IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v196y2025i2d10.1007_s10551-024-05684-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ethics of Quantification and Randomised Control Trials in International Development: A Decolonial Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Emily Cook-Lundgren

    (Independent Researcher)

  • Emanuela Girei

    (Liverpool John Moores University)

Abstract

In this article, we examine the ethical implications of randomised control trials (RCTs) as a practice of quantification in international development. Often referred to as the “gold standard” for the evaluation of development interventions, RCTs are lauded for their ability to generate supposedly objective, unbiased, and rigorous evidence to inform policy decisions for poverty alleviation. At the same time, critiques of quantification within and beyond development challenge claims of objectivity and neutrality, raising epistemological and ethical questions regarding the role of quantitative research, the numbers they produce, and the processes triggered by practices of quantification. Building on these critiques, this study develops a decolonial analysis of the RCT methodology. We argue that RCTs, by enacting the coloniality of being, knowledge, and power, serve to perpetuate global coloniality, and its core organising principle, namely colonial difference. The study contributes to ongoing conversations addressing the ethical stakes of knowledge production and (de)coloniality.

Suggested Citation

  • Emily Cook-Lundgren & Emanuela Girei, 2025. "Ethics of Quantification and Randomised Control Trials in International Development: A Decolonial Analysis," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 196(2), pages 241-254, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:196:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s10551-024-05684-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-024-05684-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10551-024-05684-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-024-05684-1?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:kap:jbuset:v:196:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s10551-024-05684-1. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.