Bachelor’s and Master’s Theses

Agriculture is widely regarded as one of the most vulnerable sectors to the adverse impacts of climate change, with arable farming being particularly susceptible. Projections suggest that these impacts will intensify in the coming decades, compelling farmers to adapt to an increasingly unpredictable climate. Over the years, various climate change adaptation strategies have been proposed, including diversification, conservation tillage, and crop insurance. While many farmers have already adopted a variety of these strategies to mitigate climate risks, the extent of adaptation varies significantly across farms. Recent studies have highlighted the critical role that farmer characteristics and behavioral factors—such as risk tolerance, personality traits, and climate perceptions—play in shaping adaptation decisions. Understanding the conditions required for effective climate adaptation is essential for policymakers, farmers, and other stakeholders within the agricultural sector. By identifying the key bottlenecks that hinder adaptation, this research aims to facilitate the development of more targeted and efficient strategies, ultimately strengthening the sector's resilience to climate variability. This thesis employs Necessary Condition Analysis (NCA) to systematically identify and evaluate the critical factors that must be present for successful uptake of climate adaptation measures in arable crop farming. NCA is an easily implementable method used to identify conditions that must be met for a specific outcome, as the outcome cannot occur without them.

This thesis aims at identifying key bottlenecks for climate change adaptation linked to behavioral and socioeconomic characteristics of farmers. This research will involve an econometric analysis of existing data from an online survey with 700 apprenticing farms in Germany.

Literature

Carter, C., Cui, X., Ghanem, D., & Mérel, P. (2018). Identifying the Economic Impacts of Climate Change on Agriculture. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 10(June), 361–380. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-100517-022938

Dessart, F. J., Barreiro-Hurlé, J., & Van Bavel, R. (2019). Behavioural factors affecting the adoption of sustainable farming practices: A policy-oriented review. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 46(3), 417–471. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbz019

Dul, J. (2021). Advances in Necessary Condition Analysis. https://bookdown.org/ncabook/advanced_nca2/.

Moore, F. C., & Lobell, D. B. (2014). Adaptation potential of European agriculture in response to climate change. Nature Climate Change, 4(7), 610–614. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2228

Christian Stetter (cstetter@ethz.ch), Robert Finger (rofinger@ethz.ch)

Agriculture is a significant contributor to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, accounting for approximately 11% of total global emissions, with livestock farming being the largest source within the sector (Ritchie et al., 2024). Achieving climate targets requires substantial reductions in agricultural emissions, prompting discussions on effective mitigation strategies. Various measures, such as feed optimization, manure management, and technological innovations, have been proposed to reduce emissions from livestock farming—particularly cattle (Garnett, 2009; Herrero et al., 2016). However, a key question remains: Are these strategies sufficient to achieve low-emission agriculture, or is a reduction in livestock numbers necessary? Recent policy initiatives, such as government buyout schemes aimed at decreasing livestock populations, have intensified this debate (Boezeman et al., 2023). Reducing livestock numbers and the consumption of livestock products is increasingly considered a potential pathway to lowering agricultural emissions. This thesis seeks to assess whether such reductions are a necessary condition for achieving low-emission agriculture and, if so, which types of livestock are most critical in this regard. Using Necessary Condition Analysis (NCA ), this research systematically evaluates the role of livestock reduction in achieving climate goals and identifies key bottlenecks in the transition to a more climate-friendly agricultural system. NCA is an easily implementable method used to identify conditions that must be met for a specific outcome, as the outcome cannot occur without them. The analysis can be approached from different perspectives, including global, regional (e.g., Europe), or national (e.g., Switzerland) datasets. The specific scope and dataset selection are subject to discussion and can be determined together with the student.

This thesis aims to determine whether reducing livestock populations is a necessary condition for achieving low-emission agriculture. If so, it seeks to identify bottleneck levels of livestock counts for given levels of greenhouse gas emissions. Additionally, the research will explore various scenarios incorporating feeding strategies, manure management, and technological innovations to assess their potential in mitigating emissions while maintaining current livestock production levels.

