The agricultural landscape patterns of fishing village have undergone visible transformations in recent decades. Scholars pay less attention to fishermen with diverse livelihoods. Therefore, it is necessary to sort out the changing characteristics of fishermen’ livelihoods and agricultural landscape patterns under different policy periods. We use in-depth interviews, remote sensing technology, and mathematical analysis to systematically study the changes in fishermen’s livelihoods and in agricultural landscape patterns in a typical fishing village. The results show that policy have profoundly affected fishermen’ livelihoods. Livelihood transformation have altered local land use practices, which had a direct impact on agricultural landscape patterns. The livelihood of fishermen has changed from diverse to single, and their cropping structure were gradually becoming simpler and more specialised. After grazing ban and comprehensive fishing ban, many fishermen migrated to towns and cities, it accelerated the loss of population in the fishing village, which caused the amount of abandoned land increasingly. Left-behind fishermen became rice farmers by contracting abandoned paddy fields. The expanses of abandoned land and bamboo woodland had increased, which caused agricultural landscape patterns gradually becoming fragmented, heterogeneous and complex.

How fishermen produce and live has been a hot topic of academic concern in recent years. However, existing research has focused excessively on marine fishermen. Inland fisheries make a significant but often overlooked contribution to rural livelihoods in developing countries. In this paper, we constructed a framework for fishermen’s livelihood strategies and used questionnaires and in-depth interviews to study 275 households of inland fishermen in a professional fishing village at Poyang Lake. The results show that (1) the impact of the comprehensive fishing ban has led to significant changes in the livelihood capital of inland fishermen, leading to fishermen being forced to change their livelihood strategies. (2) The current livelihood strategies can be divided into four categories, which are non-fishing employment, self-employment, public welfare positions and retirement respectively. (3) Livelihood capital such as age, education, social interaction and fishing rights influence their choice of livelihood strategies. (4) The fishing ban proposal generally meets the interests of fishermen, but there is some capacity for improvement in terms of implementation details and policy flexibility. Based on these findings, we recommend that the government conducts further in-depth research and adjusts and improves its policy options in good time. To the satisfaction of all parties, the current policy protects the environment and achieves sustainable human development, making Chinese contributions and proposing Chinese plans to address global environmental change.