Effective Altruism Forum
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
Comment Permalink
Hauke Hillebrandt0
0
0

Yes, that's actually an important consideration. I think I'll link to Givewell and give AMF and SCI as an example, so that people know that they will probably not win if they just write about bednet distributions or deworming.

Reply
See in context
by Hauke Hillebrandt
2 min read 11

16

Frontpage

Tl;dr: I need feedback and ~$2,000 for prize money to start an EA essay competition.

 

Update: The project is funded now! Feedback is still very welcome!

Hi!

I’m Hauke, the new Director of Research at Giving What We Can.

Similar to Tyler’s recent blog post, I’ve an idea to get more people engaged with EA.

I’ve a spreadsheet with the contact details of the administrators of the the world’s top 100 universities master’s programmes in Global Health and Development. I think that some of the students in these areas would be very receptive to effective altruism (at least in terms of global poverty eradication).

I want to email all these contacts and and give them a good reason to forward the email to all their students in the department in order to introduce them to effective altruism and Giving What We Can and deeply engage with EA ideas.

The idea is to have an essay competition for these students.

The benefit would be threefold:

  1. The students and potentially the scientific field of Development might be nudged to think more in terms effectiveness

  2. This might also translate into more engagement with EA (GWWC pledges etc.) as some of the students are naturally aligned with our cause

  3. The best ideas might undercover very effective interventions

 

Here’s a very rough draft of the essay prompt:

“How can one be an effective altruist? To which organisation should one donate their money to, in order to do the most good for the global poor? Which is the most effective, but currently underfunded global poverty intervention that is already done or could be  implemented soon?

The essay ideally clarifies the following issues:

  1. Intervention effectiveness:

    1. What is the scale of the problem (global burden of disease in DALYs) and thus scalability of the intervention? See Global Burden of Disease Study.

    2. What is the cost-benefit analysis of the intervention ($ Dollars per DALY averted)? See Disease Control Priorities Project.

  2. Neglectedness/crowdedness:

    1. Is there an organisation that is currently doing this intervention work and could use our donations?

    2. Is there room for more funding in this area which would mean that additional donation to this intervention would have high impact? Or is this area currently already sufficiently funded and our marginal impact is low?

  3. Tractability:

    1. Is this a feasible intervention that could realistically implemented soon or are there any barriers to this intervention being implemented (e.g. cultural, political, technological barriers)?”

Word limit: 900 words excluding references.

The prize money could be distributed as follows:


1st Prize

$1,000

2nd Prize

$500

3rd Prize

$250

4

$50

5

$50

6

$20

Bookprize

7

$20

Bookprize

8

$20

Bookprize

9

$20

Bookprize

10

$20

Bookprize

11

$20

Bookprize

12

$20

Bookprize

13

$20

Bookprize



Overall Prize money in US Dollar

$2,010


The idea here is that the first prize sounds like a lot (4 figures) and there are still quite a few more prizes. The books would of course be EA books (e.g. Peter Singer's or Will's book).


The grading could be crowdsourced if there are too many submission for me to judge by myself.

Feedback on this idea is very welcome.

If you want to fund this project, you can also email me at: hauke.hillebrandt@givingwhatwecan.org

16

0
0

Reactions

0
0

More posts like this

Comments11


Sorted by
New & upvoted
Click to highlight new comments since:
tomstocker3
0
0

This is a fantastic idea Hauke, nice one! I also like they way you've set out the objective and rationale clearly. Thanks!

The primary objective is to engage students right rather than get ideas?

Social policy, economics, epidemiology and public health DPhils / masters people might also be really good for this if you can get the mailing lists etc. (could that be tacked on to Tyler's task for nearly EA group contact details at universities?)

Again, wonderful idea and all the best!

Reply
Hauke Hillebrandt0
0
0

Yes, good idea- I'll try to get in touch with those students as well! Thanks Tom for the feedback!

Reply
zdgroff3
0
0

You might want to include a link to some EA sites, books, or articles to clarify that effective altruist has a specific meaning. People not already in the EA movement, especially those who have not encountered it, might not realize the level of intellectual rigor and roughly consequentialist reasoning expected.

Reply
Denise_Melchin2
0
0

Seconding this. I think people might underestimate this.

Reply
Hauke Hillebrandt0
0
0

Yes, that's a very good point! I'll include links and flesh this out a bit.