Literature

Boezeman, D., De Pue, D., Graversgaard, M., & Möckel, S. (2023). Less Livestock in North‐western Europe? Discourses and Drivers Behind Livestock Buyout Policies. EuroChoices, 22(2), 4–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/1746-692X.12399

Dul, J. (2021). Advances in Necessary Condition Analysis. https://bookdown.org/ncabook/advanced_nca2/. Garnett, T. (2009). Livestock-related greenhouse gas emissions: Impacts and options for policy makers. Environmental Science & Policy, 12(4), 491–503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2009.01.006

Herrero, M., Henderson, B., Havlík, P., Thornton, P. K., Conant, R. T., Smith, P., Wirsenius, S., Hristov, A. N., Gerber, P., Gill, M., Butterbach-Bahl, K., Valin, H., Garnett, T., & Stehfest, E. (2016). Greenhouse gas mitigation potentials in the livestock sector. Nature Climate Change, 6(5), 452–461. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2925

Ritchie, H., Rosado, P., & Roser, M. (2024). Breakdown of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide emissions by sector. Our World in Data.

Christian Stetter (cstetter@ethz.ch), Robert Finger (rofinger@ethz.ch)

Die direkte Demokratie ist ein zentrales Element der Schweizer Politik und ermöglicht es Bürger:innen, durch Volksinitiativen neue politische Agenden zu setzen oder bestehende Gesetze mittels Referenden zu hinterfragen. In den letzten Jahren wurden zahlreiche Initiativen zu Nachhaltigkeits- und Umweltfragen eingereicht, wodurch auch die Agrar- und Ernährungspolitik zunehmend durch direktdemokratische Prozesse geprägt wird (Huber & Finger, 2019). Parallel dazu wächst international die Anerkennung dafür, dass Ernährungspolitik nicht isoliert betrachtet werden kann, sondern als integrales Steuerungsinstrument dienen sollte, das ökonomische, ökologische und soziale Dimensionen gleichermassen berücksichtigt (Huber, 2022). Die Ernährungs- und Landwirtschaftsorganisation der Vereinten Nationen (FAO) definiert nachhaltige Ernährungssysteme als solche, die Ernährungssicherheit gewährleisten, natürliche Ressourcen schonen und soziale Gerechtigkeit fördern (FAO, 2014). Die Bachelorarbeit leistet einen Beitrag zum Verständnis der direkten Demokratie als Instrument der nachhaltigen Politikgestaltung in den Bereichen Agrar und Ernährung. Sie zeigt, welche Rolle direktdemokratische Instrumente bei der Transformation des Schweizer Ernährungssystems spielen. Die Ergebnisse können wertvolle Impulse für zukünftige politische Steuerungsinstrumente liefern. Diese Arbeit untersucht anhand einer qualitativen Analyse, wie Volksinitiativen und Referenden im Agrar- und Ernährungsbereich die politische Debatte prägen. Im Fokus stehen dabei offizielle Dokumente aus Verwaltung und Politik, die Einblicke in Entscheidungsprozesse und Argumentationsmuster bieten.

Die Arbeit untersucht, inwiefern Volksinitiativen und Referenden in der Schweiz zur Transformation der Agrar- und Ernährungspolitik beitragen. Dabei soll analysiert werden, ob und wie direktdemokratische Instrumente Nachhaltigkeitsdimensionen im Ernährungssystem stärken und welche Zielkonflikte zwischen ökonomischen, ökologischen und sozialen Aspekten entstehen können. Zentrale Fragestellungen sind: Wie beeinflussen Volksinitiativen und Referenden die Schweizer Ernährungspolitik im Kontext von Nachhaltigkeit? - Welche Nachhaltigkeitsdimensionen stehen im Zentrum dieser direktdemokratischen Instrumente?

Literature

FAO. (2014). Developing sustainable food value chains – Guiding principles. FAO.

Huber, R. (2022). Einführung in die Schweizer Agrarpolitik (1. Aufl.). vdf Hochschulverlag AG an der ETH Zürich. https://doi.org/10.3218/4059-3

Huber, R., & Finger, R. (2019). Popular initiatives increasingly stimulate agricultural policy in Switzerland. EuroChoices, 18(2), 38–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/1746-692X.12209

Christian Stetter (cstetter@ethz.ch)

A descriptive analysis of the data is conducted by dividing the sample of wheat and maize producers into two subgroups: (a) farmers who adhere to organic farming standards, and (b) farmers who do not use pesticides but do not meet organic standards (possibly enrolled in pesticide-free production schemes).

