Can randomised controlled trials test whether poverty relief works?

Abstract

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have become a popular method for evaluating anti-poverty programs in low-income countries. RCTs involve randomly assigning individuals to either a treatment group, which receives the program, or a control group, which does not. This method allows researchers to estimate the causal impact of the program by comparing outcomes between the two groups. While proponents argue that RCTs offer a rigorous approach to evaluating program effectiveness, critics raise concerns about their external validity and relevance. The highly specific context in which RCTs are conducted can limit the generalizability of findings to other settings. Furthermore, the focus on micro-interventions that are easily studied with RCTs may neglect broader, macro-level factors that contribute to poverty. Despite these criticisms, RCTs remain a valuable tool for gathering evidence about what types of programs can help alleviate poverty, particularly when combined with other research methods and a focus on understanding not just that a program works, but why it works. – AI-generated abstract.