Abstract:<span>The 2019 Nobel Prize in economics was awarded to three scholars on the grounds that their pioneering use of randomized control trials (RCTs) was innovative methodologically and contributed to development policy and the emergence of a new development economics. Using a critical feminist lens, this article challenges that conclusion by interrogating the storytelling practices deployed by "randomista" economists through a critical reading of a widely cited essay by Esther Duflo, one of the 2019 Nobel recipients, on the relationship between women's empowerment and economic development. The paper argues that the limitations of randomista economics have given rise to a particular way of thinking characterized by piecemeal analysis, ad hoc resort to theory, indifference to history and context, and methodological fundamentalism. It concludes that the randomista argument that broad-based economic development alone – without focused attention to women's rights – will lead to gender equality has not been borne out by recent data.<b>HIGHLIGHTS</b> Despite claims of impartiality, Duflo's interpretations of evidence and the language she uses indicate that the randomista method and narrative is not objective or impartial.The randomistas' treatment of preferences as random and idiosyncratic ignores what feminists have long espoused: that the formation of preferences derives from entrenched social constructions.The randomistas' claims to methodological superiority result in a discounting or dismissal of findings from nonexperimental studies in favor of experimental studies that report the same findings.Duflo's main argument discussed in this paper is that while gender equality is desirable in its own right, it is better achieved through gender-neutral policies because gender-affirmative policies "distort" the allocative process and lead to efficiency costs.Yet, these so-called distortions stem from historical structures that have curtailed women's productive potential and protected male privilege.In other words, patriarchal discrimination introduces structural costs that are unlikely to be visible when the focus is on individual economic actors.</span>

Why are some countries so rich? Economics Nobel awarded for study of inequality

Form Indifference to Difference——Remarks on the Contribution of 2008 Nobel Laureate in Economics

The Influence of Randomized Controlled Trials on Development Economics Research and on Development Policy

Income Inequalities in Perspective

Gabriel Zucman: Winner of the 2023 Clark Medal

Economists Being Economists

Game Theory and Nobel Prize in Economics

The historical roots of economic development

Absolute versus Relative Poverty and Wealth: Cooperation in the Presence of Between-Group Inequality

Corruption and Wealth: Unveiling a national prosperity syndrome in Europe

Exponential Structure of Income Inequality: Evidence from 67 Countries

Caste, class, race, and inequality: insights for economic policy

The psychology of economic inequality and social class

Emergence of income inequality: Origin, distribution and possible policies

Inequality of Opportunity and the Probability of Being Very Rich or Very Poor

Scientific wealth and inequality within nations

Changing inequalities in Europe and North America: part two

Women’s Empowerment and Economic Development: A Feminist Critique of Storytelling Practices in “Randomista” Economics

Inequality and Real Income Growth for Middle- and Low-income Households across Rich Countries in Recent Decades

Theory and practice of overcoming an economic crisis (on the Nobel Prize in economics in 2022)

A Review to the Academic Achievements of 2012 Nobel Laureates in Economics