Sada Hussain Shah, Aijaz Ali Wassan, Abdul Hadi


Conducting and communicating research is a responsible intellectual job. A researcher would go analysing immense literature and would search for valid evidence. Prior to narrating an authentic statement. Correspondingly while selecting a method for study it is vital to opt for an approach that is ethically suitable in a defined context. While applied on a set of a populace, generally denoted to as a sample and/or universe. Therefore, social research would be a more laborious task. Hence, the social context is ever-changing in terms of time and space. Diverse methods of social research are being invented yearly. To compete with consistently changing social phenomena and needs of evidence. Operational research, evaluation, and screen monitoring are the most prominent approaches of modern social research. Hence, these naïve approaches of social research would undergo learning and adaptation. Community development projects and retrospective studies thereof are also being synthesized, with existing methods of social research. An identical practice is an adaptation of the Randomized Controlled Trial hereinafter (RCT) approach to conduct impact evaluations of humanitarian and development projects. Hitherto, RCT was being widely used by health researchers as a clinical research approach. Hence, an adaptation of this clinical research approach for field studies, particularly for the evaluation of humanitarian projects. Those are being implemented to provide survival support to vulnerable communities. It would require this approach to undergo some ethical adaptations. This research paper is developed to commence a wider literary discourse on requisite ethical adaptations for RCT to use in the evaluation of humanitarian projects. This research paper brings the findings from desk and field. To discuss key questions; where and how we can use RCT, and what ethical adaptations are necessary not to be forgone? This discourse is established on the usefulness of RCT, ethics of social research, ethics of evaluation, and humanitarian principles. The overarching purpose of this research paper is to facilitate the adaptation of RCT in the field of impact evaluation. While considering the ethical principles of the development sector and evaluation.

Article visualizations:

Hit counter


randomized controlled trial, impact evaluation, humanitarian projects

Full Text:



Bhide, A., Shah, RS., G. (2018). A simplified guide to randomized controlled trials.

Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology AOGS; 97, 380-387. doi: 10.1111/aogs.13309.

BMZ Strategy Paper 6. (n.d.). Strategy on Transitional Development Assistance: Strengthening Resilience-Shaping Transition. Retrieved from

Carley, K. (1993). Coding Choices for Textual Analysis: A Comparison of Content Analysis and Map Analysis. Sociological Methodology, 23, 75-126.

Cheema, A.R., Mehmood, A. & Imran, M. (2016). Learning from the past Analysis of disaster management structures, policies and institutions in Pakistan. Disaster Prevention and Management, 25, (4), 449 – 463. doi:

FAO in Emergencies. (n.d.). Guidance Note: Accountability to Affected Populations. Retrieved from

Given, L. M. (2008). Retrieved from The Sage Encyclopaedia of Qualitative Research.

Goldstein. M. (2018, April 18). The history of randomized control trials: scurvy, poets

and beer. Retrieved form,is%20trying%20to%20cure%20scurvy.&text=This%20trial%20was%20actually%20double,differences%20across%20treatment%20and%20control).

Harald. S., Geoffrey. N., Isabelle. T. (2005). Randomized Controlled Trials. American journal of roentgenology. 183, (6), 1539-1544. doi: 183. 1539-44. 10.2214/ajr.183.6.01831539.

Krueger, R. A. (1988). Focus Groups: A practical guide for applied research. Sage, UK.

Maguire, M., & Delahunt, B. (2017). Doing a Thematic Analysis: A Practical, Step-by-Step Guide for Learning and Teaching Scholars: AISHE-J, 8, (3), 3351-3361. doi:

Mathison, S. (2007). Ethical Issues in Evaluation. International Symposium on Evaluation, National Autonomous University of Mexico. Retrieved from

Mehta, M. (2007). Gender Matters Lessons for Disaster Risk Reduction in South Asia. Kathmandu: International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development.

OCHA. (2017). Global Humanitarian Review for 2018.

Palys, T. (2008). Purposive sampling. The Sage Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods, (2), 697-698.

Prakash, A., Acharya, A. S., & Nigam, A. (2012). Indian Journal of Medical Specialties: 3 (2), 198-202.

Sobočan, A. M., Bertotti, T., Strom G. K. (2018). Ethical considerations in social work research. European Journal of Social Work: European Journal of Social Work: 2-14. doi: 10.1080/13691457.2018.1544117

Stolberg, H. O., Norman, G., Trop, I. (2004). Fundamentals of Clinical Research for Radiologists. AJR: 183. 1539-1544.

Swath, J. M. (2015). Monographic issue the profile of disaster risk reduction in Pakistan and institutional response. 2, (1), 1-55.

Syed, A. S. & Gonszalez P. A. (2014). Flood disaster profile of Pakistan: A review. Science Journal of Public Health. 2, (3), 144-149. doi: 10.11648/j.sjph.20140203.11.

The Sphere Handbook (2018). Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian Response. Retrieved from

UNHCR. (2018). Global Trends; Forced Displacement in 2018.

Wagner, H. M. (1982). Principles of Operations Research, with Applications to Management Decisions. New Delhi: Prentice Hall of India.

White, H., Sabarwal, S., & Hoop, T. (2014). Randomized Controlled Trials. UNICEF Office of Research, Florence. Retrieved from


Copyright (c) 2021 Sada Hussain Shah, Aijaz Ali Wassan, Abdul Hadi

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The research works published in this journal are free to be accessed. They can be shared (copied and redistributed in any medium or format) and\or adapted (remixed, transformed, and built upon the material for any purpose, commercially and\or not commercially) under the following terms: attribution (appropriate credit must be given indicating original authors, research work name and publication name mentioning if changes were made) and without adding additional restrictions (without restricting others from doing anything the actual license permits). Authors retain the full copyright of their published research works and cannot revoke these freedoms as long as the license terms are followed.

Copyright © 2016 - 2023. European Journal Of Social Sciences Studies (ISSN 2501-8590) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing Group. All rights reserved.

This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library. All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and standards formulated by Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002), the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing (2003) and  Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities (2003) and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Copyrights of the published research works are retained by authors.


Hit counter