Complex climate and network effects on internal migration in South Africa revealed by a network model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Climate variability and climate change influence human migration both directly and indirectly through a variety of channels that are controlled by individual and household socioeconomic, cultural, and psychological processes as well as public policies and network effects. Characterizing and predicting migration flows are thus extremely complex and challenging. Among the quantitative methods available for predicting such flows is the widely used gravity model that ignores the network autocorrelation among flows and thus may lead to biased estimation of the climate effects of interest. In this study, we use a network model, the additive and multiplicative effects model for network (AMEN), to investigate the effects of climate variability, migrant networks, and their interactions on South African internal migration. Our results indicate that prior migrant networks have a significant influence on migration and can modify the association between climate variability and migration flows. We also reveal an otherwise obscure difference in responses to these effects between migrants moving to urban and non-urban destinations. With different metrics, we discover diverse drought effects on these migrants; for example, the negative standardized precipitation index (SPI) with a timescale of 12 months affects the non-urban-oriented migrants’ destination choices more than the rainy season rainfall deficit or soil moisture do. Moreover, we find that socioeconomic factors such as the unemployment rate are more significant to urban-oriented migrants, while some unobserved factors, possibly including the abolition of apartheid policies, appear to be more important to non-urban-oriented migrants.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".