It is not the peasant’s goal to produce the highest possible time‐averaged crop yield, averaged over many years. If your time‐averaged yield is marvelously high as a result of the combination of nine great years and one year of crop failure, you will still starve to death in that one year of crop failure before you can look back to congratulate yourself on your great time‐averaged yield. Instead, the peasant’s aim is to make sure to produce a yield above the starvation level in every single year, even though the time‐averaged yield may not be highest. That’s why field scattering may make sense. If you have just one big field, no matter how good it is on the average, you will starve when the inevitable occasional year arrives in which your one field has a low yield. But if you have many different fields, varying independently of each other, then in any given year some of your fields will produce well even when your other fields are producing poorly.<The World Until Yesterday, Jared Diamond · 2013>
I think the 'which' in "in which" or 'in which' itself is not grammatical or very rare because the antecedent is not a noun but a clause that includes the verb 'arrives'. Is the sentence 'you will starve when the inevitable occasional year arrives in which your one field has a low yield' grammatical or wrong?