MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403198204 · doi:10.1080/13600818.2024.2410029

A microsimulation study of COVID-19‘s impact on household welfare in Ethiopia

2024· article· en· W4403198204 on OpenAlexafffund
Tsegay Tekleselassie, Abdelkrim Araar, Mehari Hiluf Abay, Kibrom A. Abay

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford Development Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsMicrosimulationWelfareCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)EconomicsSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakHuman welfareDevelopment economicsPublic economicsEconomic growthBiologyMedicineVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our study aims to analyze and learn from the unanticipated economic shocks caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. We examine the ramifications of the pandemic on household well-being in Ethiopia, uncovering the layers of socio-economic impact through a rigorous microsimulation exercise. Drawing on robust data from the 2018/19 Living Standards Measurement Study – Integrated Surveys on Agriculture, we assess the significant disruptions caused by the pandemic. Our findings reveal a 2 to 4 percentage point increase in the poverty rate within the first three months, driven largely by shifts in direct incomes and food prices. The analysis highlights differential impacts across rural and urban areas, as well as between male- and female-headed households. Moreover, the study underscores the vital role of social protection programs in mitigating the effects of such shocks.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford Development StudiesSame topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207