| By: |
Florent Bédécarrats (IRD, UMI SOURCE);
Isabelle Guérin (IRD, CESSMA (Paris, France), IFP (Pondicherry, India));
François Roubaud (DIAL-LEDa, IRD, Université Paris-Dauphine, PSL Université);
Mireille Razafindrakoto (DIAL-LEDa, IRD, Université Paris-Dauphine, PSL Université) |
| Abstract: |
For around twenty years, Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) have been
considered the gold standard of causal attribution and have gradually acquired
a dominant position in the method of administering proof in the field of
development. This domination, supported by a powerful pro-RCT movement, was
crowned by the obtention of various positions of power and the awarding of
numerous distinctions, including the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2019 to three
of its tutelary figures, praised for their contribution to the fight against
poverty. Since then, the Covid-19 pandemic hit the world as the biggest global
poverty shock in decades. This article questions the role played by RCTs in
the policies implemented to fight the health crisis. The 1st section examines
the contribution of RCTs to health policies. The 2nd focuses on what
randomists did during the period, and pays particular attention to the growing
importance of nudges. The 3rd concerns the contribution of RCTs to meeting the
development challenges recognized as priorities by the United Nations and the
scientific community during and following the pandemic. The 4th offers
elements of explanation for the growing hiatus between the accentuation of the
domination of RCTs and their marginal contribution to mitigate the pandemic
effects, shown by the previous sections, in particular by developing the
concept of “scientific populism”. To our knowledge, this paper constitutes the
first critical synthesis of RCTs and related issues in times of Covid-19 and
beyond. |
| Keywords: |
Covid-19, Development; Experimental method, Impact evaluation; Political economy; Poverty; Randomised control trials; SDG; Scientific populism; Développement; Economie politique; Evaluation d’impact; Méthode expérimentale; ODD; Nudge; Pauvreté; Populisme scientifique |
| JEL: |
A11 B41 C18 C93 D72 O10 |
| Date: |
2024–03 |
| URL: |
http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:dia:wpaper:dt202404&r=sog |