Based on survey data of 1540 Swiss wheat and maize producers, the thesis focuses on the crop protection strategies adopted by organic wheat and maize producers in Switzerland, comparing these practices to those of non-organic, pesticide-free producers. The latter group refers to farmers who avoid using chemical synthetic pesticides specifically for wheat and maize but may apply them to other crops within their rotation. Differences between wheat and maize cultivation methods are analyzed to understand how protection strategies may vary depending on the crop. The analysis furthermore looks at the types of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategies employed by both groups, such as long-term strategies like wider crop rotation or more resource-intensive investments, such as specialized machinery. Moreover, differences in farmers’ ratings of the effectiveness of IPM measures are investigated. This comparison sheds light on the diversity of crop protection strategies within different farming systems and provides insights into the perceived efficacy of those approaches.

Main research questions: 1. How does the portfolio of IPM measures differ between organic and non-organic, pesticide free wheat and maize production? 2. What kinds of IPM strategies (i.e., long-term strategies such as wider crop rotation or strategies with a higher investment e.g. for machinery) are used by organic as compared to non-organic but pesticide free producing farmers?
3. Do organic farmers rely more on preventive measures? 4. How do both groups of farmers evaluate the effectiveness of IPM measures?

Robert Finger (rofinger@ethz.ch) Sharmin Akter (sharmin.akter@mtec.ethz.ch)

Arable farming is often seen as one of the most vulnerable sectors to the effects of climate change as changes in temperature and precipitation have a direct impact on crop yields and the risk of crop failure, but also indirectly lead, for example, to changes in pest and disease pressure. This thesis analyses actually implemented adaptation measures. Farmers have already implemented a wide range of adaptation strategies that aim at reducing the adverse effects of climate change. However, the degree of adaptation varies widely across farms. In recent years, it has been shown that behavioral factors such as risk tolerance, personality or perceptions influence farmers’ decisions. In this context, it is also likely that farmers’ behavioral characteristics affect their probability to adopt climate change adaptation strategies. However, this relationship is still underexplored.

References

Carter, C., Cui, X., Ghanem, D., & Mérel, P. (2018). Identifying the Economic Impacts of Climate Change on Agriculture. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 10(June), 361–380. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-100517-022938

Dessart, F. J., Barreiro-Hurlé, J., & Van Bavel, R. (2019). Behavioural factors affecting the adoption of sustainable farming practices: A policy-oriented review. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 46(3), 417–471. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbz019

Mase, A. S., Gramig, B. M., & Prokopy, L. S. (2017). Climate change beliefs, risk perceptions, and adaptation behavior among Midwestern U.S. crop farmers. Climate Risk Management, 15, 8–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2016.11.004

Moore, F. C., & Lobell, D. B. (2014). Adaptation potential of European agriculture in response to climate change. Nature Climate Change, 4(7), 610–614. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2228

Streletskaya, N. A., Bell, S. D., Kecinski, M., Li, T., Banerjee, S., Palm-Forster, L. H., & Pannell, D. (2020). Agricultural adoption and behavioral economics: Bridging the gap. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 42(1), 54–66. https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13006

This thesis aims at quantifying the impact of farmers’ behavioral factors such risk tolerance, climate change perception or social-evaluative concerns on the uptake of specific climate change adaptation measures. This research will involve an econometric analysis of recently collected data from an online survey with 700 apprenticing farms in Germany.

Christian Stetter (cstetter@ethz.ch), Robert Finger (rofinger@ethz.ch)

The number of farms have been decreasing continuously across Europe. Between 2005 and 2016, for example, the number of farms decreased at a yearly rate of 2.0 % in France, 2.3 % in Austria, 3.1 % in Germany and 3.7 % in Italy. At the same time, there has been a rise in global average temperature, which is associated with widespread changes in weather patterns such that extreme weather events like heat waves and droughts are likely to become more frequent or more intense. This associated uncertainty imposes additional hazards (e.g. yield and quality losses) on farm businesses, which could negatively affect farms to the point of exiting their businesses. On top of farm exits (and entries), extreme weather could also induce structural adjustments, e.g. in terms of farm size or diversification. So far the relationship between climate change, weather and farm structure has been widely underexplored. This master thesis aims to tackle this research gap.

