Loading…
Randomized control trial as social observatory: A case study
Critics of randomized control trials (RCTs) in development economics argue that this methodology lends itself to ‘smaller’ questions with limited relevance to policy or economics. Using the seminal work of Miguel and Kremer (2004) on a school-based deworming intervention in Kenya as a case study, we...
Saved in:
Published in: | World development 2020-03, Vol.127, p.104787, Article 104787 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-e0dc406620ccf36782beba621de33bb35d9fd2d2f94e4466606594c0c82e6ec93 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-e0dc406620ccf36782beba621de33bb35d9fd2d2f94e4466606594c0c82e6ec93 |
container_end_page | |
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 104787 |
container_title | World development |
container_volume | 127 |
creator | Baird, Sarah Hamory Hicks, Joan Ozier, Owen |
description | Critics of randomized control trials (RCTs) in development economics argue that this methodology lends itself to ‘smaller’ questions with limited relevance to policy or economics. Using the seminal work of Miguel and Kremer (2004) on a school-based deworming intervention in Kenya as a case study, we argue that RCTs can spearhead policy change, serve as a laboratory to test economic theories and develop cutting-edge empirical methods, or do both. This does not happen in a vacuum, but through thoughtful design embedded in a broader research and policy agenda. Here, we describe a family of studies built on Miguel and Kremer (2004), shedding light on factors that supported the generation of evidence and insights far beyond the near-term RCT result. As in any piece of social sciences research, this descriptive evidence may not be externally valid in all settings. We nevertheless hope the lessons it offers will inspire others to examine these possibilities in their own research. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104787 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2376207346</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0305750X1930436X</els_id><sourcerecordid>2376207346</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-e0dc406620ccf36782beba621de33bb35d9fd2d2f94e4466606594c0c82e6ec93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkE9LxDAQxYMouK5-BSl47jpJ2qQRDy6L_2BBEAVvIU2m0NJt1qRbWT-9XapnTzMM773h_Qi5pLCgQMV1s_jyoXUOhwUDqsZjJgt5RGa0kDzNlaLHZAYc8lTm8HFKzmJsACDnSs7I7avpnN_U3-gS67s--DbpQ23axMQkenvYfBkxDKb3YX-TLBNrIiax37n9OTmpTBvx4nfOyfvD_dvqKV2_PD6vluvUcsn7FMHZDIRgYG3FhSxYiaURjDrkvCx57lTlmGOVyjDLhBAgcpVZsAVDgVbxObmacrfBf-4w9rrxu9CNLzXjcsyVPBOjSkwqG3yMASu9DfXGhL2moA-kdKP_SOkDKT2RGo13kxHHDkONQUdbY2fR1QFtr52v_4v4ARGzdRg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2376207346</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Randomized control trial as social observatory: A case study</title><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>ScienceDirect Freedom Collection</source><source>PAIS Index</source><creator>Baird, Sarah ; Hamory Hicks, Joan ; Ozier, Owen</creator><creatorcontrib>Baird, Sarah ; Hamory Hicks, Joan ; Ozier, Owen</creatorcontrib><description>Critics of randomized control trials (RCTs) in development economics argue that this methodology lends itself to ‘smaller’ questions with limited relevance to policy or economics. Using the seminal work of Miguel and Kremer (2004) on a school-based deworming intervention in Kenya as a case study, we argue that RCTs can spearhead policy change, serve as a laboratory to test economic theories and develop cutting-edge empirical methods, or do both. This does not happen in a vacuum, but through thoughtful design embedded in a broader research and policy agenda. Here, we describe a family of studies built on Miguel and Kremer (2004), shedding light on factors that supported the generation of evidence and insights far beyond the near-term RCT result. As in any piece of social sciences research, this descriptive evidence may not be externally valid in all settings. We nevertheless hope the lessons it offers will inspire others to examine these possibilities in their own research.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0305-750X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-5991</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104787</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Busia, Kenya ; Case studies ; Case study ; Clinical trials ; Development economics ; Deworming ; Economic theory ; Economics ; Intervention ; Longitudinal research ; Policy making ; Randomization ; RCT ; Reforms ; Research methodology ; School based intervention ; Social research ; Social sciences ; Spillovers ; Vacuum</subject><ispartof>World development, 2020-03, Vol.127, p.104787, Article 104787</ispartof><rights>2019 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright Pergamon Press Inc. Mar 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-e0dc406620ccf36782beba621de33bb35d9fd2d2f94e4466606594c0c82e6ec93</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-e0dc406620ccf36782beba621de33bb35d9fd2d2f94e4466606594c0c82e6ec93</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27866,27924,27925,33223</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Baird, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hamory Hicks, Joan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ozier, Owen</creatorcontrib><title>Randomized control trial as social observatory: A case study</title><title>World development</title><description>Critics of randomized control trials (RCTs) in development economics argue that this methodology lends itself to ‘smaller’ questions with limited relevance to policy or economics. Using the seminal work of Miguel and Kremer (2004) on a school-based deworming intervention in Kenya as a case study, we argue that RCTs can spearhead policy change, serve as a laboratory to test economic theories and develop cutting-edge empirical methods, or do both. This does not happen in a vacuum, but through thoughtful design embedded in a broader research and policy agenda. Here, we describe a family of studies built on Miguel and Kremer (2004), shedding light on factors that supported the generation of evidence and insights far beyond the near-term RCT result. As in any piece of social sciences research, this descriptive evidence may not be externally valid in all settings. We nevertheless hope the lessons it offers will inspire others to examine these possibilities in their own research.</description><subject>Busia, Kenya</subject><subject>Case studies</subject><subject>Case study</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Development economics</subject><subject>Deworming</subject><subject>Economic theory</subject><subject>Economics</subject><subject>Intervention</subject><subject>Longitudinal research</subject><subject>Policy making</subject><subject>Randomization</subject><subject>RCT</subject><subject>Reforms</subject><subject>Research methodology</subject><subject>School based intervention</subject><subject>Social research</subject><subject>Social sciences</subject><subject>Spillovers</subject><subject>Vacuum</subject><issn>0305-750X</issn><issn>1873-5991</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkE9LxDAQxYMouK5-BSl47jpJ2qQRDy6L_2BBEAVvIU2m0NJt1qRbWT-9XapnTzMM773h_Qi5pLCgQMV1s_jyoXUOhwUDqsZjJgt5RGa0kDzNlaLHZAYc8lTm8HFKzmJsACDnSs7I7avpnN_U3-gS67s--DbpQ23axMQkenvYfBkxDKb3YX-TLBNrIiax37n9OTmpTBvx4nfOyfvD_dvqKV2_PD6vluvUcsn7FMHZDIRgYG3FhSxYiaURjDrkvCx57lTlmGOVyjDLhBAgcpVZsAVDgVbxObmacrfBf-4w9rrxu9CNLzXjcsyVPBOjSkwqG3yMASu9DfXGhL2moA-kdKP_SOkDKT2RGo13kxHHDkONQUdbY2fR1QFtr52v_4v4ARGzdRg</recordid><startdate>202003</startdate><enddate>202003</enddate><creator>Baird, Sarah</creator><creator>Hamory Hicks, Joan</creator><creator>Ozier, Owen</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Pergamon Press Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202003</creationdate><title>Randomized control trial as social observatory: A case study</title><author>Baird, Sarah ; Hamory Hicks, Joan ; Ozier, Owen</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-e0dc406620ccf36782beba621de33bb35d9fd2d2f94e4466606594c0c82e6ec93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Busia, Kenya</topic><topic>Case studies</topic><topic>Case study</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Development economics</topic><topic>Deworming</topic><topic>Economic theory</topic><topic>Economics</topic><topic>Intervention</topic><topic>Longitudinal research</topic><topic>Policy making</topic><topic>Randomization</topic><topic>RCT</topic><topic>Reforms</topic><topic>Research methodology</topic><topic>School based intervention</topic><topic>Social research</topic><topic>Social sciences</topic><topic>Spillovers</topic><topic>Vacuum</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Baird, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hamory Hicks, Joan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ozier, Owen</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>World development</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Baird, Sarah</au><au>Hamory Hicks, Joan</au><au>Ozier, Owen</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Randomized control trial as social observatory: A case study</atitle><jtitle>World development</jtitle><date>2020-03</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>127</volume><spage>104787</spage><pages>104787-</pages><artnum>104787</artnum><issn>0305-750X</issn><eissn>1873-5991</eissn><abstract>Critics of randomized control trials (RCTs) in development economics argue that this methodology lends itself to ‘smaller’ questions with limited relevance to policy or economics. Using the seminal work of Miguel and Kremer (2004) on a school-based deworming intervention in Kenya as a case study, we argue that RCTs can spearhead policy change, serve as a laboratory to test economic theories and develop cutting-edge empirical methods, or do both. This does not happen in a vacuum, but through thoughtful design embedded in a broader research and policy agenda. Here, we describe a family of studies built on Miguel and Kremer (2004), shedding light on factors that supported the generation of evidence and insights far beyond the near-term RCT result. As in any piece of social sciences research, this descriptive evidence may not be externally valid in all settings. We nevertheless hope the lessons it offers will inspire others to examine these possibilities in their own research.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104787</doi></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0305-750X |
ispartof | World development, 2020-03, Vol.127, p.104787, Article 104787 |
issn | 0305-750X 1873-5991 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2376207346 |
source | International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); ScienceDirect Freedom Collection; PAIS Index |
subjects | Busia, Kenya Case studies Case study Clinical trials Development economics Deworming Economic theory Economics Intervention Longitudinal research Policy making Randomization RCT Reforms Research methodology School based intervention Social research Social sciences Spillovers Vacuum |
title | Randomized control trial as social observatory: A case study |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T08%3A45%3A52IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Randomized%20control%20trial%20as%20social%20observatory:%20A%20case%20study&rft.jtitle=World%20development&rft.au=Baird,%20Sarah&rft.date=2020-03&rft.volume=127&rft.spage=104787&rft.pages=104787-&rft.artnum=104787&rft.issn=0305-750X&rft.eissn=1873-5991&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104787&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2376207346%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-e0dc406620ccf36782beba621de33bb35d9fd2d2f94e4466606594c0c82e6ec93%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2376207346&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |