Field Experiments in International Development Research
Development economists have used field experiments to measure the effectiveness of poverty and health programs in developing countries. Organizations such as the Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL) at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the Center of Evaluation for Global Action at the University of California, and Innovations for Poverty Action (IPA) in particular have received attention for their use of randomized field experiments to evaluate development programs. The aim of field experiments used in development research is to find causal relationships between policy interventions and development outcomes. Field experiments are seen by some academics as a rigorous way of testing general theories about economic and political behavior and most recently, field experiments have been used by political scientists to study political behavior, institutional dynamics, and conflict in the developing world.
In a randomized field experiment on an international development intervention, researchers would separate participants into two or more groups: a treatment group (or groups) and a control group. Members of the treatment group(s) then receive a particular development intervention being evaluated while the control group does not. (Often the control group receives the intervention later in the roll out of the study.) Field experiments have gained popularity in the field because they allow researchers to guard against selection bias, a problem present in many current studies of development interventions. Selection bias refers to the fact that, in non-experimental settings, the group receiving a development intervention is likely different from a group that is not receiving the intervention. This may occur because of characteristics that make some people more likely to opt in to a program, or because of program targeting. Some academics dispute the claim that findings from field experiments are sufficient for establishing and testing theories about behavior. In particular, a hotly contested issue with regards to field experiments is their external validity. Given that field experiments necessarily take place in a specific geographic and political setting, the extent to which findings can be extrapolated to formulate a general theory regarding economic behavior is a concern.
Read more about this topic: Field Experiment
Famous quotes containing the words field, experiments, development and/or research:
“the whole field is a
white desire, empty, a single stem;
a cluster, flower by flower,
a pious wish to whiteness gone over—
or nothing.”
—William Carlos Williams (1883–1963)
“The man who invented Eskimo Pie made a million dollars, so one is told, but E.E. Cummings, whose verse has been appearing off and on for three years now, and whose experiments should not be more appalling to those interested in poetry than the experiment of surrounding ice-cream with a layer of chocolate was to those interested in soda fountains, has hardly made a dent in the doughy minds of our so-called poetry lovers.”
—John Dos Passos (1896–1970)
“For the child whose impulsiveness is indulged, who retains his primitive-discharge mechanisms, is not only an ill-behaved child but a child whose intellectual development is slowed down. No matter how well he is endowed intellectually, if direct action and immediate gratification are the guiding principles of his behavior, there will be less incentive to develop the higher mental processes, to reason, to employ the imagination creatively. . . .”
—Selma H. Fraiberg (20th century)
“To be sure, nothing is more important to the integrity of the universities ... than a rigorously enforced divorce from war- oriented research and all connected enterprises.”
—Hannah Arendt (1906–1975)