Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Meta-analysis: Rationale, Issues and Applications

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Benefit Transfer of Environmental and Resource Values

Part of the book series: The Economics of Non-Market Goods and Resources ((ENGO,volume 14))

Abstract

This chapter reviews the key reasons for using meta-analysis for benefit transfer and provides an illustrative case study application. The case study involves a meta-analysis of values for improved river health in Australia from 2000 to 2009. To minimize potential problems of commensurability and methodology, we restrict the analysis to consider only values drawn from choice experiments . Different measures and scales of river health across studies were reconciled by transforming implicit prices into a comparable standard of willingness to pay (WTP) per kilometer of river in good health. Ordinary least squares and random effects meta-regression models were used to identify systematic relationships between the dependent variable (WTP/km) and explanatory variables characterizing sites, populations, affected resources, and primary study methodology. The case study illustrates both advantages and challenges involved in the application of meta-analysis to benefit transfer.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The data sourced for the MA have been described in more detail in Rolfe and Brouwer (2013).

  2. 2.

    Many studies included this information as part of the framing to survey respondents. Where the information was not included in studies, the data was sourced from Norris et al. (2001).

  3. 3.

    This result has to be treated with caution, as this was a characteristic of only one study (Morrison and Bennett 2004), and may be driven by other study characteristics.

