No concessions, but sit-ins did change the picture for both sides

In August last year, a few days before the nation's top legislature laid down the restrictive framework for electing the chief executive in 2017, Rita Fan Hsu Lai-tai, Hong Kong's sole representative on the body, issued a stark warning to the city's activists.

The more they talked about using civil disobedience to press Beijing to heed demands for greater democracy, the more central government officials would stand firm on reform.

She was referring to Occupy Central co-founder Benny Tai Yiu-ting's plan to mobilise 10,000 people to block roads in the city's financial heart if the central and Hong Kong governments created a system for the 2017 chief executive election that did not allow a "genuine" choice of candidates.

Fan proved to be correct. The 79-day civil disobedience campaign failed to force any concessions from Beijing.

Professor Lau Siu-kai, vice-chairman of the Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macau Studies, a mainland think tank, says Beijing's tough stance changed Hong Kong's political landscape.

"Pan-democrats have a better understanding of Beijing's bottom line and the acceptability of Hong Kong people," Lau says. "The pan-democrats have realised that confrontational tactics can't force concessions from Beijing and there is a limit to the public's tolerance of unconventional means to fight for democracy."

The strategy of the Beijing and Hong Kong governments to wear down protesters paid off as public sympathy for the movement gradually waned as the road blockade dragged on and on.