MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Smoothing Income against Crop Flood Losses in Amazonia: Rain Forest or Rivers as a Safety Net?

2010· article· en· W2093324069 on OpenAlexaff
Yoshito Takasaki, Bradford L. Barham, Oliver T. Coomes

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Development Economics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural risk and resilience
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmazon rainforestEconomicsFishingFlood mythConsumption smoothingAgricultural economicsAsset (computer security)Natural resource economicsGeographyFisheryUnemploymentEcologyEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article examines the role of ex post labor supply in smoothing income in response to crop losses caused by large floods among riverine households in the Peruvian Amazon, where rich environmental endowments permit a variety of resource extractive activities and coping responses. The paper finds that households respond to crop losses primarily by intensifying fishing effort, not by relying on gathering of nontimber forest products, hunting, or asset liquidation. This ex post labor adjustment helps to smooth total income against small crop losses but less well against large crop losses. Both relatively nonpoor households with better fishing capital and poor young households with a physical labor advantage employ this natural insurance in rivers.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations48
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Development EconomicsSame topicAgricultural risk and resilienceFrench-language works237,207