IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v144y2024ics0264837724001893.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A note on the discussion regarding terrorism and land use in agriculture

Author

Listed:
  • Mußhoff, Oliver
  • Ölkers, Tim
  • Kirchner, Ella

Abstract

Ideally, scientific results are communicated such that they can be critically assessed, discussed, and used for future research by the scientific community. Replication studies that test and also verify earlier results ensure trust in the scientific work and discussion culture. In this note, we illustrate main challenges in replication studies using the example of a recently published replication attempt of a paper entitled ’Terrorism and land use in agriculture: The case of Boko Haram in Nigeria’ on the effects of armed conflict on agricultural land use and the corresponding reaction of the authors of the initial research paper. We argue that a comprehensive, transparent description of the data and methods used is just as crucial as the opportunity to objectively, constructively, and fairly discuss criticism during the replication process. From this series of articles, we further derive lessons for replication debates in general by highlighting challenges and possible ways of dealing with strained relations between authors and replicators. Rethinking solutions to ensure supportive collaborations is crucial in shaping the future discourse surrounding replication debates.

Suggested Citation

  • Mußhoff, Oliver & Ölkers, Tim & Kirchner, Ella, 2024. "A note on the discussion regarding terrorism and land use in agriculture," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:144:y:2024:i:c:s0264837724001893
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2024.107236
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837724001893
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2024.107236?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Replication; Repeatability; Reproducibility; Transparency; Validity;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q00 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General - - - General
    • C00 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:144:y:2024:i:c:s0264837724001893. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.