IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bpubpo/v5y2021i1p2-49_2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How can experiments play a greater role in public policy? Twelve proposals from an economic model of scaling

Author

Listed:
  • AL-UBAYDLI, OMAR
  • LEE, MIN SOK
  • LIST, JOHN A.
  • MACKEVICIUS, CLAIRE L.
  • SUSKIND, DANA

Abstract

Policymakers are increasingly turning to insights gained from the experimental method as a means to inform large-scale public policies. Critics view this increased usage as premature, pointing to the fact that many experimentally tested programs fail to deliver their promise at scale. Under this view, the experimental approach drives too much public policy. Yet, if policymakers could be more confident that the original research findings would be delivered at scale, even the staunchest critics would carve out a larger role for experiments to inform policy. Leveraging the economic framework of Al-Ubaydli et al. (2019), we put forward 12 simple proposals, spanning researchers, policymakers, funders and stakeholders, which together tackle the most vexing scalability threats. The framework highlights that only after we deepen our understanding of the scale-up problem will we be on solid ground to argue that scientific experiments should hold a more prominent place in the policymaker's quiver.

Suggested Citation

  • Al-Ubaydli, Omar & Lee, Min Sok & List, John A. & Mackevicius, Claire L. & Suskind, Dana, 2021. "How can experiments play a greater role in public policy? Twelve proposals from an economic model of scaling," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(1), pages 2-49, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:bpubpo:v:5:y:2021:i:1:p:2-49_2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2398063X20000172/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. John List, 2021. "The Voltage Effect in Behavioral Economics," Artefactual Field Experiments 00733, The Field Experiments Website.
    2. Omar Al-Ubaydli & Chien-Yu Lai & John A. List, 2023. "A Simple Rational Expectations Model of the Voltage Effect," NBER Working Papers 30850, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Aars, Ole Kristian & Godager, Geir & Kaarboe, Oddvar & Moger, Tron Anders, 2024. "Sending emails to reduce medical costs? The effect of feedback on general practitioners’ claiming of fees," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    4. John A. List, 2024. "Optimally generate policy-based evidence before scaling," Nature, Nature, vol. 626(7999), pages 491-499, February.
    5. Lucia A Reisch, 2021. "Shaping healthy and sustainable food systems with behavioural food policy [The impacts of dietary change on greenhouse gas emissions, land use, water use, and health: a systematic review]," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 48(4), pages 665-693.
    6. Jordan Adamson & Lucas Rentschler, 2023. "Criminal justice from a public choice perspective: an introduction to the special issue," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 196(3), pages 223-227, September.
    7. Karun Adusumilli & Francesco Agostinelli & Emilio Borghesan, 2024. "Heterogeneity and Endogenous Compliance: Implications for Scaling Class Size Interventions," Working Papers 2024-007, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    8. Adélaïde Fadhuile & Daniel Llerena & Béatrice Roussillon, 2023. "Intrinsic Motivation to Promote the Development of Renewable Energy : A Field Experiment from Household Demand," Working Papers hal-03977597, HAL.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cup:bpubpo:v:5:y:2021:i:1:p:2-49_2. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/bpp .

    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.