Comparative Environmental Economic Assessment
Show Less

Comparative Environmental Economic Assessment

Edited by Raymond J.G.M. Florax, Peter Nijkamp and Kenneth G. Willis

Over the last decade, economists have increasingly recognized the role of meta-analysis and value transfer in synthesizing knowledge and efficiently exploiting the existing pool of knowledge. Comparative Environmental Economic Assessment explores the potential significance of using these techniques, particularly in environmental economics. Both meta-analysis and value transfer constitute major research tools which efficiently use knowledge previously acquired from other studies. The book focuses on the potential role and usefulness of these tools in environmental economic research, and goes on to address their validity, relevance and applicability
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 10: Methodological pitfalls in meta-analysis: publication bias

Raymond J.G.M. Florax

Extract

10. Methodological pitfalls in metaanalysis: publication bias Raymond J.G.M. Florax* 1 INTRODUCTION An important characteristic of modern science is the enormous production of researchers. There is a growing stream of scientific output in the form of patents, publications and knowledge-based consultancy to industry and the public sector. In this chapter we will be concerned with publications, which should in the current context be understood as a rather broad concept. The term ‘publication’ refers to traditional journal articles (provided as hard copy or digitally online), monographs and edited volumes, but also to outlets that are more difficult of access, such as theses and dissertations, research memoranda, working papers and mimeos of conference papers. Following what is already standard practice in medicine, education, marketing and psychology, economists now increasingly use meta-analysis as a tool to synthesize and summarize the insights prevailing in the literature (van den Bergh et al., 1997). The critical feature distinguishing meta-analysis from other types of summarizing techniques, such as state-of-the-art reviews and expert assessments (see Button, Chapter 5 of the present volume), is its statistical nature. Meta-analysis is concerned with the statistical analysis of research results of studies performed previously, and should thus be distinguished from primary and secondary analysis (Glass, 1976). Hunter and Schmidt (1990) succinctly define meta-analysis as the ‘analysis of analyses’. Although literature reviews are valuable in their own right, an important drawback is that they are usually implicitly based on vote counting (Light and Smith, 1971). Vote counting essentially boils down...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.


Further information

or login to access all content.