Global climate migration is a story of who and not just how many
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the impact of climate change on human migration is critical for policymakers. Yet climate change can both incentivize people to migrate and reduce their ability to move, making its effect on human migration ambiguous. We propose an approach to studying migration that combines causal inference methods with cross-validation techniques to reliably estimate effects of weather on migration within and across borders. This approach highlights the key role of migrant demographics in the weather-migration relationship. We show that allowing weather effects to differ by age and education improves out-of-sample performance by a factor of five or more compared with a homogeneous effect. Demographic heterogeneity is critical in explaining this discrepancy. Projections based on our empirical estimates indicate that the effects of climate change on future cross-border migration will be an order of magnitude larger for most demographics than the average effect, but differing responses across groups largely offset one another. Migration responses to climate are demographically heterogeneous. Accounting for age and education greatly improves predictions, with demographic-specific effects often an order of magnitude larger than population wide averages.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".