MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229070968 · doi:10.3390/jrfm15050211

Climate Insurance for Agriculture in Europe: On the Merits of Smart Contracts and Distributed Ledger Technologies

2022· article· en· W4229070968 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Reimund Schwarze, Oleksandr Sushchenko

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicInsurance and Financial Risk Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Fund for Agricultural Development
KeywordsLedgerAgriculturePaymentBusinessYield (engineering)Compensation (psychology)Crop insuranceDistributed ledgerStrengths and weaknessesInsurance policyNatural resource economicsActuarial scienceFinanceEconomicsGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate insurance has become a crucial issue due to the increasing number of climate-related catastrophic events and the associated losses for the economy in general and insurance companies in particular. The extremely hot and dry summers of 2018 and 2019 in some European countries highlighted existing weaknesses in European agricultural insurance mechanisms, with farmers having to wait for months before compensation payments could be made. Our paper compares features of yield-based insurance and index-based insurance (IBI) in agriculture in the light of new developments and trends in information technology (IT). The results show that applying Distributed Ledger Technologies (DLT) in combination with IBI could not only resolve existing problems but also facilitate the development of innovative risk management tools under the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) post-2020 reform.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.730
Threshold uncertainty score0.411

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicInsurance and Financial Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207