EA as a whole tends to maximize welfare (and you can see relevant discussion in the proposed definition of EA here). While suffering and well-being are possibly not simply opposites, something which I'm currently trying to understand, the analyses are arguably similar with the tools we have today. So ACE and GiveWell should be pretty safe bets.
This is the third in a sequence of posts taken from my recent report: Why Did Environmentalism Become Partisan?
Summary
Rising partisanship did not make environmentalism more popular or politically effective. Instead, it saw flat or falling overall public opinion, fewer major legislative achievements, and fluctuating executive actions.
Public Opinion...
This post presents the executive summary from Giving What We Can’s impact evaluation for 2025. At the end of this post we share links to more information, including the full report and...
EA as a whole tends to maximize welfare (and you can see relevant discussion in the proposed definition of EA here). While suffering and well-being are possibly not simply opposites, something which I'm currently trying to understand, the analyses are arguably similar with the tools we have today. So ACE and GiveWell should be pretty safe bets.
Thinking about the long term, the Center on Long Term Risk is working with a suffering-focused ethics approach. This view can result in different cause prioritization.