Feature—Is a Replicability Crisis on the Horizon for Environmental and Resource Economics?

Paul Ferraro and Pallavi Shukla

Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 2020, vol. 14, issue 2, 339 - 351

Abstract: Environmental and resource economists pride themselves on the credibility of their empirical research. In other disciplines, however, the credibility of empirical research is increasingly being debated by scholars. At the core of these debates are critiques of widespread practices, such as selectively reporting results or using designs with low statistical power, and critiques of the professional incentives that encourage these practices. These critiques have led to claims of a “replicability crisis” in science. We show that questionable research practices are also prevalent in the environmental and resource economics literature. We argue that the discipline needs to take the potential harm from these practices more seriously. To mitigate this harm, we recommend changes in the norms and practices of funders, editors, peer reviewers, and authors. (JEL: Q0, C0)

Date: 2020
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (19)

Downloads: (external link)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/reep/reaa011 (application/pdf)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/reep/reaa011 (text/html)
Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ucp:renvpo:doi:10.1093/reep/reaa011

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Review of Environmental Economics and Policy from University of Chicago Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Journals Division ().