Effective Altruism Forum
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
by Amalie Farestvedt 🔸
3 min read 1

10

Building effective altruismCommunityOpportunities to take actionAnnouncements and updatesApplication announcementsConferencesEAGx
Frontpage

EAGxNordics is by now a well-established EA conference, running for the fourth year! For the first time, we are bringing this conference to Norway! Set in one of the (admittedly less impressive) fjords of Norway, EAGxNordics will be hosted in Norway’s capital - Oslo.

Although this conference primarily is targeted for EAs in the Nordics and Baltics, there are several reasons why you might be interested in attending this EAGx in particular, even if you live outside of those regions.

Only two weeks till applications close! Apply now to attend EAGxNordics in Oslo.

 

Who is this event for?

If you live in or are connected to the Nordics or Baltics, are familiar with the core ideas of effective altruism, and want to explore how to act on them—then this conference is for you. While we prioritise applications with connections to the Nordics and Baltics, we also welcome experienced EAs from around the world who can bring valuable perspectives and mentorship to the event.

EAGxNordics is a great opportunity for experienced community members from outside the region who are interested in expanding their network or seeking new opportunities. There are also some strategic choices made for this conference that might be of interest to a more international audience.

EAGxNordics will cover a breadth of topics, but some of the more distinct aspects of the event -  ones that might make it worth the trip from outside the region - include:

  • Personal mental health & support: Understanding mental health and how to navigate challenges like perfectionism, imposter syndrome, and burnout helps create a culture where people feel supported and can contribute sustainably over the long run. That’s why mental health & psychological well-being is a critical focus at EAGxNordics. Tim LeBon will be speaking on “How to overcome perfectionism and imposter syndrome: A CBT therapist's perspective” and Ewelina Tur will host a workshop about “Impact Without Burnout”. 
  • Upskilling & targeted advice for organisations: workshops like “Mastering Grant Applications: Strategies for Success with EA Funders” and “Open house: Get input and feedback on your theory of change and/or impact evaluation system” (hosted by EA Sweden) will likely draw a smaller audience, but be particularly impactful to those who attend.
  • Policy: The Nordics and Baltics are recognized for their leadership in evidence-based policy, from climate change to effective governance. Inspired by this, we are developing content on how policy can drive impact in key areas such as animal welfare, AI safety, and other global catastrophic risks.

 

Vision for the conference

Our main goal is to help form meaningful connections between EAs. If you’re new to EA, this conference will make you feel included in the community and help you find the next steps on your EA journey. If you’re an experienced EA, you’ll have plenty of opportunities to give and receive feedback, offer mentorship, and expand your network to maximise your impact.

EAGxNordics 2025 is aiming for a conference that is inclusive, supportive, and welcoming to all. We especially encourage women and underrepresented groups to apply. 

 

Satellite events 

Satellite events are unofficial social events that will take place before, during, and after the conference, and that will help you connect to more like-minded people outside of conference hours. Some examples include co-working, city tours, and after-party. 

 

Travel support

Travel support can be requested in the application. Rooms have been booked at a nearby hostel for all travel support recipients, making it easy to meet others, keep the interesting conversations going, and commute to the event together. EAGxNordics prioritises attendees from the Nordic and Baltic regions to build the local community.

 

Apply by April 8 to attend EAGxNordics in Oslo: Application link. 

If you have any questions or comments, don’t hesitate to reach out to nordics@eaglobalx.org.

10

0
0

Reactions

0
0

More posts like this

Comments1


Sorted by
New & upvoted
Click to highlight new comments since:
Amalie Farestvedt 🔸1
0
0

Although seats are filling up quickly, you can apply until April 8! Additionally, there is still more travel support available, that you can request while submitting the application. 

