 Are You Estimating the Right Thing? An Editor ReflectsApplied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 2019, vol. 41, issue 3, 329-350 Abstract: A key aspect of applied economics over the last decade has been the status accorded to research designs that may credibly identify causal effects. Without such designs, one may not estimate the right thing and publishing options may be limited. Yet situations where reported results are not for parameters that researchers think they have identified are potentially more widespread than what is usually considered in discussion of research designs or identification strategies. I give five examples of applied practice where what is estimated may not identify what is wanted. Each practice came up in submissions I handled as co-editor of an agricultural economics journal, and these issues seem common in applied work. A narrow focus on identification strategies may lead to the neglect of these examples, and of other productive ways to improve the credibility and usefulness of applied economics research. Keywords: Applied economics; demand; design effects; identification strategies; measurement error; publishing; research designs (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:apecpp:v:41:y:2019:i:3:p:329-350. Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from Access Statistics for this article Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy is currently edited by Timothy Park, Tomislav Vukina and Ian Sheldon More articles in Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy from Agricultural and Applied Economics Association Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK. Contact information at EDIRC. |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.