Silver lining of the water: The role of government relief assistance in disaster recovery
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Combining three datasets, the Australian Longitudinal Census Panel of 2006 and 2011, engineering data on flood-water height, and administrative data on government relief assistance, we investigate whether and how the government’s post-disaster relief payments helped the economic recovery from riverine floods that struck the state of Queensland in Australia in 2010/11. Using a difference-in-differences methodology that compares the flooded areas with unflooded zones within Queensland whereby the flooded zones differed in their levels of flooding and the government’s relief assistance, we find that the government’s disaster relief assistance was effective in economic recovery, having led individuals residing in flooded areas with average flood height to experience a 3.4 percent rise in (self-reported) income following the disaster, relative to those individuals living in unflooded areas of the state. Our findings are robust to a battery of sensitivity tests, including migration, parallel trends, spatial spillovers, and possible confounders.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it