CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 351

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Does rising income increase or decrease damage risk from natural disasters?

Kellenberg, Derek K., Mobarak, Ahmed Mushfiq·2008·Journal of Urban Economics
DOI 10.1016/j.jue.2007.05.003
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jue.2007.05.003

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Trade-offs for income regardless of the risk to human health or wellbeing seem to be accepted in other contexts like sex workers, income per capita with less preparation for natural disasters, and rising urbanisation escalating global risk of obesity and type 2 diabetes.

    “Trade-offs for income regardless of the risk to human health or wellbeing seems to be accepted in other contexts like, sex workers [99,100], income per capita, with less preparation for natural disasters [101] and rising urbanisation escalating global risk of obesity and type 2 diabetes [102].”

    From What People Really Think About Safety around Horses: The Relationship between Risk Perception, Values and Safety Behaviours (2020) · cites this paper as [101]

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 24

  1. Adger, 1999, Social vulnerability to climate change and extremes in Coastal Vietnam, World Development, 27, 249, 10.1016/S0305-750X(98)00136-3 · DOI
  2. Anbarci, 2005, Earthquake fatalities: The interaction of nature and political economy, Journal of Public Economics, 89, 1907, 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2004.08.002 · DOI
  3. Austin, 2004, Assessing the price effects of flood hazard disclosure under the California Natural Hazard Disclosure Law (AB 1195), Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 47, 137, 10.1080/0964056042000189844 · DOI
  4. Brookshire, 1985, A test of the expected utility model: Evidence from earthquake risks, Journal of Political Economy, 93, 369, 10.1086/261304 · DOI
  5. Cossette, 2003, Modeling catastrophes and their impact on insurance portfolios, North American Actuarial Journal, 7, 1, 10.1080/10920277.2003.10596114 · DOI
  6. Cummins, 2004, The basis risk of catastrophic-loss index securities, Journal of Financial Economics, 71, 77, 10.1016/S0304-405X(03)00172-7 · DOI
  7. Dasgupta, 2002, Confronting the environmental Kuznets curve, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16, 147, 10.1257/0895330027157 · DOI
  8. Freeman, P.K., Keen, M., Mani, M., 2003. Dealing with increased risk of natural disasters: Challenges and options. Working paper WP/03/197, IMF · DOI
  9. Hallstrom, 2005, Market responses to hurricanes, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 50, 541, 10.1016/j.jeem.2005.05.002 · DOI
  10. Henderson, 2002, Urbanization in developing countries, The World Bank Research Observer, 17, 89, 10.1093/wbro/17.1.89 · DOI
  11. Hettige, 2000, Industrial pollution in economic development: The environmental Kuznets curve revisited, Journal of Development Economics, 62, 445, 10.1016/S0304-3878(00)00092-4 · DOI
  12. Jha, 1996, The Kuznets curve: A reassessment, World Development, 24, 773, 10.1016/0305-750X(95)00165-9 · DOI
  13. Kahn, 2005, The death toll from natural disasters: The role of income, geography, and institutions, Review of Economics and Statistics, 87, 271, 10.1162/0034653053970339 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Kunreuther, 1996, Mitigating disaster losses through insurance, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 12, 171, 10.1007/BF00055792 · DOI
  15. Kuznets, 1955, Economic growth and income inequality, American Economic Review, 45, 1
  16. List, 1999, The Kuznets curve: What happens after the inverted-U?, Review of Development Economics, 3, 200, 10.1111/1467-9361.00061 · DOI
  17. Millimet, 2003, The environmental Kuznets curve: Real progress or mis-specified models?, Review of Economics and Statistics, 85, 1038, 10.1162/003465303772815916 · DOI
  18. Okonski, 2004, Economic growth saves lives, Wall Street Journal Asia, December, 29
  19. Rappaport, 2003, The United States as a coastal nation, Journal of Economic Growth, 8, 5, 10.1023/A:1022870216673 · DOI
  20. Sadowski, 2005, Hurricane fatalities and hurricane damages: Are safer hurricanes more damaging?, Southern Economic Journal, 72, 422, 10.2307/20062119 · DOI
  21. Skidmore, 2001, Risk, natural disasters, and household savings in a life-cycle model, Japan and the World Economy, 13, 15, 10.1016/S0922-1425(00)00056-6 · DOI
  22. Skidmore, 2002, Do natural disasters promote long-run growth?, Economic Inquiry, 40, 664, 10.1093/ei/40.4.664 · DOI
  23. Toya, 2007, Economic development and the impacts from natural disasters, Economics Letters, 94, 20, 10.1016/j.econlet.2006.06.020 · DOI
  24. Yang, D., 2005. Coping with disaster: The impact of hurricanes on international financial flows, 1970–2002. Working paper, University of Michigan at Ann Arbor · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Kellenberg, D. K., & Mobarak, A. M.
Venue
Journal of Urban Economics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-05
Volume
63
Issue
3
Pages
788-802
ISSN
0094-1190
DOI
10.1016/j.jue.2007.05.003
Cited by
351
References
1
Language
en
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review