Environmental and Resource Economics

, Volume 69, Issue 3, pp 609–635 | Cite as

Understanding Error Structures and Exploiting Panel Data in Meta-analytic Benefit Transfers

Article
First Online:
Accepted:

Abstract

A regression meta-analysis is a statistical summary of results from a set of empirical studies. While, a meta-analysis is typically used to drawn inferences regarding the collective insights from an empirical literature, a regression meta-analysis can also be used to predict outcomes as a substitute for the conduct of a new study. Within the nonmarket-valuation literature benefit transfers are a special case of prediction where value estimates collected for one purpose are used as a basis for predicting value for unstudied applications. Balancing against the prediction opportunities provided by a regression meta-analysis is the potential prediction error. This paper considers some of these issues in the estimation of a regression meta-analysis to support prediction of nonmarket values for applications where an original study does not exist. We do not purport to address all elements of the error structure and prediction issues, but to present a more coherent focus to enhance future research on the validity and reliability of benefit-function transfers, and ultimately assist in enhancing the credibility of benefit transfers to support policy analyses.

Keywords

Meta-analysis Meta-regression Benefit transfer Prediction Error stuctures 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Abadie A, Diamond A, Hainmueller J (2010) Synthetic control methods for comparative case studies: estimating the effect of California’s tobacco control program. J Am Stat Assoc 105(490):493–505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abadie A, Athey S, Imbens GW, Wooldridge JM (2017) Finite population causal standard errors. Stanford University Graduate School of Business, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  3. Ashenfelter O, Harmon C, Oosterbeek H (1999) A review of estimates of the schooling/earnings relationship, with tests for publication bias. Labour Econ 6(4):453–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Babapulle MN, Joseph L, Bélisle P, Brophy JM, Eisenberg MJ (2004) A hierarchical Bayesian meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials of drug-eluting stents. The Lancet 364(9434):583–591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boyle KJ, Kuminoff NV, Parmeter CF, Pope JC (2009) Necessary conditions for valid benefit transfers. Am J Agric Econ 91(5):1328–1334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boyle KJ, Kuminoff NV, Parmeter CF, Pope JC (2010) The benefit-transfer challenges. Annu Rev Resour Econ 2(1):161–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Card D, Kreuger AB (1995) Time-series minimum-wage studies: a meta-analysis. Am Econ Rev 85(2):238–243Google Scholar
  8. Cameron AC, Miller DL (2015) A practitioner’s guide to cluster-robust inference. J Hum Resour 50:317–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dalhuisen JM, Florax RJGM, de Groot HLF, Nijkamp P (2003) Price and income elasticities of residential water demand: a meta-analysis. Land Econ 79(2):292–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dekker T, Brouwer R, Hofkes M, Moeltner K (2011) The effect of risk context on the value of a statistical life: a Bayesian meta-model. Environ Resour Econ 49(4):597–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Duval S, Tweedie R (2000) A nonparametric ‘trim and fill’ method of accounting for publication bias in meta-analysis. J Am Stat Assoc 95(449):89–98Google Scholar
  12. Florax RJGM (2002) Methodological pitfalls in meta-analysis: publication bias. In: Florax RJGM, Nijkamp P, Willis KG (eds) Comp Environ Econ Assess. Edward Elgar, NorthamptonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gallet CA, List JA (2003) Cigarette demand: a meta-analysis of elasticities. Health Econ 12(10):821–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hansen CB (2007) Asymptotic properties of a robust variance matrix estimator for panel data when T is large. J Econ 141:597–620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Heckman JJ (1979) Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica 47:153–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Higgins J, Thompson SG (2002) Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 21(11):1539–1558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hoehn JP (2006) Methods to address selection effects in the meta-regression and transfer of ecosystem values. Ecol Econ 60(2):389–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Johnston RJ, Rolfe J, Rosenberger RS, Brouwer R (2015) Benefit transfer of environmental and resource values. Springer, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kaul S, Boyle KJ, Kuminoff NV, Parmeter CF, Pope JC (2013) What can we learn from benefit transfer errors? Evidence from 20 years of research on convergent validity. J Environ Econ Manage 66(1):90–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kim Y, Kling C, Zhao J (2015) Understanding behavioral explanations of the WTP-WTA divergence through a neoclassical lens: implications for environmental policy. Annu Rev Resour Econ 7:169–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kochi I, Hubbell B, Kramer R (2006) An empirical Bayes approach to combining and comparing estimates of the value of a statistical life for environmental policy analysis. Environ Resour Econ 34(3):385–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kraemer HC, Andrews G (1982) A nonparametric technique for meta-analysis effect size calculation. Psychol Bull 91(2):404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Leon-Gonzalez R, Scarpa R (2008) Improving multi-site benefit functions via Bayesian model averaging: a new approach to benefit transfer. J Environ Econ Manage 56(1):50–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Loomis JB, White DS (1996) Economic benefits of rare and endangered species: summary and meta-analysis. Ecol Econ 18(3):197–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Moeltner K, Boyle KJ, Paterson RW (2007) Meta-analysis and benefit transfer for resource valuation-addressing classical challenges with Bayesian modeling. J Environ Econ Manage 53(2):250–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mrozek JR, Taylor LO (2002) What determines the value of life? A meta-analysis. J Policy Anal Manage 21(2):253–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mundlak Y (1978) On the pooling of time series and cross section data. Econometrica 46(1):69–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nelson JP (2004) Meta-analysis of airport noise and hedonic property values. J Transp Econ Policy 38(1):1–27Google Scholar
  29. Nelson JP, Kennedy PE (2009) The use (and abuse) of meta-analysis in environmental and natural resource economics: an assessment. Environ Resour Econ 42(3):345–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Peters JL, Sutton AJ, Jones DR, Abrams KR, Rushton L (2006) Comparison of two methods to detect publication bias in meta-analysis. J Am Med Assoc 295(6):676–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rosenberger RS, Loomis JB (2000) Using meta-analysis for benefit transfer: in-sample convergent validity tests of an outdoor recreation database. Water Resour Res 36(4):1097–1107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rosenberger RS, Stanley TD (2006) Measurement, generalization, and publication: sources of error in benefit transfers and their management. Ecol Econ 60(2):372–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rosenberger RS, Johnston RJ (2009) Selection effects in meta-analysis and benefit transfer: avoiding unintended consequences. Land Econ 85(3):410–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Siriwardena SD, Boyle KJ, Holmes TP, Wiseman PE (2016) The implicit value of tree cover in the US: a meta-analysis of hedonic property value studies. Ecol Econ 128:68–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Smith VK, Huang J (1995) Can markets value air quality? A meta-analysis of hedonic property value models. J Polit Econ 103(1):209–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Smith VK, Pattanayak SK (2002) Is meta-analysis a Noah’s ark for non-market valuation? Environ Resour Econ 22(1–2):271–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Smith TC, Spiegelhalter DJ, Thomas A (1995) Bayesian approaches to random-effects meta-analysis: a comparative study. Stat Med 14(24):2685–2699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Smith VK, Van Houtven G, Pattanayak SK (2002) Benefit transfer via preference calibration: ‘Prudential algebra’ for policy. Land Econ 78(1):132–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sutton AJ, Abrams KR (2001) Bayesian methods in meta-analysis and evidence synthesis. Stat Methods Med Res 10(4):277–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Van Kooten GC, Eagle AJ, Manley J, Smolak T (2004) How costly are carbon offsets? A meta-analysis of carbon forest sinks. Environ Sci Policy 7(4):239–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Woodward RT, Wui Y (2001) The economic value of wetland services: a meta-analysis. Ecol Econ 37(2):257–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wooldridge JM (1995) Selection corrections for panel data models under conditional mean independence assumptions. J Econ 68:115–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wooldridge JM (1999) Distribution-free estimation of some nonlinear panel data models. J Econ 90(1):77–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wooldridge JM (2010) Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data, 2nd edn. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  45. Wooldridge JM (2016) Introductory econometrics: a modern approach, 6th edn. Cengage, CincinnatiGoogle Scholar
  46. Zelmer J (2003) Linear public goods experiments: a meta-analysis. Exp Econ 6(3):299–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Virginia TechBlacksburgUSA
  2. 2.Michigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA

Personalised recommendations