Just recently I re-discovered posts from 1-2 years ago which discussed critiques of the GiveWell style approach to global health, namely the focus on RCTs.
For example, Ben Kuhn’s article suggested that maybe we should look more at the cost-effectiveness of political change. Then there is the wildly popular post on growth and randomista development, which suggested that maybe we should pay more attention to economic growth interventions.
I am sure these articles sparked lots of discussion in the GiveWell and EA global health community. My question is: Has anything changed since then? Has anyone put more resources into researching these topics? How has the thinking of EA global health people developed?
[Question] Has anything in the EA global health sphere changed since the critiques of “randomista development” 1-2 years ago?
Just recently I re-discovered posts from 1-2 years ago which discussed critiques of the GiveWell style approach to global health, namely the focus on RCTs.
For example, Ben Kuhn’s article suggested that maybe we should look more at the cost-effectiveness of political change. Then there is the wildly popular post on growth and randomista development, which suggested that maybe we should pay more attention to economic growth interventions.
I am sure these articles sparked lots of discussion in the GiveWell and EA global health community. My question is: Has anything changed since then? Has anyone put more resources into researching these topics? How has the thinking of EA global health people developed?