This thesis aims at quantifying the short and long-run impacts of extreme weather shocks on the agricultural structural change in the EU. This thesis combines official statistics provided by the EU with meteorological data and provides causal estimates of weather shocks on farm structural indicators using econometric methods.

Literature

Neuenfeldt, S., Gocht, A., Heckelei, T., & Ciaian, P. (2019). Explaining farm structural change in the European agriculture: A novel analytical framework. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 46(5), 713–768. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jby037

Breustedt, G., & Glauben, T. (2007). Driving forces behind exiting from farming in Western Europe. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 58(1), 115–127. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-9552.2007.00082.x

Neuenfeldt, S., Gocht, A., Heckelei, T., & Ciaian, P. (2019). Explaining farm structural change in the European agriculture: A novel analytical framework. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 46(5), 713–768. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jby037

Schickele, R. (1949). Farm Business Survival under Extreme Weather Risks. Journal of Farm Economics, 31(4), 931. https://doi.org/10.2307/1233760

Christian Stetter (cstetter@ethz.ch), Robert Finger (rofinger@ethz.ch)

This project is set to limited visibility by its publisher. To see the project description you need to log in at SiROP. Please follow these instructions:

• Click link "Open this project..." below.
• Log in to SiROP using your university login or create an account to see the details.

If your affiliation is not created automatically, please follow these instructions: http://bit.ly/sirop-affiliate

Hintergrund Hülsenfrüchte sind ein wesentlicher Bestandteil einer ausgewogenen, pflanzenbasierten Ernährung. Da die inländische Produktion vergleichsweise teuer ist und somit nicht wettbewerbsfähig, werden Hülsenfrüchte bevorzugt günstig aus dem Ausland bezogen. Dieser Effekt wird dadurch verstärkt, dass es in der Schweiz keinen substanziellen Grenzschutz für Hülsenfrüchte gibt. Abgesehen vom Grenzschutz, bietet die Absatzförderung eine Alternative zur Unterstützung der inländischen Produktion, welche die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit der einheimischen Produktion stärkt Mit der Absatzförderung leistet der Bund einen Beitrag an die Kommunikationsmassnahmen der Branchen- und Produzentenorganisationen. Das Ziel ist, die Vorteile von Schweizer Landwirtschaftsprodukten zu präsentieren und die Präferenz für inländische Erzeugnisse zu erhöhen. Die Absatzförderung trägt dazu bei, dass sich Schweizer Produkte gegenüber Importen behaupten und auf Exportmärkten bestehen können. Welche Produkte gefördert werden, wird im Umsetzungsprogramm vorgegeben gemäss einer Formel, welche Anteile berücksichtigt. Momentan werden die meisten Mittel im Rahmen der Absatzförderung für Käse ausgegeben, aber auch Wein ist relevant.

Fragestellung - Wie funktioniert die Absatzförderung in der Schweiz? - Welche Produkte werden momentan gefördert und was sind die Gründe für diese Förderung? - Welche Relevanz hat die Absatzförderung im Vergleich zu anderen agrarpolitischen Instrumenten? - Welche Faktoren sind relevant, das neue Produkte, wie Hülsenfrüchte, in die Absatzförderung aufgenommen werden?

Methoden - Literaturrecherche - Anwendung theoretischer Grundlagen, z.B. aus der Vorlesung Einführung in die Agrarpolitik - Experten-Interviews

Ziel dieser Bachelorarbeit ist es, die Funktionsweise der Absatzförderung in der Schweiz zu analysieren, geförderte Produkte und deren Auswahlkriterien zu untersuchen und die Relevanz der Absatzförderung im Vergleich zu anderen agrarpolitischen Instrumenten sowie die Potenziale für Hülsenfrüchte zu bewerten.

Robert Finger; rofinger@ethz.ch Robert Huber; rhuber@ethz Diese Bachelorarbeit wird in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Verein Schweizer Hülsenfrüchte realisiert https://schweizerhuelsenfruechte.ch/.

