Can External Claims of Randomised Evaluations Used in Developmental Economics Be Considered Knowledge, in Light of the Problem of Induction?

Randomised Evaluations(REs) are being increasingly used in Developmental Economics to understand and predict the impact of specific interventions. However there has been little known epistemological examination of them. Often praise is reserved for the ability of randomised evaluations to generate highly justified internal claims. Samples are randomly allocated into 2 groups. The intervention under study is only applied to one group. The other serves as control, enabling any difference in results to be more closely attributed to the intervention. However, the central problem of induction still undermines the external claims - the predictions - of REs. In this essay I explore: 1)How the epistemic status of RE’s external claims is undermined by the problem of induction. 2)What are the possible solutions or evasions to the problem and how effective and appropriate they are 3)Why in fact the unique methodology of REs allows its external claims to overcome the problem of induction.