MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991071441 · doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2019.102746

Cost and effectiveness of in-season strategies for coping with weather variability in Pakistan's agriculture

2019· article· en· W2991071441 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAgricultural Systems · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicClimate change impacts on agriculture
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWageningen University and Research CentreInternational Development Research CentreDepartment for International DevelopmentDepartment for International Development, UK GovernmentGovernment of the United Kingdom
KeywordsCroppingLivelihoodCoping (psychology)AgricultureGrowing seasonEx-anteDry seasonCrop yieldWet seasonEnvironmental scienceAgroforestryAgricultural economicsAgricultural scienceEconomicsAgronomyBiologyEcologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Crops are vulnerable to weather hazards throughout the growth season, with periods of heightened risk described as critical moments. Farmers have a number of ex-ante and in-season options for coping with these events, and ex-post adjustments to farm-household portfolios to further limit the impact on livelihoods if these options fail. Adaptation-related research has focussed mainly on ex-ante or ex-post coping strategies, because in-season approaches tend to be seen as a given, meaning their cost effectiveness is ignored. Based on detailed survey data collected from 287 households in four of the main cropping systems in Pakistan, this study evaluates the impact pathways of hazards and the cost effectiveness of in-season coping strategies. Yield losses varied by 10–30% for 43% of the cases and by 31–50% for another 39%, with the most severe losses caused by the compounding effect of two hazards in one crop season or if both crops in a multi-crop rotation were affected simultaneously. In-season coping options were mostly restricted to the early crop stages and constrained by a short window of time for the response. The application of in-season coping strategies resulted in a yield recovery of 40–95%, with an additional cost of 4–34% of the value of recovered yield. The major critical moments identified were the harvest season, with farming often affected by un-seasonal precipitation, and the germination stage, with an additional high risk for low temperatures at high altitude. A better understanding of the differentiated risks and effectiveness of in-season coping strategies could support the promotion of sustainable crop production in similar agro-ecologies. Moreover, the effectiveness of present-day coping strategies, rather than the use of coping approaches itself, could signal a potential ability to adjust to future climate change.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.622
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.241 · 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