Reply
Curated and popular this week
Paul Present
 ·  · 28m read
 · 
Note: I am not a malaria expert. This is my best-faith attempt at answering a question that was bothering me, but this field is a large and complex field, and I’ve almost certainly misunderstood something somewhere along the way. Summary While the world made incredible progress in reducing malaria cases from 2000 to 2015, the past 10 years have seen malaria cases stop declining and start rising. I investigated potential reasons behind this increase through reading the existing literature and looking at publicly available data, and I identified three key factors explaining the rise: 1. Population Growth: Africa's population has increased by approximately 75% since 2000. This alone explains most of the increase in absolute case numbers, while cases per capita have remained relatively flat since 2015. 2. Stagnant Funding: After rapid growth starting in 2000, funding for malaria prevention plateaued around 2010. 3. Insecticide Resistance: Mosquitoes have become increasingly resistant to the insecticides used in bednets over the past 20 years. This has made older models of bednets less effective, although they still have some effect. Newer models of bednets developed in response to insecticide resistance are more effective but still not widely deployed.  I very crudely estimate that without any of these factors, there would be 55% fewer malaria cases in the world than what we see today. I think all three of these factors are roughly equally important in explaining the difference.  Alternative explanations like removal of PFAS, climate change, or invasive mosquito species don't appear to be major contributors.  Overall this investigation made me more convinced that bednets are an effective global health intervention.  Introduction In 2015, malaria rates were down, and EAs were celebrating. Giving What We Can posted this incredible gif showing the decrease in malaria cases across Africa since 2000: Giving What We Can said that > The reduction in malaria has be
LewisBollard
 ·  · 8m read
 · 
> How the dismal science can help us end the dismal treatment of farm animals By Martin Gould ---------------------------------------- Note: This post was crossposted from the Open Philanthropy Farm Animal Welfare Research Newsletter by the Forum team, with the author's permission. The author may not see or respond to comments on this post. ---------------------------------------- This year we’ll be sharing a few notes from my colleagues on their areas of expertise. The first is from Martin. I’ll be back next month. - Lewis In 2024, Denmark announced plans to introduce the world’s first carbon tax on cow, sheep, and pig farming. Climate advocates celebrated, but animal advocates should be much more cautious. When Denmark’s Aarhus municipality tested a similar tax in 2022, beef purchases dropped by 40% while demand for chicken and pork increased. Beef is the most emissions-intensive meat, so carbon taxes hit it hardest — and Denmark’s policies don’t even cover chicken or fish. When the price of beef rises, consumers mostly shift to other meats like chicken. And replacing beef with chicken means more animals suffer in worse conditions — about 190 chickens are needed to match the meat from one cow, and chickens are raised in much worse conditions. It may be possible to design carbon taxes which avoid this outcome; a recent paper argues that a broad carbon tax would reduce all meat production (although it omits impacts on egg or dairy production). But with cows ten times more emissions-intensive than chicken per kilogram of meat, other governments may follow Denmark’s lead — focusing taxes on the highest emitters while ignoring the welfare implications. Beef is easily the most emissions-intensive meat, but also requires the fewest animals for a given amount. The graph shows climate emissions per tonne of meat on the right-hand side, and the number of animals needed to produce a kilogram of meat on the left. The fish “lives lost” number varies significantly by
Neel Nanda
 ·  · 1m read
 · 
TL;DR Having a good research track record is some evidence of good big-picture takes, but it's weak evidence. Strategic thinking is hard, and requires different skills. But people often conflate these skills, leading to excessive deference to researchers in the field, without evidence that that person is good at strategic thinking specifically. I certainly try to have good strategic takes, but it's hard, and you shouldn't assume I succeed! Introduction I often find myself giving talks or Q&As about mechanistic interpretability research. But inevitably, I'll get questions about the big picture: "What's the theory of change for interpretability?", "Is this really going to help with alignment?", "Does any of this matter if we can’t ensure all labs take alignment seriously?". And I think people take my answers to these way too seriously. These are great questions, and I'm happy to try answering them. But I've noticed a bit of a pathology: people seem to assume that because I'm (hopefully!) good at the research, I'm automatically well-qualified to answer these broader strategic questions. I think this is a mistake, a form of undue deference that is both incorrect and unhelpful. I certainly try to have good strategic takes, and I think this makes me better at my job, but this is far from sufficient. Being good at research and being good at high level strategic thinking are just fairly different skillsets! But isn’t someone being good at research strong evidence they’re also good at strategic thinking? I personally think it’s moderate evidence, but far from sufficient. One key factor is that a very hard part of strategic thinking is the lack of feedback. Your reasoning about confusing long-term factors need to extrapolate from past trends and make analogies from things you do understand better, and it can be quite hard to tell if what you're saying is complete bullshit or not. In an empirical science like mechanistic interpretability, however, you can get a lot more fe
Recent opportunities in Building effective altruism
41
EA Global Referral Program
Ivan Burduk
· · 2m read
0
0
10
EAGxNordics in Norway: apply now
Amalie Farestvedt 🔸
· · 3m read
1
1
32
Introducing Effective Accountability: Project and Job Search Accountability Groups
2 authors
· · 2m read
1
1
View more