Coastal SEES Collaborative Research: Non-Market Value Meta-Data on Willingness to Pay for Coastal Marsh Habitat Change
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
These data represent a meta-dataset of observations on per household economic value - represented by per household willingness-to-pay (WTP) - for improvements in coastal marsh habitat, drawn from stated-preference studies in the research literature. The metadata allow estimation of benefit transfer functions via meta-regression modeling. Within these econometric functions, the dependent variable is a comparable estimate of economic value (e.g., WTP) drawn from extant primary valuation studies. Independent variables represent observable factors hypothesized to explain variation in this value measure across observations. These functions can be used to produce out-of-sample predictions of WTP for coastal marsh habitat improvements at sites for which no primary valuation studies have been conducted. They can also be used to understand the factors associated with systematic variations in marsh habitat values across different sites and studies. These data are described in Vedogbeton, H. and R.J. Johnston. 2020. Commodity Consistent Meta-Analysis of Wetland Values: An Illustration for Coastal Marsh Habitat. Environmental and Resource Economics 75(4), 835-865, and allow replication of the results presented therein. The metadata are extracted from primary studies that estimate total (use and nonuse) per household WTP for changes in the quantity or quality of coastal marsh wildlife habitats or their services, in US and Canada. These studies were identified via a systematic review of the literature. The metadata combine information provided by these primary non-market valuation studies with publicly available external data extracted from sources such as the US Census, US National Historical GIS (https://www.nhgis.org/), and US Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory (https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html). Studies included in the metadata are restricted to those that estimate total per household WTP for coastal wetland habitat changes using generally accepted stated preference methods, report theoretically comparable and quantifiable measures of economic value, and provide sufficient information to enable inclusion in the metadata. The data are further restricted to observations from studies conducted in the US or Canada, and published between 1990 and 2016, inclusive. The resulting metadata include 141 total observations of WTP per household from 23 studies published from 1990 to 2016, with all values adjusted to 2016 USD. These 141 habitat-value observations are identified by the variable changsize = 0 within the data. Because the meta-analysis is restricted to WTP in the positive domain, two negative-WTP observations were subsequently dropped, leading to the 139 habitat-value observations reported in Vedogbeton and Johnston (2020). An additional 18 metadata observations are drawn from similar primary stated preference studies that estimate total WTP for changes in coastal marsh area (or size), where these area increases provide habitat combined with other wetland services such as flood control, water filtration, aesthetics, recreation, and habitat. These additional observations are used for the habitat-and-area value models in the paper, and are identified by the variable changsize = 1 within the data. The combined data include 159 total observations (141 habitat-value and 18 habitat-and-area value observations). The metadata compile variables characterizing (1) the scope [magnitude] of the valued habitat change and the spatial scale of the wetland area affected by the change, (2) the type of habitat, marsh and uses affected, (3) regions sampled by the primary study, and (4) original study methodology used to measure the value(s), sample size from these studies, and year. The categorical variable "code" identifies how each of these observations are used within the data analysis of Vedogbeton and Johnston (2020). The attached pdf file, "Stata Code_Marsh Meta", provides illustrative Stata (v16) code used to generate some of the primary model results in this article, using the data. Note that some variable labels in the Stata code differ slightly from those used in the published paper. This project was supported by National Science Foundation grant 1427105.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,028 | 0,223 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,005 | 0,014 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,014 | 0,019 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,027 | 0,004 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».