Hintergrund: Die Wertschöpfungskette von Nahrungsmitteln weist in der Schweiz eine X-Struktur auf. Die X-Struktur beschreibt eine Wertschöpfungskette in welcher viele Produzentinnen und Produzenten wenigen Verarbeitern beziehungswiese wenigen Händlern gegenüberstehen, diese aber wiederum viele Konsumentinnen und Konsumenten beliefern. In der Schweiz werden die Nahrungsmittel von vielen Landwirtschaftsbetrieben hergestellt. Sie entsprechen einer atomistischen Struktur. Das hat zur Folge, dass der einzelne Landwirt durch seine Produktionsmenge den Preis für das Produkt nicht bestimmen kann. Auch die Konsumentinnen und Konsumenten weisen eine atomistische Struktur auf. Niemand kann durch seine Nachfrage den Preis für die Nahrungsmittel beeinflussen. Demgegenüber stehen die Abnehmer und Händler. Diese umfassen nur wenige Akteure und ihre Entscheidungen über Mengen können die Preise beeinflussen. Dadurch kann Marktmacht entstehen. Die Politik greift in die Agrarmärkte ein, um ein besseres Gleichgewicht zwischen den Akteuren der Wertschöpfungskette zu schaffen. Aus der Kombination der Wettbewerbssituation (Anzahl Akteure und Organisation) und den agrarpolitischen Eingriffen entsteht eine sogenannte Marktordnung. Für unterschiedliche Agrarmärkte wie beispielsweise Kalb- oder Geflügelfleisch, Brotgetreide oder Zucker aber auch Äpfel oder Trauben bestehen unterschiedliche Marktordnungen. Methodisches Vorgehen: Die Bachelorarbeit besteht aus einer ausführlichen Literatur- und Datenrecherche zu einem ausgewählten Agrarmarkt in der Schweiz. Die Studentin oder der Student kann selber entscheiden, welchen Markt sie oder er untersuchen möchte.

Darstellung und ökonomische Interpretation der Marktordnung eines ausgewählten Schweizer Agrarmarktes.

Robert Huber rhuber@ethz.ch

Bachelor thesis

The goal of for this B.Sc. thesis is to conduct a literature review on addressing the aforementioned research gap. There are three research objectives:

1) What are the most relevant environmental indicators for dairy farming?

2) Which of these indicators have been received the most attention for calculating the cost of reduction?

3) Which environmental indicators (e.g. biodiversity, impact on water, deforestation, soil health, etc) lack of sufficient research?

References

Dalheimer, B., Parikoglou, I., Brambach, F., Yanita, M., Kreft, H., and Brümmer, B. (2024). On the palm oil-biodiversity trade-off: Environmental performance of smallholder producers. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 125:102975.

European Commission: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, Peyraud, J. and MacLeod, M., Future of EU livestock – How to contribute to a sustainable agricultural sector ? – Final report, Publications Office, 2020, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2762/3440

European Commission: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, Marie-Laure Augère-Granier, The EU dairy sector: Main features, challenges and prospects – Final report, Publications Office, 2024, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_BRI(2018)630345

Gullstrand, J., Blander, R., and Waldo, S. (2014). The Influence of Biodiversity Provision on the Cost Structure of Swedish Dairy Farming. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 65(1):87–111.

Mamardashvili, Phatima, Emvalomatis, Grigorios and Jan, Pierrick, (2016), Environmental Performance and Shadow Value of Polluting on Swiss Dairy Farms, Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 41, issue 2, number 235154

OECD (2022), Making Agri-Environmental Payments More Cost Effective, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/4cf10d76-en.


Peerlings, J. and Polman, N. (2004). Wildlife and landscape services production in Dutch dairy farming; jointness and transaction costs. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 31(4):427–449

Iordanis Parikoglou (iparikoglou@ethz.ch)

Master thesis

The goal of for this M.Sc. thesis is to address the two aforementioned research gaps. For this, econometric techniques will be applied on a panel of Swiss dairy farm level data (2009-2021) from the Swiss farm accountancy data network. There are three research objectives:

1)What is the cost of conservation biodiversity at the farm level?

