1 min read 3

3

Imagine if you see the option of putting down a donation of $100 to your favorite charity cause to actually contribute 2-5x of that amount. So by donating $100 you are essentially donating $200-500 to the charity. Doesn't that sound more compelling to you than a standard $100 donation? Won't you be more inclined to click on that "Donate" button ?

Is this possible? Yes it is, by changing the old and outdated donation gathering system design we can easily motivate people to donate more. 

I propose we should have two types of donations: 1.  Matching Donation Pledge. 2. Standard Donation

  1. Matching Donation Pledge - As a user I can pledge a donation match of $100 (max) to a charity. This is not a direct debit from my account, but rather a temporary hold. Once someone does a standard donation of $100 to the charity my $100 will be deducted from my  bank and a donation will finally be made from my account.
  2. Standard Donation - As a user I can choose to donate $100 to a charity. If there has already been (1 or more) matching donation pledges to the same charity for the same cause, I may be able to increment my donation to $100 * Y (Y being the number of similar pledges). When I go on the donation page, I see something like - "Donate $200 by giving $100"

The whole point of this system design is to encourage people to donate more. It may work since the users see a higher than normal impact. 

This idea is not new, it is already implemented in several large corporations and has worked wonders in gathering large donations. 

Would EA be interested in implementing an experiment to see if such a donation design works? If yes, I wouldn't mind guiding you to do so.

3

0
0

Reactions

0
0
Comments3


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

While not exactly the same, EA researchers are already doing something quite similar: https://givingmultiplier.org/.

Yes, it's a similar idea to the "Matching as donor coordination" idea I describe in this post.  (Feel free to contact me if you have any thoughts.)

I really appreciate the work that https://givingmultiplier.org/ is doing. I am certain it will lead to greater reflection by donors and increase funding for important causes, particularly highly impactful charities. For a simple live database of donation matches that are publicly available, https://www.donationmultiplier.org may (or may not) be of interest. Donation Multiplier (also conceived at Harvard) is not geared towards effective altruism at this moment in time but rather seeks to encourage donations from individuals that might not otherwise be donating. As one of the founders, it is our hope that over time we can increase the number of donation match listings, particularly matches offered by cost-effective and highly impactful charities, resulting in a net gain in money donated to charities i.e. expanding the pool of resources, in addition to increasing the relative frequency and amount of donations to highly effective charities. We are also passionate about improving the integrity of donation matches e.g. addressing the repackaging of donations into matches or delays in removing matches once the cap has been exceeded, so we are currently exploring a system for ensuring that only matches that meet certain standards of integrity are included on our site, thus we hope that in the future Donation Multiplier will also function as a screening tool.

Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 1m read
 · 
Garrison
 ·  · 7m read
 · 
This is the full text of a post from "The Obsolete Newsletter," a Substack that I write about the intersection of capitalism, geopolitics, and artificial intelligence. I’m a freelance journalist and the author of a forthcoming book called Obsolete: Power, Profit, and the Race to build Machine Superintelligence. Consider subscribing to stay up to date with my work. Wow. The Wall Street Journal just reported that, "a consortium of investors led by Elon Musk is offering $97.4 billion to buy the nonprofit that controls OpenAI." Technically, they can't actually do that, so I'm going to assume that Musk is trying to buy all of the nonprofit's assets, which include governing control over OpenAI's for-profit, as well as all the profits above the company's profit caps. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman already tweeted, "no thank you but we will buy twitter for $9.74 billion if you want." (Musk, for his part, replied with just the word: "Swindler.") Even if Altman were willing, it's not clear if this bid could even go through. It can probably best be understood as an attempt to throw a wrench in OpenAI's ongoing plan to restructure fully into a for-profit company. To complete the transition, OpenAI needs to compensate its nonprofit for the fair market value of what it is giving up. In October, The Information reported that OpenAI was planning to give the nonprofit at least 25 percent of the new company, at the time, worth $37.5 billion. But in late January, the Financial Times reported that the nonprofit might only receive around $30 billion, "but a final price is yet to be determined." That's still a lot of money, but many experts I've spoken with think it drastically undervalues what the nonprofit is giving up. Musk has sued to block OpenAI's conversion, arguing that he would be irreparably harmed if it went through. But while Musk's suit seems unlikely to succeed, his latest gambit might significantly drive up the price OpenAI has to pay. (My guess is that Altman will still ma
 ·  · 5m read
 · 
When we built a calculator to help meat-eaters offset the animal welfare impact of their diet through donations (like carbon offsets), we didn't expect it to become one of our most effective tools for engaging new donors. In this post we explain how it works, why it seems particularly promising for increasing support for farmed animal charities, and what you can do to support this work if you think it’s worthwhile. In the comments I’ll also share our answers to some frequently asked questions and concerns some people have when thinking about the idea of an ‘animal welfare offset’. Background FarmKind is a donation platform whose mission is to support the animal movement by raising funds from the general public for some of the most effective charities working to fix factory farming. When we built our platform, we directionally estimated how much a donation to each of our recommended charities helps animals, to show users.  This also made it possible for us to calculate how much someone would need to donate to do as much good for farmed animals as their diet harms them – like carbon offsetting, but for animal welfare. So we built it. What we didn’t expect was how much something we built as a side project would capture peoples’ imaginations!  What it is and what it isn’t What it is:  * An engaging tool for bringing to life the idea that there are still ways to help farmed animals even if you’re unable/unwilling to go vegetarian/vegan. * A way to help people get a rough sense of how much they might want to give to do an amount of good that’s commensurate with the harm to farmed animals caused by their diet What it isn’t:  * A perfectly accurate crystal ball to determine how much a given individual would need to donate to exactly offset their diet. See the caveats here to understand why you shouldn’t take this (or any other charity impact estimate) literally. All models are wrong but some are useful. * A flashy piece of software (yet!). It was built as
Recent opportunities in Effective giving
63
· · 1m read