Skip to content
where news meets its scholarly match
  • Newsletters
  • About JSTOR Daily
  • Teaching with Reveal Digital’s American Prison Newspapers Collection
  • Newsletters
  • Arts & Culture
    • Art & Art History
    • Film & Media
    • Language & Literature
    • Performing Arts
  • Business & Economics
    • Business
    • Economics
  • Politics & History
    • Politics & Government
    • U.S. History
    • World History
    • Social History
    • Quirky History
  • Science & Technology
    • Health
    • Natural Science
    • Plants & Animals
    • Sustainability & The Environment
    • Technology
  • Education & Society
    • Education
    • Lifestyle
    • Religion
    • Social Sciences
  • Reading Lists
  • Syllabi
  • Columns
  • Open Community Collections on JSTOR
  • Contact The Editors
  • Support JSTOR Daily
Business & Economics

Why Are Random Trials So Common in Anti-Poverty Work?

Three economists who have devoted their careers to studying poverty alleviation won the Nobel Prize in economics. How did their methods catch on?

Abhijit Banerjee, Esther Duflo and Michael Kremer, 2019 Laureates in Economic Sciences
Abhijit Banerjee, Esther Duflo and Michael Kremer, 2019 Laureates in Economic Sciences
Copyright © Nobel Media 2019. Illustration: Niklas Elmehed
By: Livia Gershon
October 29, 2019 October 24, 2019
3 minutes
Share Tweet Email Print

This year, three economists who have devoted their careers to studying the alleviation of poverty in developing countries won the Nobel in economics (which, yes, we know, is not a real Nobel, but it’s still the most prestigious prize in the discipline). All three are known for their experimental approach to the issue. Two of them, Esther Duflo and Abhijit Banerjee, are leaders of the Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL), an organization that has been remarkably successful in spreading this methodology.

In a paper published in 2018, the economist Arthur Jatteau looked at just how J-PAL became so influential: its use of randomized controlled trials. As a method for addressing problems related to poverty, RCTs operate much the way they do in medicine. For example, researchers hoping to improve children’s school attendance might provide de-worming treatments to one set of students and see how they perform compared with an untreated control group.

Deaton argues that projects narrow enough to be scientifically rigorous may be too narrow to provide clear guidance for large-scale interventions.

This is not a new concept, Jatteau writes. Experiments like this were first done in the 1920s. But they’ve become far more common since J-PAL started up in 2003. Important global institutions, from major research universities to the World Bank, have adopted randomized trials as a best practice. The concept has also received glowing treatment in the media and been embraced by political leaders involved in economic development.

This growth has occurred despite some criticism within economics. For example, Angus Deaton—winner of the 2015 economics Nobel—has written that truly randomized experiments are difficult to achieve in the complex field of economic development. Deaton argues that projects narrow enough to be scientifically rigorous may be too narrow to provide clear guidance for large-scale interventions.

So, why have randomized trials spread so fast? Jatteau writes that one crucial part of the picture is the structure of J-PAL itself. Looking at J-PAL-affiliated researchers, Jatteau finds that they are among the elite of the field of economics. Forty-five percent got their PhDs from Harvard or MIT, and a strong majority had a doctorate from a top U.S. or European school. They are also far more likely to work for these top schools than the average academic economist. Jatteau writes that this elite character may have helped randomized trials to spread for two reasons. First, the prestige of these top researchers may rub off on the method itself. Second, other economists may be eager to join a field populated by so many professionally successful researchers.

Weekly Newsletter

    Get your fix of JSTOR Daily’s best stories in your inbox each Thursday.

    Privacy Policy   Contact Us
    You may unsubscribe at any time by clicking on the provided link on any marketing message.

    At the same time, the network of J-PAL-affiliated researchers is tight, with many of its members coauthoring papers together. A few of them, including Duflo and Banerjee, had particularly large numbers of coauthors within the network, as well as prestigious professional positions, making them leaders who help hold the field together. “Here, a highly connected network works as a guarantee to keep methodological principles the same,” Jatteau writes.

    Jatteau’s work may help explain why Duflo and Banerjee are such influential proponents of randomized trials—not just due to their own work but because of the strong network they’ve created to support the method.

    Share Tweet Email Print
    Have a correction or comment about this article?
    Please contact us.
    economicspovertyHistorical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung
    JSTOR logo

    Resources

    JSTOR is a digital library for scholars, researchers, and students. JSTOR Daily readers can access the original research behind our articles for free on JSTOR.

    The Success of Randomized Controlled Trials: A Sociographical Study of the Rise of J-PAL to Scientific Excellence and Influence
    By: Arthur Jatteau
    Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung, Vol. 43, No. 3 (165), Special Issue: Economists, Politics, and Society. New Insights from Mapping Economic Practices Using Field-Analysis (2018), pp. 94-119
    GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences

    Join Our Newsletter

      Get your fix of JSTOR Daily’s best stories in your inbox each Thursday.

      Privacy Policy   Contact Us
      You may unsubscribe at any time by clicking on the provided link on any marketing message.

      Read this next

      Public health
      Health

      A Different Kind of Public Health Message

      Researchers have found that Americans experience radically different health outcomes depending on their race and socioeconomic status.

      Trending Posts

      1. Elizabeth Siddal, the Real-Life “Ophelia”
      2. Who Wants the Metaverse?
      3. Why Does the Bible Forbid Tattoos?
      4. Who Is Santa Muerte?
      5. The Devastation of Black Wall Street

      More Stories

      Adam Smith

      Adam Smith, Revolutionary?

      By 1800, Smith—once considered a friend of the poor and an enemy of the privileges of the rich—was already being refashioned into a icon of conservatism.
      An image of tigers and tropical leaves
      Economics

      Economic Grrrowth in the East: Asian Tiger Economies

      Can the conditions that produced the fast-growing economies of the Four Tigers—Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan—be replicated?
      Ladies at the tellers’windows of the Fifth Avenue Bank, New York 1900
      Economics

      A Bank of Her Own

      The first US bank for women was opened by a fraudster in 1879. It took 40 years for a reputable women’s bank to be founded in Tennessee.
      Flat vector illustration created from paper cut elements, hand drawn doodles and textures depicting mass surveillance and thin line between privacy and security concept.
      Economics

      Aspymmetrical Powers: Economic and Cyber Espionage

      The lack of global governance over some acts of economic and cyber espionage is likely an intentional choice, one with varying benefits for state actors.

      Recent Posts

      1. Secret Societies and the Fight for Black Freedom
      2. The Long Life of the Nacirema
      3. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo: Annotated
      4. How Did Amy Robsart Die?
      5. Celebrating Black History Month

      Support JSTOR Daily

      Help us keep publishing stories that provide scholarly context to the news.
      Become a member

      About Us

      JSTOR Daily provides context for current events using scholarship found in JSTOR, a digital library of academic journals, books, and other material. We publish articles grounded in peer-reviewed research and provide free access to that research for all of our readers.

      • Contact The Editors
      • Masthead
      • Newsletters
      • About Us
      • Submission Guidelines
      • RSS
      • About the American Prison Newspapers Collection
      • Submissions: American Prison Newspapers Collection
      • Support JSTOR Daily
      • JSTOR.org
      • Terms and Conditions of Use
      • Privacy Policy
      • Cookie Policy
      • Cookie Settings
      • Accessibility
      logo

      JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not-for-profit organization helping the academic community use digital technologies to preserve the scholarly record and to advance research and teaching in sustainable ways.

      © ITHAKA. All Rights Reserved. JSTOR®, the JSTOR logo, and ITHAKA® are registered trademarks of ITHAKA.