Abstract

Disputes over conflicting information from different studies play a prominent role in many environmental controversies. Rather than resulting from flawed or fraudulent science, we suggest that conflicting findings may often result from the complex nature of environmental systems and the limitations of our analytical tools. Using heuristic simulation examples, we show how environmental heterogeneity and limitations in our ability to measure and model environmental systems can give rise to conflicting inferences even for very simple systems. Although analytical tools are improving, individual studies will remain limited in their ability to describe complex environmental systems. We suggest that, instead of being a curse, multiple studies with conflicting findings often provide an opportunity to expand and refine our understanding of complex environmental systems. Using hierarchical Bayesian techniques, we show how pooling multiple studies can enable us to generate a broader, richer, and more accurate unders...

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.