MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286587843 · doi:10.3390/hydrology9080129

Growing Crops in Arid, Drought-Prone Environments: Adaptation and Mitigation

2022· article· en· W4286587843 on OpenAlexaff
Nicholas P. Sisto, Sergei Severinov, Gilberto Aboites Manrique

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWater scarcityIrrigationContext (archaeology)AgricultureProduction (economics)Environmental scienceAridWater conservationScarcityWater useFarm waterWater resource managementWater supplyAgroforestryDeficit irrigationWater resourcesClimate changeAgricultural economicsBusinessIrrigation managementEconomicsAgronomyGeographyEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drought poses significant risks to society, in particular irrigated-crop production, which accounts for a large share of global freshwater use. Given its key role in the production of food, feed and fiber crops, there exists a need for policy measures to prevent and mitigate the impacts of drought on irrigated agriculture. This paper proposes that the design of drought policy should take into account actual farmer behavior in response to water scarcity. To this end, we offer a detailed analysis of land allocation and crop-choice decisions over time in an irrigation district located in the dry plains of Northern Mexico. We find that farmers systematically change their crop mix in response to water availability. In particular, in times of drought, irrigation water flows to higher-yield and higher-price crops (which also require more intense irrigation) to the detriment of less water-demanding (but lower value) crops. Farmers use water with the goal of earning a living—economizing on water per se has no relevance in that context. Policies that do not explicitly recognize this may result in ineffective, inefficient and/or unfair outcomes.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.166
Teacher spread0.158 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrologySame topicWater resources management and optimizationFrench-language works237,207