References

  • Barrio, M., & Loureiro, M. (2010). A meta-analysis of contingent valuation forest studies. Ecological Economics, 69, 1023–1030.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bateman, I. J., & Jones, A. P. (2003). Contrasting conventional with multi-level modelling approaches to meta-analysis: Expectation consistency in UK woodland recreation values. Land Economics, 79, 239–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bateman, I. J., Brouwer, R., Ferrini, S., Schaafsma, M., Barton, D. N., Dubgaard, A., et al. (2011). Making benefit transfers work: Deriving and testing principles for value transfers for similar and dissimilar sites using a case study of the non-market benefits of water quality improvements across Europe. Environmental and Resource Economics, 50, 365–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, J., Dumsday, R. & Gillespie, R. (2008a). Analysing options for the Red Gum forests along the Murray River. Paper presented at the 52nd Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, Canberra, February.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, J., Dumsday, R., Howell, G., Lloyd, C., Sturgess, N., & Van Raalte, L. (2008b). The economic value of improved environmental health in Victorian Rivers. Australasian Journal of Environmental Management, 15, 138–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergstrom, J. C., & Taylor, L. O. (2006). Using meta-analysis for benefits transfer: Theory and practice. Ecological Economics, 60, 351–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyle, K., & Bergstrom, J. (1992). Benefit transfer studies: Myths, pragmatism and idealism. Water Resources Research, 28, 657–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brander, L. M., Florax, R. J. G. M., & Vermaat, J. (2006). The empirics of wetland valuation: A comprehensive summary and a meta-analysis of the literature. Environmental and Resource Economics, 33, 223–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brander, L. M., Van Beukering, P., & Cesar, H. S. J. (2007). The recreational value of coral reefs: A meta-analysis. Ecological Economics, 63, 209–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brouwer, R. (2000). Environmental value transfer: State of the art and future prospects. Ecological Economics, 32, 137–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brouwer, R., Langford, I. H., Bateman, I. J., & Turner, R. K. (1999). A meta-analysis of wetland contingent valuation studies. Regional Environmental Change, 1, 47–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, P. (2003). Topics in meta-analysis: A literature survey. Oslo: Institute of Transport Economics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colombo, S., Calatrava-Requena, J., & Hanley, N. (2007). Testing choice experiment for benefit transfer with preference heterogeneity. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 89, 135–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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. Environmental and Resource Economics, 49, 597–624.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glass, G. V. (1976). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher, 5, 3–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatton MacDonald, D., & Morrison, M. (2010). Untangling differences in values from internet and mail stated preference studies. Paper presented at the 4th World Congress on Environmental Economics, Montreal, Canada, June 28–July 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, R. J., & Moeltner, K. (2014). Meta-modeling and benefit transfer: The empirical relevance of source-consistency in welfare measures. Environmental and Resource Economics, 59, 337–361. doi:10.1007/s10640-013-9730-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, R. J., & Rosenberger, R. S. (2010). Methods, trends and controversies in contemporary benefit transfer. Journal of Economic Surveys, 24, 479–510.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, R. J., & Thomassin, P. J. (2010). Willingness to pay for water quality improvements in the United States and Canada: Considering possibilities for international meta-analysis and benefit transfer. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, 39, 114–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, R. J., Besedin, E. Y., & Wardwell, R. F. (2003). Modeling relationships between use and nonuse values for surface water quality: A meta-analysis. Water Resources Research, 39, 1363–1372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, R. J., Besedin, E. Y., Iovanna, R., Miller, C., Wardwell, R., & Ranson, M. (2005). Systematic variation in willingness to pay for aquatic resource improvements and implications for benefit transfer: A meta-analysis. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 53, 221–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, R. J., Besedin, E., & Ranson, M. H. (2006). Characterising the effects of valuation methodology in function-based benefits transfer. Ecological Economics, 60, 407–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaul, S., Boyle, K. J., Kuminoff, N., Parmeter, C. F., & Pope, J. C. (2013). What can we learn from benefit transfer errors? Evidence from 20 years of research on convergent validity. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 66, 90–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kragt, M. & Bennett, J.W. (2009a). Using choice experiments to value river and estuary health in Tasmania with individual preference heterogeneity. Paper presented at 53rd Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society Conference, Cairns.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kragt, M. & Bennett, J.W. (2009b). Using choice experiments to value river and estuary health in Tasmania with individual preference heterogeneity. Canberra: Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Report 16, Australian National University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kragt, M. & Bennett, J.W. (2010). The impacts of attribute level framing and changing cost levels on choice experiments value estimates. Paper presented at the 54th Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society Conference, Adelaide.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kragt, M., Bennett, J., Lloyd, C., & Dumsday, R. (2007). Comparing choice models of river health improvement for the Goulburn River. Paper presented at the 51st Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Conference, 13–16 February, Queenstown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindhjem, H., & Navrud, S. (2008). How reliable are meta-analyses for international benefit transfers? Ecological Economics, 66, 425–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Londoño, L. M., & Johnston, R. J. (2012). Enhancing the reliability of benefit transfer over heterogeneous sites: A meta-analysis of international coral reef values. Ecological Economics, 78, 80–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loomis, J., & Rosenberger, R. (2006). Reducing barriers in future benefit transfers: Needed improvements in primary study design and reporting. Ecological Economics, 60, 343–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazur, K.M. (2011). Choice modelling in the development of natural resource management strategies in NSW catchments. Ph.D thesis, Canberra: Australian National University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazur, K. & Bennett, J.W. (2009). Location differences in communities’ preferences for environmental improvements in selected NSW catchments: A choice modelling approach. Paper presented at 53rd Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society Conference, Cairns, 10–13 February.