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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:World development 2020-03, Vol.127, p.104787, Article 104787
Main Authors: Baird, Sarah, Hamory Hicks, Joan, Ozier, Owen
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