6

Several sources make varying claims that 70% of the global economy is sensitive/dependant on the weather:

Is there evidence to support this claim?

Oddthinking
  • 140,378
  • 46
  • 548
  • 638
Tutuquinho
  • 69
  • 1
  • 3
    What is that supposed to mean exactly? If you are talking about an area that gets weather such as a blizzard or hurricane that would impact everything and isn’t really a good measure. – Joe W Jan 10 '23 at 16:42
  • 1
    @ArthurA the second link cites 25 resources to support its claims. Have you looked through them? – Weather Vane Jan 10 '23 at 19:00
  • 3
    @JoeW: The definitions are unclear and contradictory between sources, but there seems to be a common meme between them and others. Maybe we can find the source and clarify. – Oddthinking Jan 10 '23 at 22:14
  • We all rely on eating food; food production relies on weather. Seems plausible to me. – user253751 Jan 11 '23 at 02:53
  • 4
    What would the remaining 30% be? The only human activity not affected by the weather are autonomous systems already in space, which are very very few. I would take any claim it's less than 100% with a big grain of salt unless "weather sensitive" is more accurately defined. With bad enough weather, all human activity ceases. – gerrit Jan 11 '23 at 09:06
  • 1
    @WeatherVane The second link only cites three references to support this claim rather than 25, and that is a bald claim in the paper's conclusions that is supported only by those three references. There is no analysis in that paper that supports the 70% figure. The second link aims at informing manufacturers with regard to "reducing cash-flow uncertainty and potential losses caused by adverse weather, and in influencing sales." – David Hammen Jan 11 '23 at 14:07
  • 2
    @Oddthinking The oldest reference in the second paper that claims 70% is *Hanley, H., 1999. Hedging the Force of Nature. Risk Professional, pp. 21–25*. Since they all claim 70%, I suspect that that paper is the source. – David Hammen Jan 11 '23 at 14:11
  • 2
    @DavidHammen I haven't found the paper by Hanley, but [another reference](https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/10636807.pdf) to it says *"It is estimated that nearly 30% of the US economy and 70% of the US companies are affected by weather"* which isn't quite what the Q title says. – Weather Vane Jan 11 '23 at 15:18
  • 1
    @WeatherVane I can't find the Hanley paper, either. The best I can do is to find that that paper has been referenced 50 times, per Google Scholar. Google Scholar doesn't know about the paper itself. Even sci-hub doesn't know about this paper. – David Hammen Jan 11 '23 at 15:23
  • 2
    @DavidHammen plenty of people mention it without an actual reference. [Another article](http://www.sfu.ca/~rjones/econ410/readings/Lenep2004JAI.pdf) quotes *"Indeed, Challis [1999] and Hanley [1999| estimate that around US $1 trillion of the US $7 trillion U.S economy is sensitive to weather risks."* yet 1/7 is only 14%. – Weather Vane Jan 11 '23 at 15:26
  • 2
    I don't understand the close votes. It's clear what the question is asking: It's asking us to confirm or rebut the three notable sources that all claim that 70% of the global economy is sensitive to / dependent on the weather. The question is clear, and because the sources are notable, the question is on-topic. – David Hammen Jan 11 '23 at 15:29
  • 1
    The other paper frequently mentioned by Challis 1999 *"Bright forecast for profits"* doesn't get a link from Google Scholar either. – Weather Vane Jan 11 '23 at 16:01
  • 1
    @DavidHammen I suspect the issue is that the claim is so *vague*. It makes answering the question more of a scavenger hunt for some source these statements might have relied on, rather than a test for whether the claim is accurate. It's clear you could make the claim both correct and incorrect if you have the freedom to define it within the parameters given, so it's not very interesting. JoeW's comment gives an example at one extreme. – Bryan Krause Jan 11 '23 at 23:17

0 Answers0