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazur, K. & Bennett, J.W. (2010). Framing for incentive compatibility in choice modelling. Paper presented at 54th Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society Conference, Adelaide, 9–12 February.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moeltner, K., Boyle, K., & Paterson, R. W. (2007). Meta-analysis and benefit transfer for resource valuation-addressing classical challenges with Bayesian modelling. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 53, 250–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, M., & Bennett, J. (2004). Valuing New South Wales rivers for use in benefits transfer. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 48, 591–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, M., & Bennett, J. (2006). Valuing New South Wales rivers for use in benefits transfer. In J. Rolfe & J. Bennett (Eds.), Choice modelling and the transfer of environmental values. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, J. P., & Kennedy, P. E. (2009). The use (and abuse) of meta-analysis in environmental and resource economics: An assessment. Environmental and Resource Economics, 29, 323–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norris, R. H., Young, B., Liston, P., Bauer, N., Davies, N., Dyer, F., et al. (2001). The assessment of river condition: An audit of the ecological condition of Australian Rivers. Canberra: National Land and Water Resources Audit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rolfe, J. (2006). Theoretical issues in using choice modelling data for benefit transfer. In J. Rolfe & J. Bennett (Eds.), Choice modelling and the transfer of environmental values (pp. 28–53). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rolfe, J., & Bennett, J. (2009). The impact of offering two versus three alternatives in choice modelling experiments. Ecological Economics, 68, 1140–1148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rolfe, J., & Brouwer, R. (2013). Design effects in a meta-analysis of river health choice experiments in Australia. Journal of Choice Modelling, 5, 81–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rolfe, J., & Windle, J. (2003). Valuing the protection of aboriginal cultural heritage sites. The Economic Record, 79, s85–s95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rolfe, J., Loch, A., & Bennett, J. (2002). Tests of benefits transfer across sites and population in the Fitzroy Basin. In Valuing floodplain development in the Fitzroy Basin Research Report No. 4. Rockhampton: Central Queensland University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberger, R. S., & Loomis, J. (2000). Using meta-analysis for benefit transfer: In-sample convergent validity tests for an outdoor recreation database. Water Resources Research, 36, 1097–1107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberger, R. S., & Stanley, T. D. (2006). Measurement, generalization and publication: Sources of error in benefit transfers and their management. Ecological Economics, 60, 372–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shrestha, R., Rosenberger, R., & Loomis, J. (2007). Benefit transfer using meta-analysis in recreation economic valuation. In S. Navrud & R. Ready (Eds.), Environmental value transfer: Issues and methods (pp. 161–177). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, V. K., & Osbourne, L. (1996). Do contingent valuation estimates pass the scope test? A meta-analysis. Economics Letters, 32, 67–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, V. K., & Pattanayak, S. K. (2002). Is meta-analysis a Noah’s Ark for non-market valuation? Environmental and Resource Economics, 22, 271–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stapler, R. W., & Johnston, R. J. (2009). Meta-analysis, benefit transfer, and methodological covariates: Implications for transfer error. Environmental and Resource Economics, 42, 227–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanley, T. D., Doucouliagos, H., Giles, M., Heckemeyer, J. H., Johnston, R. J., Laroche, P., et al. (2013). Meta-analysis of economics reporting guidelines. Journal of Economic Surveys, 27, 390–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swait, J., & Louviere, J. J. (1993). The role of the scale parameter in the estimation and comparison of multinomial logit models. Journal of Marketing Research, 30, 305–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Bueren, M., & Bennett, J. (2004). Towards the development of a transferable set of value estimates for environmental attributes. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 48, 1–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Houtven, G., Powers, J., & Pattanayak, S. K. (2007). Valuing water quality improvements in the United States using meta-analysis: Is the glass half-full or half-empty for national policy analysis? Resource and Energy Economics, 29, 206–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windle, J., & Rolfe, J. (2004). Assessing values for estuary protection with choice modelling using different payment mechanisms, in Valuing floodplain development in the Fitzroy basin, Research Report No. 10. Rockhanpton: Central Queensland University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Windle, J., & Rolfe, J. (2006). Non market values for improved NRM outcomes in Queensland. Research Report No. 2 in the non-market valuation component of AGSIP Project #13. Rockhampton: Central Queensland University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodward, R. T., & Wui, Y.-S. (2001). The economic value of wetland services: A meta-analysis. Ecological Economics, 37, 257–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zandersen, M., & Tol, R. (2009). A meta-analysis of forest recreation values in Europe. Journal of Forest Economics, 15, 109–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Thanks go to Jeff Bennett, Russell Blamey, Mark Morrison and Jill Windle for helping to provide relevant data for the meta-analysis. The time for Roy Brouwer to assemble the data was funded by the CSIRO National Research Flagship Water for a Healthy Country.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Business and Law, CQUniversity, Rockhampton, QLD, Australia

    John Rolfe

  2. Department of Environmental Economics, Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Roy Brouwer

  3. Department of Economics and George Perkins Marsh Institute, Clark University, Worcester, USA

    Robert J. Johnston

Authors
  1. John Rolfe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Roy Brouwer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Robert J. Johnston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John Rolfe .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics and George Perkins Marsh Institute, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA

    Robert J. Johnston

  2. School of Business and Law, CQUniversity, Rockhampton, Queensland, Australia

    John Rolfe

  3. Dept. of Forest Ecosystems & Society, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA

    Randall S. Rosenberger

  4. Department of Environmental Economics, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Roy Brouwer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rolfe, J., Brouwer, R., Johnston, R.J. (2015). Meta-analysis: Rationale, Issues and Applications. In: Johnston, R., Rolfe, J., Rosenberger, R., Brouwer, R. (eds) Benefit Transfer of Environmental and Resource Values. The Economics of Non-Market Goods and Resources, vol 14. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9930-0_16

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation