Marcellesi, A. and Cartwright, N. (2018) 'Modeling mitigation and adaptation policies to predict their effectiveness : the limits of randomized controlled trials.', in Climate modelling : philosophical and conceptual issues. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 449-480.
Policies to combat climate change should be supported by evidence regarding their effectiveness. But what kind of evidence is that? And what tools should one use to gather such evidence? Many argue that randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard when it comes to evaluating the effects of policies. As a result, there has been a push for climate change policies to be evaluated using RCTs. We argue that this push is misguided. After explaining why RCTs are thought to be the gold standard, we use examples of mitigation and adaptation policies to show that RCTs provide, at best, one piece of the evidential puzzle one needs to assemble for well-supported decisions regarding climate change policies.
|Item Type:||Book chapter|
|Full text:||(AM) Accepted Manuscript|
Download PDF (182Kb)
|Publisher Web site:||https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65058-6_15|
|Publisher statement:||Marcellesi, A. & Cartwright, N. (2018). Modeling mitigation and adaptation policies to predict their effectiveness: The limits of randomized controlled trials. In Climate Modelling: Philosophical and Conceptual Issues. Editors: Lloyd, E. & Winsberg, E. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, reproduced with permission of Palgrave Macmillan. This extract is taken from the author's original manuscript and has not been edited. The definitive, published, version of record is available here: https://www.palgrave.com/gb/book/9783319650579|
|Date accepted:||No date available|
|Date deposited:||29 September 2015|
|Date of first online publication:||14 February 2018|
|Date first made open access:||14 February 2020|
Save or Share this output
|Look up in GoogleScholar|