MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Climate Change and the Economics of Farm Management in the Face of Land Degradation: Dryland Salinity in Western Australia

2005· article· en· W1530978041 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michele John, David J. Pannell, Ross Kingwell

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomie · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPasture and Agricultural Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDryland salinityClimate changeLand degradationCroppingDryland farmingPastureAgricultureEnvironmental scienceAgroforestryGeographySalinityEcologySoil waterForestrySoil fertility

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Projected changes in climate would affect not only the profitability of agriculture, but also the way it is managed, including the way issues of land conservation are managed. This study provides a detailed analysis of these effects for an extensive dryland farming system in south‐west Australia. Using a whole‐farm linear programming model, with discrete stochastic programming to represent climate risk, we explore the consequences of several climate scenarios. Climate change may reduce farm profitability in the study region by 50% or more compared to historical climate. Results suggest a decline in the area of crop on farms, due to greater probability of poor seasons and lower probability of very good seasons. The reduced profitability of farms would likely affect the capacity of farmers to adopt some practices that have been recommended to farmers to prevent land degradation through dryland salinization. In particular, establishment of perennial pastures (lucerne or alfalfa, Medicago sativa), woody perennials (“oil mallees”, Eucalyptus spp.), and salt‐tolerant shrubs for grazing (“saltland pastures”, Atriplex spp.) may become slightly more attractive in the long run (i.e., relative to other enterprises) but harder to adopt due to their high establishment costs in the context of lower disposable income.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.907
Threshold uncertainty score0.944

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.143 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomieSame topicPasture and Agricultural SystemsFrench-language works237,207