Abstract
Drought undermines the financial sustainability of farmers. While farmers have adopted various strategies to mitigate some drought impacts, they remain exposed to substantial drought risk. Insurance could be useful in managing climatic risks and for encouraging farmers to take sensible risks (e.g., changing their sowing date to increase yield), but it can be costly. Here, we tested whether the integration of a change in sowing date with rainfall index-based insurance could improve farmer profitability and income stability. We used the Agricultural Production Systems Simulator (APSIM)-Cotton model to simulate cotton lint yields for various sowing dates, taking into account different management strategies, across three dry-land cotton research farm sites – Dalby, Goondiwindi, and Theodore – from 1940 to 2022. We designed the index-based insurance payout when the average rainfall received during the growing season falls below a predefined level, such as the 5th, 10th, or 20th percentile of rainfall. Our study, which involved 3.9 million cotton lint simulations and 3,000 rainfall index-based insurance products, showed that combining a shift in sowing date with insurance can lead to an income improvement of up to 21.5% at some study sites. Additionally, in drought years, the income improvement for farmers who combined optimal sowing dates with rainfall index-based insurance was up to 48.0%. The framework developed in this study could aid in devising financial strategies to enhance farming resilience during climate extremes.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 3
Claim · model-written summary
Combining sowing-date shift and insurance improved income up to 21.5% at some sites.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutume1 - Treatment
- combining a shift in sowing date with insurancee0
- Outcome
- income improvemente0
- Direction
- improvemente0
- Value
- up to 21.5%e0
- Qualifier
- at some study sitese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Verbatim
e0“combining a shift in sowing date with insurance can lead to an income improvement of up to 21.5% at some study sites”
e1“cotton lint yields”
Claim · model-written summary
In drought years optimal sowing date with insurance improved income up to 48.0%.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutume1 - Treatment
- combined optimal sowing dates with rainfall index-based insurancee0
- Outcome
- income improvemente0
- Direction
- improvemente0
- Value
- up to 48.0%e0
- Qualifier
- in drought yearse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Verbatim
e0“in drought years, the income improvement for farmers who combined optimal sowing dates with rainfall index-based insurance was up to 48.0%”
e1“cotton lint yields”
Claim · model-written summary
The framework could help devise financial strategies for climate extremes.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutume1 - Outcome
- devising financial strategies to enhance farming resilience during climate extremese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Verbatim
e0“The framework developed in this study could aid in devising financial strategies to enhance farming resilience during climate extremes”
e1“cotton lint yields”
The same questions in other papers
rainfall · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 papers →sowing time · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
65 papers in the same direction as this paper · 28 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
91 papers more in this group
See all 95 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.