Reconciling climate-conflict meta-analyses: reply to Buhaug et al.
- Solomon Hsiang, Goldman School of Public Policy, University of California, Berkeley
- Edward Miguel, University of California, Berkeley
- Marshall Burke, Stanford University
- Goldman School of Public Policy Working Paper (July 2014)
A comment by Buhaug et al. attributes disagreement between our recent analyses and their review articles to biased decisions in our meta-analysis and a difference of opinion regarding statistical approaches. The claim is false. Buhaug et al.’s alteration of our metaanalysis misrepresents findings in the literature, makes statistical errors, misclassifies multiple studies, makes coding errors, and suppresses the display of results that are consistent with our original analysis. We correct these mistakes and obtain findings in line with our original results, even when we use the study selection criteria proposed by Buhaug et al. We conclude that there is no evidence in the data supporting the claims raised in Buhaug et al.
Download a PDF (265KB)
Last updated on 02/05/2015