MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903214105 · doi:10.1111/ajae.12403

Rainfall shocks and risk aversion: Evidence from Southeast Asia

2023· article· en· W2903214105 on OpenAlexaff
Sabine Liebenehm, Ingmar Schumacher, Eric Strobl

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Agricultural Economics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural risk and resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRisk aversion (psychology)EconomicsPovertyLoss aversionEconometricsMicroeconomicsFinancial economicsExpected utility hypothesisEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We analyze how individual risk aversion changes in response to shocks in an agrarian setting, and the role of changes in yields and prices as two potential channels. To do so we specify a theoretical model that describes temporal alterations in risk aversion. Empirically, we test the model's proposition by combining individual‐level panel data with historical rainfall data for rural Thailand and Vietnam. We find that rainfall shocks increase individuals risk aversion, whereby the largest effects are observed among households that are net buyers of food commodities. Regarding potential channels, only prices seem to explain–and even then just to a very small extent–the increase in net buyers' risk aversion. Our findings imply that shocks can increase risk aversion, and, in the absence of functioning credit and insurance markets, may ultimately lead to decisions that perpetuate poverty.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations30
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Agricultural EconomicsSame topicAgricultural risk and resilienceFrench-language works237,207