Correction to: Commodity Consistent Meta-Analysis of Wetland Values: An Illustration for Coastal Marsh Habitat
- PDF / 402,138 Bytes
- 10 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 48 Downloads / 160 Views
Correction to: Commodity Consistent Meta‑Analysis of Wetland Values: An Illustration for Coastal Marsh Habitat Hermine Vedogbeton1 · Robert J. Johnston1,2
© Springer Nature B.V. 2020
Correction to: Environmental and Resource Economics (2020) 75:835–865 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-020-00409-0 In the original article, the code used to estimate the meta-regression models (of WTP for coastal marsh habitat changes) erroneously included the natural log of nominal rather than real income as an independent variable. The models should have included income with all values standardized to 2016 USD. Instead, the code included the natural log of nominal income prior to adjustment into constant 2016 USD. This error had only a minor effect on results presented in the original article. Not surprisingly, the primary effect was a change in the parameter estimate on the time-trend variable, yearindex, which was also included in the model. That is, because the difference between nominal and real income has a time trend, the effect of this error was largely captured by the parameter on the time-trend variable. Statistical significance levels and/or relative magnitudes change for a few parameters in the alternative, less commodity consistent “habitat and area” meta-regression model (e.g., riparian_marsh, habitat_fish, habitat_multiple, dichotomous). Where these changes occur, estimated significance levels typically improve (p-values decrease). These changes are not material to the primary hypotheses considered by the article. Correcting the error leads to slight improvements in model fit and benefit transfer accuracy. None of the key conclusions of the article change. Results of the corrected data and analysis are provided in Tables 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 (corrected). These correspond to Tables 1–6 in the original article. We have updated the summary statistics in Tables 1 and 2 to reflect only the observations included in the unrestricted meta-regression models (N = 133 and 151). With these updates, there is
The original article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-020-00409-0. * Robert J. Johnston [email protected] Hermine Vedogbeton [email protected] 1
Department of Economics, Clark University, Worcester, MA 01610, USA
2
George Perkins Marsh Institute, Clark University, 950 Main St, Worcester, MA 01610, USA
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
13
RI
LA
Bauer et al. (2004)
Bergstrom et al. (1990)
Salt or estuarine marsh
Coastal marsh type(s)
Combined salt marsh and freshwater complex Eastern Research Group (2016) NJ Salt or estuarine marsh Hanemann et al. (1991) CA Combined salt marsh and freshwater complex He et al. (2017) Canada Riparian or forested wetland Hoehn and Loomis (1993) CA Combined salt marsh and freshwater complex Hwang et al. (2014) LA Coastal marsh and other habitat Interis and Petrolia (2014) LA Coastal marsh and other habitat Interis and Petrolia (2016) LA/AL Salt or estuarine marsh/other coastal wetlands Johnston and Abdulrahman (2017) CT Salt or estuarine marsh Johnston et al
Data Loading...
