4.5 Review

Quasi-experimental methods enable stronger inferences from observational data in ecology

Journal

BASIC AND APPLIED ECOLOGY
Volume 19, Issue -, Pages 1-10

Publisher

ELSEVIER GMBH
DOI: 10.1016/j.baae.2017.01.005

Keywords

Observational data; Natural experiments; Econometrics; Matching; Difference-in-differences; Regression discontinuity design; Instrumental variables

Categories

Funding

  1. Alexander von Humboldt Foundation
  2. Einstein Foundation Berlin, Germany
  3. National Science Foundation Coupled Natural Human Systems program [BCS-0814424]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Many systems and processes in ecology cannot be experimentally controlled, either because the temporal and spatial scales are too broad, or because it would be unethical. Examples include large wildfires, alternative conservation strategies, removal of top predators, or the introduction of invasive species. Unfortunately, many of these phenomena also do not occur randomly in time or space, and this can lead to different biases (selection bias, unobserved variable bias) in statistical analyses. Economics has evolved largely without experiments, and developed statistical approaches to study quasi-experiments, i.e., situations were changes in time or space reveal relationships even in the absence of a controlled experiment. The goal of our paper was to compare and evaluate four quasi-experimental statistical approaches commonly used in economics, (1) matching, (2) regression discontinuity design, (3) difference-in-differences models, and (4) instrumental variables, in terms of their relevance for ecological research. We contrast the strengths and weaknesses of each approach and provide a detailed tutorial to demonstrate these approaches. We suggest that quasi-experimental methods offer great potential for investigating many phenomena and processes in ecological and coupled human-natural systems. Furthermore, quasi-experimental methods are common in environmental policy research and policy recommendations by ecologists may be more valuable when based on these methods. (C) 2017 Gesellschaft fur Okologie. Published by Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available