Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Use (and Abuse) of Meta-Analysis in Environmental and Natural Resource Economics: An Assessment
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Use (and Abuse) of Meta-Analysis in Environmental and Natural Resource Economics: An Assessment
Do you wish to request the book?
Use (and Abuse) of Meta-Analysis in Environmental and Natural Resource Economics: An Assessment
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Use (and Abuse) of Meta-Analysis in Environmental and Natural Resource Economics: An Assessment
2009
Overview
Motivated by the 2006 report of a Work Group appointed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), this paper examines the present state of meta-analysis in environmental economics and offers recommendations for its future use. To this end we summarize and assess 140 meta-analyses from 125 published and unpublished studies, covering 17 topical categories in environmental and resource economics. First, we provide several generic meta-analysis models as reference points and discuss major estimation issues. Five econometric issues are identified as part of a complete analysis: (1) sample selection criteria; (2) basic data summary; (3) primary data heterogeneity; (4) heteroskedasticity; and (5) non-independence of multiple observations from primary studies. Second, a tabular summary is presented for the 140 meta-analyses with respect to estimation methods. Third, a narrative summary is presented for 19 meta-analyses, including the three value-of-statistical-life studies examined by the EPA Work Group and one analysis from each of 16 other categories. Fourth, we offer a set of “best practice” guidelines for future meta-analyses in this and other areas of economics. Last, the paper comments on the use of meta-analytic methods for benefit transfers of environmental values.
Publisher
Dordrecht : Springer Netherlands,Springer Netherlands,European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists,Springer Nature B.V
Subject
