[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jodepp/v6y2021i2p137-143.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evidence-based Policy in India: Crossing the Long, Uphill Bridge

Author

Listed:
  • Abhirup Bhunia
Abstract
The evidence-based-policy ecosystem, and its arsenal of approaches and techniques need course-correction to adequately respond to complex and practical policymaking contexts. Experimental findings do not resonate in scale implementation, particularly in large and diverse contexts like India’s. Causal empiricism leaves out investigation of complex pathways and impact mechanisms, while ‘evidence’ often disengages political economy considerations. Surmounting the methodological constrictions—which limit the utility and uptake of such evidence for a decisionmaker—requires being able to sufficiently account for institutional factors, social norms, politics, and stakeholder incentives among other related influences in policymaking. This may be possible through robust use of qualitative nuances, and integration of political economy analysis towards adopting a realist approach in evidence generation. It is important to acknowledge that measurement alone should qualify as neither evaluation or research. The state of research, its guiding principles, approaches and methods are often directed by current influences and preferences of stakeholders who are in a position to shape discourse. Interjections by more stakeholders are urgently needed to orient evidence generation to ‘real world’ realities and respond to the non-linear complexities of developmental change pathways.

Suggested Citation

  • Abhirup Bhunia, 2021. "Evidence-based Policy in India: Crossing the Long, Uphill Bridge," Journal of Development Policy and Practice, , vol. 6(2), pages 137-143, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jodepp:v:6:y:2021:i:2:p:137-143
    DOI: 10.1177/24551333211035566
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/24551333211035566
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/24551333211035566?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gisselquist Rachel M. & Niño-Zarazúa Miguel, 2015. "What Can Experiments Tell Us About How to Improve Government Performance?," Journal of Globalization and Development, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-45, June.
    2. Deaton, Angus & Cartwright, Nancy, 2018. "Understanding and misunderstanding randomized controlled trials," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 2-21.
    3. Angus Deaton & Nancy Cartwright, 2016. "Understanding and Misunderstanding Randomized Controlled Trials," Working Papers august_25.pdf, Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Research Program in Development Studies..
    4. Alexander Frankel & Maximilian Kasy, 2022. "Which Findings Should Be Published?," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 1-38, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andor, Mark A. & Gerster, Andreas & Peters, Jörg & Schmidt, Christoph M., 2020. "Social Norms and Energy Conservation Beyond the US," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    2. Vellore Arthi & James Fenske, 2018. "Polygamy and child mortality: Historical and modern evidence from Nigeria’s Igbo," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 97-141, March.
    3. Andreas C Drichoutis & Rodolfo M Nayga, 2020. "Economic Rationality under Cognitive Load," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(632), pages 2382-2409.
    4. Cristina Corduneanu-Huci & Michael T. Dorsch & Paul Maarek, 2017. "Learning to constrain: Political competition and randomized controlled trials in development," THEMA Working Papers 2017-24, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    5. Jörg Peters & Jörg Langbein & Gareth Roberts, 2018. "Generalization in the Tropics – Development Policy, Randomized Controlled Trials, and External Validity," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 33(1), pages 34-64.
    6. Maurizio Canavari & Andreas C. Drichoutis & Jayson L. Lusk & Rodolfo M. Nayga, Jr., 2018. "How to run an experimental auction: A review of recent advances," Working Papers 2018-5, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    7. Aufenanger, Tobias, 2018. "Treatment allocation for linear models," FAU Discussion Papers in Economics 14/2017, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Institute for Economics, revised 2018.
    8. Vicky Chemutai & Hubert Escaith, 2017. "Measuring World Trade Organization (WTO) Accession Commitments and their Economic Effects," Journal of International Commerce, Economics and Policy (JICEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(02), pages 1-27, June.
    9. Ashkan Pakseresht & Brandon R McFadden & Carl Johan Lagerkvist, 2017. "Consumer acceptance of food biotechnology based on policy context and upstream acceptance: evidence from an artefactual field experiment," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 44(5), pages 757-780.
    10. Sutherland, Alex & Ariel, Barak & Farrar, William & De Anda, Randy, 2017. "Post-experimental follow-ups—Fade-out versus persistence effects: The Rialto police body-worn camera experiment four years on," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 110-116.
    11. Robin Maialeh, 2019. "Generalization of results and neoclassical rationality: unresolved controversies of behavioural economics methodology," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(4), pages 1743-1761, July.
    12. Huber, Martin & Steinmayr, Andreas, 2017. "A framework for separating individual treatment effects from spillover, interaction, and general equilibrium effects," FSES Working Papers 481, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Freiburg/Fribourg Switzerland.
    13. Gustavo Canavire-Bacarreza & Luis Castro Peñarrieta & Darwin Ugarte Ontiveros, 2021. "Outliers in Semi-Parametric Estimation of Treatment Effects," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-32, April.
    14. Ashkan Pakseresht & Anna Kristina Edenbrandt & Carl Johan Lagerkvist, 2021. "Genetically modified food and consumer risk responsibility: The effect of regulatory design and risk type on cognitive information processing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(6), pages 1-21, June.
    15. Florent Bédécarrats & Isabelle Guérin & François Roubaud, 2019. "All that Glitters is not Gold. The Political Economy of Randomized Evaluations in Development," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 50(3), pages 735-762, May.
    16. Donald Moynihan, 2018. "A great schism approaching? Towards a micro and macro public administration," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 1(1).
    17. Alexander Ruder, 2019. "What Works at Scale? A Framework to Scale Up Workforce Development Programs," FRB Atlanta Community and Economic Development Discussion Paper 2019-1, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
    18. Boris Salazar-Trujillo & Daniel Otero Robles, 2019. "La revolución empírica en economía," Apuntes del Cenes, Universidad Pedagógica y Tecnológica de Colombia, vol. 38(68), pages 15-48, July.
    19. Williams, Martin J., 2020. "Beyond ‘context matters’: Context and external validity in impact evaluation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    20. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John A. List & Danielle LoRe & Dana Suskind, 2017. "Scaling for Economists: Lessons from the Non-Adherence Problem in the Medical Literature," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(4), pages 125-144, Fall.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:jodepp:v:6:y:2021:i:2:p:137-143. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.