policy perspective, the translation of sustainable livelihoods is not only a redistribution of material interests but also a power struggle over meaning systems among different actors. When the government defined ‘ecological protection’ as the OPP, it failed to fully consider the traditional livelihood needs of the residents. The emotional feedback from residents reflects a strong sense of dissatisfaction and deprivation, which sowed the seeds of dissent within the network from its very inception. Establishing a benefit sharing mechanism is a critical factor in the mobilization of actors. This includes the development of collective economies, ecological compensation, and the allocation of homestead land. Once the actor network is established, communities and their members can maintain strong norms of cooperation [70]. Adaptive governance must institutionalize benefit sharing, ensure transparent land and resource allocation, and recognize the mediating role of non-human actors in shaping social outcomes [71]. “From a policy perspective, laws and compensation funds serve as interessement devices, yet their efficacy is moderated by institutional trust. This study finds that due to management opacity and past crises of confidence, residents may exhibit strong resistance to these tools. Furthermore, the government has set up a support fund for livelihoods around the protected area to encourage community participation in ecological protection [72].

The sustainable path for livelihood adaptation in protected area communities requires a shift from coercive translation to negotiated translation. It is essential to redefine the roles of residents within the network—not as passive participants, but as co-managers of the socio-ecological system, moving toward symbiotic governance. Furthermore, recognizing the agency of non-human actors is critical; integrating environmental carrying capacity and cultural authenticity into the guiding principles of the actor–network’s implementation will facilitate both cultural and ecological sustainability. Simultaneously, this study adopts a critical stance toward ANT’s limitations. While ANT effectively explains how networks are assembled and stabilized, it is less explicit in evaluating normative outcomes such as equity, justice, and long-term sustainability. To address this gap, our findings are situated within broader policy debates on community-based conservation and tourism governance. Compared with cases from Southeast Asia, where tourism-led livelihood transitions often exacerbate inequality or external dependency [73], the Qi’ao case illustrates how benefit sharing mechanisms, collective economies, and trust-based governance can partially mitigate these risks, though not eliminate them entirely.

6. Conclusions

This study expands upon the classical translation discourse of ANT, which traditionally focuses on technical or physical dimensions, by proposing that trust and emotion be viewed as critical invisible mediators. During the interessement and enrolment stages, the residents of the Qi’ao community exhibited institutional distrust, a sense of deprivation regarding resource access, and dissatisfaction with the market logic and disruptions introduced by external actors. As human actors endowed with agency, these emotional fluctuations directly influence the construction process of the community network, potentially triggering oscillations or the puncturing of the ‘black box.’ This perspective provides a more micro-level and humanistic analytical framework for understanding how socio-ecological changes impact community livelihood adaptation. This study offers a relational and process-oriented explanation of how conservation and development are negotiated in practice. By tracing the translation processes between heterogeneous human and non-human actors, this study moves beyond asset-based or outcome-driven livelihood analyses and demonstrates that livelihood adaptation is an emergent, contested, and continuously reconfigured process rather than a linear transition [74]. Furthermore, it is noteworthy that although non-human actors lack the subjective agency of human actors, they contribute significantly to the construction of actor networks [75].

Non-human actors in this study include mangroves, fishponds, homestead land, and tourism facilities, each playing distinct roles at various stages of livelihood adaptation. This study emphasizes the participation and ‘protest’ of non-human actors as equally vital to network construction. When an actor–network attempts to achieve tourism-driven economic expansion at the expense of ecological integrity or cultural authenticity, non-human actors—through ecological degradation, functional failures, or spatial congestion—rupture the ‘black-boxed’ state of the system, forcing human actors to reassess their governance logic. Therefore, the core of constructing a sustainable livelihood network lies not only in the balance of interests among human actors but, more fundamentally, in achieving a Symmetrical Alignment between human and non-human actors. Only by fully respecting the agentic boundaries of material and ecological systems can a livelihood network attain long-term stability and genuine sustainability.

The core value of ANT lies not only in providing a narrative framework for explaining livelihood transitions but also in offering a highly operational and dynamic policy tool for the governance of protected areas community. Local governments and MPA authorities should transcend a singular reliance on pure economic compensation. Instead, by flexibly recalibrating interessement devices, they should facilitate the transition of tourism-based livelihoods into a collectively accepted new normal among heterogenous actant groups. Simultaneously, policy makers should maintain high sensitivity toward translation failures. Negative emotional feedback from residents, small-scale localized resistance, or sporadic illegal fishing should be decoded as critical signals of the friction points within the livelihood network. By implementing targeted interventions—such as providing more precise vocational training, optimizing benefit sharing mechanisms, and enhancing information transparency to build trust—managers can proactively repair these fissures [76]. This ensures that heterogenous actants remain effectively locked within the sustainable livelihood development network, ultimately bolstering the resilience of the livelihood system within MPA communities.

Several limitations should be acknowledged. This study focuses on a single coastal protected area community, and while the findings offer analytical generalization, future research could compare multiple regions to examine how different governance contexts affect actor–network stabilization. In addition, longer-term observation is needed to assess whether partial black boxing can be sustained under external shocks such as market fluctuations or climate change. Overall, this study demonstrates that ANT provides a powerful lens for resolving the conservation–development dilemma by revealing how livelihoods, governance, and ecosystems co-evolve through negotiated networks. The framework developed here offers transferable insights for other protected area communities seeking adaptive, equitable, and sustainable livelihood pathways.