MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Willingness to Pay for Index Based Crop Insurance in Ghana

2017· article· en· W2738718447 on OpenAlexaff
Emmanuella Ellis

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Economic and Financial Review · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural risk and resilience
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrop insuranceWillingness to payProbit modelMarital statusContingent valuationAgricultural scienceActuarial scienceProbitMultivariate probit modelIndex (typography)EconomicsAgricultural economicsBusinessAgricultureEconometricsPopulationGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study uses a dichotomous contingent valuation method to elicit the willingness to pay for crop insurance among cereal farmers in the Eastern region of Ghana. A sequential decision was considered. An initial decision regarding the willingness to purchase and a subsequent decision on the willingness to pay amount conditional on a positive initial decision was determined. The study employed descriptive statistical techniques to analyse primary data obtained from 208 sampled farmers in the region. Out of the sampled farmers, 52.9% expressed interest in crop insurance. The Probit model was used to estimate the mean willingness to pay (WTP) for crop insurance. The results revealed that farmers were willing to pay approximately GHc 66.2 per cropping season. A Heckman two stage approach was employed to estimate the factors influencing the WTP for crop insurance. The empirical results of the Probit model revealed that marital status, education, crop type, access to extension service, borrowing, savings and awareness of crop insurance influenced farmers’ willingness to purchase insurance. Farmers WTP amount estimated with the Ordinary Least Square regression model was shown to be influenced by variables such as marital status, other occupation, access to credit, borrowing and savings. The study recommends that with adequate and detailed information and affordable premiums, farmers will be willing to purchase insurance. Appropriate distribution channels are also recommended to incite demand for crop insurance.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.859
Threshold uncertainty score0.233

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations15
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Economic and Financial ReviewSame topicAgricultural risk and resilienceFrench-language works237,207