利益相关者参与农业政策制定经济实验设计的观点:赞成、反对和对研究人员的十二项建议

IF 3.3 2区 经济学 Q2 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy Pub Date : 2023-05-25 DOI:10.1002/aepp.13385
Julia Höhler, Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé, Mikołaj Czajkowski, François J. Dessart, Paul J. Ferraro, Tongzhe Li, Kent D. Messer, Leah Palm-Forster, Mette Termansen, Fabian Thomas, Katarzyna Zagórska, Kahsay Haile Zemo, Jens Rommel
{"title":"利益相关者参与农业政策制定经济实验设计的观点:赞成、反对和对研究人员的十二项建议","authors":"Julia Höhler,&nbsp;Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé,&nbsp;Mikołaj Czajkowski,&nbsp;François J. Dessart,&nbsp;Paul J. Ferraro,&nbsp;Tongzhe Li,&nbsp;Kent D. Messer,&nbsp;Leah Palm-Forster,&nbsp;Mette Termansen,&nbsp;Fabian Thomas,&nbsp;Katarzyna Zagórska,&nbsp;Kahsay Haile Zemo,&nbsp;Jens Rommel","doi":"10.1002/aepp.13385","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Economic experiments have emerged as a powerful tool for agricultural policy evaluations. In this perspective, we argue that involving stakeholders in the design of economic experiments is critical to satisfy mandates for evidence-based policies and encourage policymakers' usage of experimental results. To identify advantages and disadvantages of involving stakeholders when designing experiments, we synthesize observations from six experiments in Europe and North America. In these experiments, the primary advantage was the ability to learn within realistic decision environments and thus make relevant policy recommendations. Disadvantages include complicated implementation and constraints on treatment design. We compile 12 recommendations for researchers.</p>","PeriodicalId":8004,"journal":{"name":"Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/aepp.13385","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perspectives on stakeholder participation in the design of economic experiments for agricultural policymaking: Pros, cons, and twelve recommendations for researchers\",\"authors\":\"Julia Höhler,&nbsp;Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé,&nbsp;Mikołaj Czajkowski,&nbsp;François J. Dessart,&nbsp;Paul J. Ferraro,&nbsp;Tongzhe Li,&nbsp;Kent D. Messer,&nbsp;Leah Palm-Forster,&nbsp;Mette Termansen,&nbsp;Fabian Thomas,&nbsp;Katarzyna Zagórska,&nbsp;Kahsay Haile Zemo,&nbsp;Jens Rommel\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/aepp.13385\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Economic experiments have emerged as a powerful tool for agricultural policy evaluations. In this perspective, we argue that involving stakeholders in the design of economic experiments is critical to satisfy mandates for evidence-based policies and encourage policymakers' usage of experimental results. To identify advantages and disadvantages of involving stakeholders when designing experiments, we synthesize observations from six experiments in Europe and North America. In these experiments, the primary advantage was the ability to learn within realistic decision environments and thus make relevant policy recommendations. Disadvantages include complicated implementation and constraints on treatment design. We compile 12 recommendations for researchers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8004,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/aepp.13385\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aepp.13385\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aepp.13385","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

经济实验已成为农业政策评估的有力工具。从这个角度来看,我们认为让利益相关者参与经济实验的设计对于满足循证政策的要求和鼓励决策者使用实验结果至关重要。为了明确让利益相关者参与实验设计的利弊,我们综合了欧洲和北美六项实验的观察结果。在这些实验中,主要优点是能够在现实的决策环境中学习,从而提出相关的政策建议。缺点是实施复杂,处理设计受限。我们为研究人员汇编了 12 条建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Perspectives on stakeholder participation in the design of economic experiments for agricultural policymaking: Pros, cons, and twelve recommendations for researchers

Economic experiments have emerged as a powerful tool for agricultural policy evaluations. In this perspective, we argue that involving stakeholders in the design of economic experiments is critical to satisfy mandates for evidence-based policies and encourage policymakers' usage of experimental results. To identify advantages and disadvantages of involving stakeholders when designing experiments, we synthesize observations from six experiments in Europe and North America. In these experiments, the primary advantage was the ability to learn within realistic decision environments and thus make relevant policy recommendations. Disadvantages include complicated implementation and constraints on treatment design. We compile 12 recommendations for researchers.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy
Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY-
CiteScore
10.70
自引率
6.90%
发文量
117
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy provides a forum to address contemporary and emerging policy issues within an economic framework that informs the decision-making and policy-making community. AEPP welcomes submissions related to the economics of public policy themes associated with agriculture; animal, plant, and human health; energy; environment; food and consumer behavior; international development; natural hazards; natural resources; population and migration; and regional and rural development.
期刊最新文献
A machine learning‐based exploration of resilience and food security Environmental policy behavioral spillovers: The impact of California's single‐use carryout bag ban on the use of unregulated single‐use plastics Global economic effects of war‐induced agricultural export declines from Ukraine Comparing the great recession and COVID‐19 using Long Short‐Term Memory: A close look into agricultural commodity prices The EU target for organic farming: Potential economic and environmental impacts of two alternative pathways
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1