Rural electrification, the credibility revolution, and the limits of evidence-based policy

被引:0
作者
Ankel-Peters, Joerg [1 ,2 ]
Schmidt, Christoph M. [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Leibniz Inst Econ Res, RWI, Essen, Germany
[2] Univ Passau, Sch Business Econ & Informat Syst, Passau, Germany
[3] Ruhr Univ Bochum, Fac Management & Econ, Bochum, Germany
关键词
energy access; evidence-based decision-making; systematic reviews; meta-science; IMPACT EVALUATION; ELECTRICITY; REPRODUCIBILITY; INFRASTRUCTURE; PERSPECTIVE; CHALLENGES; ECONOMICS; MODELS; CRISIS;
D O I
10.1017/S1355770X24000263
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
The so-called credibility revolution dominates empirical economics, with its promise of causal identification to improve scientific knowledge and ultimately policy. By examining the case of rural electrification in the Global South, this opinion paper exposes the limits of this evidence-based policy paradigm. The electrification literature boasts many studies using the credibility revolution toolkit, but at the same time, several systematic reviews demonstrate that the evidence is divided between very positive and muted effects. This bifurcation presents a challenge to the science-policy interface, where policymakers, lacking the resources to sift through the evidence, may be drawn to the results that serve their (agency's) interests. The interpretation is furthermore complicated by unresolved methodological debates circling around external validity as well as selective reporting and publication decisions. These features, we argue, are not particular to the electrification literature but inherent to the credibility revolution toolkit.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 98 条
  • [1] Does basic energy access generate socioeconomic benefits? A field experiment with off-grid solar power in India
    Aklin, Michael
    Bayer, Patrick
    Harish, S. P.
    Urpelainen, Johannes
    [J]. SCIENCE ADVANCES, 2017, 3 (05):
  • [2] How Do Electricity Shortages Affect Industry? Evidence from India
    Allcott, Hunt
    Collard-Wexler, Allan
    O'Connell, Stephen D.
    [J]. AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2016, 106 (03) : 587 - 624
  • [3] Identification of and Correction for Publication Bias
    Andrews, Isaiah
    Kasy, Maximilian
    [J]. AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2019, 109 (08) : 2766 - 2794
  • [4] The Credibility Revolution in Empirical Economics: How Better Research Design is Taking the Con out of Econometrics
    Angrist, Joshua D.
    Pischke, Joern-Steffen
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES, 2010, 24 (02) : 3 - 30
  • [5] Ankel-Peters J., 2023, Ruhr Economic Papers, V991
  • [6] Is economics self-correcting? Replications in the American Economic Review
    Ankel-Peters, Joerg
    Fiala, Nathan
    Neubauer, Florian
    [J]. ECONOMIC INQUIRY, 2024, : 463 - 485
  • [7] Bagilet V., 2022, I4R Discussion Paper Series, V11
  • [8] From Proof of Concept to Scalable Policies: Challenges and Solutions, with an Application
    Banerjee, Abhijit
    Banerji, Rukmini
    Berry, James
    Duflo, Esther
    Kannan, Harini
    Mukerji, Shobhini
    Shotland, Marc
    Walton, Michael
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES, 2017, 31 (04) : 73 - 102
  • [9] Biased Policy Professionals
    Banuri, Sheheryar
    Dercon, Stefan
    Gauri, Varun
    [J]. WORLD BANK ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2019, 33 (02) : 310 - 327
  • [10] Barnes D.F., 2010, The challenge of rural electrification: strategies for developing countries