2) Which farm characteristics affect the cost of biodiversity (e.g. size of the farm, regional location, etc)?

3) Does the cost of biodiversity conservation depend on the choice of biodiversity measure at the farm level?

References

Dainesem M. et al., (2019) A global synthesis reveals biodiversity-mediated benefits for crop production. Sci. Adv. 5, eaax0121

Dalheimer, B., Parikoglou, I., Brambach, F., Yanita, M., Kreft, H., and Brümmer, B. (2024). On the palm oil-biodiversity trade-off: Environmental performance of smallholder producers. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 125:102975.

FOAG (2021). Uberblick: Direktzahlungen an schweizer ganz-jahresbetriebe. Federal Offce for Agriculture (ed.). Bern: Federal Offce for Agriculture.

Gullstrand, J., Blander, R., and Waldo, S. (2014). The Influence of Biodiversity Provision on the Cost Structure of Swedish Dairy Farming. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 65(1):87–111.

Huber, R., El Benni, N., and Finger, R. (2024). Lessons learned and policy implications from 20 years of swiss agricultural policy reforms: A review of policy evaluations. Biobased and Applied Economics, 13(2):121–146

Pe’er, G. et al., (2017). Adding some green to the greening: Improving the EU’s ecological focus areas for biodiversity and farmers. Conserv. Lett. 10, 517–530 (2017).

Peerlings, J. and Polman, N. (2004). Wildlife and landscape services production in Dutch dairy farming; jointness and transaction costs. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 31(4):427–449

Iordanis Parikoglou (iparikoglou@ethz.ch)

Robert Finger (rofinger@ethz.ch)

Master thesis

The goal of for this M.Sc. thesis is to address the aforementioned research gaps using econometric techniques that explain the production process of farms (e.g. Parikoglou et al 2024, Bokusheva et al. 2012). A panel of dairy farm level data (2009-2021) from the Swiss farm accountancy data network will be used for the analysis. There are two research objectives:

1. What is the effect of soil erosion risk on production inputs?

2. How does the effect of soil erosion risk vary conditional on farm characteristics (e.g. size of farm, location, etc)

References

Amundson, R. et al. (2015) Soil and human security in the 21st century. Science 348, 1261071-1–1261071-6

Bokusheva, R., Kumbhakar, S. C. and Lehmann, B. (2012). The effect of environmental regulations on Swiss farm productivity, International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 93-101.

Borrelli, P., Robinson, D.A., Fleischer, L.R. et al. (2017) An assessment of the global impact of 21st century land use change on soil erosion. Nat Commun 8, 2013 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-02142-7

Parikoglou, I., Emvalomatis, G., Läpple, D. et al. The contribution of innovation to farm-level productivity. J Prod Anal 62, 239–255 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11123-024-00728-0

Iordanis Parikoglou (iparikoglou@ethz.ch)

Robert Finger (rofinger@ethz.ch)

The aim of this B.Sc. thesis is to provide a review of the literature on and the current state of weather insurances in European dairy farming focusing on heat and drought related damages. There are three main research questions:

1) What are the main weather risks that threaten dairy farming?

2) What are the main types of insurance solutions offered for these weather-related risks in dairy farming?

3) How the already existing insurance designs could be potentially improved?

References

Webber, H., Ewert, F., Olesen, J. E. et al. (2018). Diverging importance of drought stress for maize and winter wheat in Europe. Nature Communications 9(1): 4249.

Bucheli, J., Conrad, N., Wimmer, S., Dalhaus, T. and Finger, R (2023) Climate Risk Managent 41, 100525

Deng, X., Barnett, B. J., Vedenov, D. V., & West, J. W. (2007). Hedging dairy production losses using weather‐based index insurance. Agricultural Economics, 36(2), 271-280.

Gisbert-Queral, M., Henningsen, A., Markussen, B., Niles, M. T., Kebreab, E., Rigden, A. J., & Mueller, N. D. (2021). Climate impacts and adaptation in US dairy systems 1981–2018. Nature Food, 2(11), 894-901.

Iordanis Parikoglou (iparikoglou@ethz.ch)

Robert Finger (rofinger@ethz.ch)