Skip to main content

Research Repository

Advanced Search

Modeling mitigation and adaptation policies to predict their effectiveness: The limits of randomized controlled trials

Marcellesi, A.; Cartwright, N.

Modeling mitigation and adaptation policies to predict their effectiveness: The limits of randomized controlled trials Thumbnail


Authors

A. Marcellesi



Contributors

E. Lloyd
Editor

E. Winsberg
Editor

Abstract

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.

Citation

Marcellesi, A., & Cartwright, N. (2018). Modeling mitigation and adaptation policies to predict their effectiveness: The limits of randomized controlled trials. In E. Lloyd, & E. Winsberg (Eds.), Climate modelling : philosophical and conceptual issues (449-480). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65058-6_15

Online Publication Date Feb 14, 2018
Publication Date Feb 14, 2018
Deposit Date Sep 17, 2015
Publicly Available Date Mar 28, 2024
Publisher Palgrave Macmillan
Pages 449-480
Book Title Climate modelling : philosophical and conceptual issues.
ISBN 9783319650579
DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65058-6_15

Files

Accepted Book Chapter (186 Kb)
PDF

Copyright 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





You might also like



Downloadable Citations