Methods to address selection effects in the meta regression and transfer of ecosystem values

By J. Hoehn. 2006

71 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3ac56f08e10d94492d3b2818638f53587954d336

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Global and Planetary Change

Citations in the corpus

Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units (2012, background): “The ESVD, like any body of literature, may be affected by four main sources of selection bias (Johnston and Rosenberger, 2010).”
Values of natural and human‐made wetlands: A meta‐analysis (2010, methodology): “A selection bias arises for instance when ecosystems that are perceived more valuable a priori are more likely to be selected for valuation or when the probability of a study being published is correlated to the effect size measure [ Hoehn , 2006; Woodward and Wui , 2001].”
How reliable are meta-analyses for international benefit transfers? (2008, unknown): “, 2006) and other choices the meta-analyst needs to make (Hoehn, 2006)(3).”
The Use (and Abuse) of Meta-Analysis in Environmental and Natural Resource Economics: An Assessment (2009, unknown): “This area has developed its own specialized set of analytical techniques; see Florax (2002b), Hoehn (2006) , Roberts and Stanley (2005), Rosenberger and Stanley (2007), Rothstein et al. (2005), Stanley (2005, 2008), and Sutton et al. (2000).”
Assessing benefit transfer for the valuation of ecosystem services (2009, background): “…can be estimated with a meta-analysis of the study results, in which case characteristics that are constant with respect to any one study, but vary across the studies, can be incorporated into the function (Smith and Pattanayak 2002; Shrestha and Loomis 2003; Bergstrom and Taylor 2006; Hoehn 2006).”
METHODS, TRENDS AND CONTROVERSIES IN CONTEMPORARY BENEFIT TRANSFER (2009, unknown): “Research priority selection may be driven by sociopolitical circumstances such as the societal awareness and perceived importance of a particular resource, or the extent to which agencies are willing and able to fund research in a particular area (Hoehn, 2006; Rosenberger and Johnston, 2009).”
Using Meta-Analysis and GIS for Value Transfer and Scaling Up: Valuing Climate Change Induced Losses of European Wetlands (2012, background): “This assumption may be questioned if the set of study sites are unrepresentative of the set of policy sites in terms of service provision, for example in the case of research priority selection bias (Hoehn 2006).”
A Global Map of Coastal Recreation Values: Results from a Spatially Explicit Meta-Analysis (2011, unknown): “The rationale here is to test whether the effect size measure is correlated with the publication status, thus providing empirical support for the existence of a publication bias in the valuation literature (Hoehn 2006; Woodward & Wui 2001).”