Reply
Peter Wildeford1
0
0

Late question, but what plans are in place (if any) to measure the impact of the essay contest?

Reply
Hauke Hillebrandt1
0
0

Great question!

The impact measure will work through two different ways:

First, we'll track how many visitors to the page we get through the email and how many sign the pledge. Second, we'll track how many submissions we get and what the quality of those submissions is.

Reply
ChrisJenkins1
0
0

Great idea! I like that you give particular suggestions for reading that aren't inside-EA information sources. Still, though, I would worry that people can quickly read up on the general EA platform and might then expect that toeing the GiveWell line is their best strategy for winning. That would at least get people to think about that information enough to summarize it, which is useful. But it might be useful to explicitly ask for consideration of interventions that differ from any of the major program types recommended by GiveWell/TLYCS/etc.

(I don't know why this would matter, but it also occurs to me that the most serious contestants are probably reading these comments. Hello!)

Reply
Hauke Hillebrandt0
0
0

Yes, that's actually an important consideration. I think I'll link to Givewell and give AMF and SCI as an example, so that people know that they will probably not win if they just write about bednet distributions or deworming.

Reply
Peter Wildeford0
0
0

I'm confident someone will fund this fully, but I'm also nervous everyone will think that and no one will fund you. Not sure what to do about that.

I guess I'll ask -- how's your funding coming along?

Reply
Hauke Hillebrandt3
0
0

It's fully funded! :)

Reply
More from Hauke Hillebrandt
130
GDP per capita in 2050
Hauke Hillebrandt
· · 20m read
11
11
435
Growth and the case against randomista development
Hauke Hillebrandt
· · 37m read
197
197
172
Let's Fund: Better Science impact evaluation. Registered Reports now available in Nature
Hauke Hillebrandt
· · 3m read
4
4
View more
Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 52m read
 · 
In recent months, the CEOs of leading AI companies have grown increasingly confident about rapid progress: * OpenAI's Sam Altman: Shifted from saying in November "the rate of progress continues" to declaring in January "we are now confident we know how to build AGI" * Anthropic's Dario Amodei: Stated in January "I'm more confident than I've ever been that we're close to powerful capabilities... in the next 2-3 years" * Google DeepMind's Demis Hassabis: Changed from "as soon as 10 years" in autumn to "probably three to five years away" by January. What explains the shift? Is it just hype? Or could we really have Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) by 2028?[1] In this article, I look at what's driven recent progress, estimate how far those drivers can continue, and explain why they're likely to continue for at least four more years. In particular, while in 2024 progress in LLM chatbots seemed to slow, a new approach started to work: teaching the models to reason using reinforcement learning. In just a year, this let them surpass human PhDs at answering difficult scientific reasoning questions, and achieve expert-level performance on one-hour coding tasks. We don't know how capable AGI will become, but extrapolating the recent rate of progress suggests that, by 2028, we could reach AI models with beyond-human reasoning abilities, expert-level knowledge in every domain, and that can autonomously complete multi-week projects, and progress would likely continue from there.  On this set of software engineering & computer use tasks, in 2020 AI was only able to do tasks that would typically take a human expert a couple of seconds. By 2024, that had risen to almost an hour. If the trend continues, by 2028 it'll reach several weeks.  No longer mere chatbots, these 'agent' models might soon satisfy many people's definitions of AGI — roughly, AI systems that match human performance at most knowledge work (see definition in footnote).[1] This means that, while the co
saulius
 ·  · 22m read
 · 
Summary In this article, I estimate the cost-effectiveness of five Anima International programs in Poland: improving cage-free and broiler welfare, blocking new factory farms, banning fur farming, and encouraging retailers to sell more plant-based protein. I estimate that together, these programs help roughly 136 animals—or 32 years of farmed animal life—per dollar spent. Animal years affected per dollar spent was within an order of magnitude for all five evaluated interventions. I also tried to estimate how much suffering each program alleviates. Using SADs (Suffering-Adjusted Days)—a metric developed by Ambitious Impact (AIM) that accounts for species differences and pain intensity—Anima’s programs appear highly cost-effective, even compared to charities recommended by Animal Charity Evaluators. However, I also ran a small informal survey to understand how people intuitively weigh different categories of pain defined by the Welfare Footprint Institute. The results suggested that SADs may heavily underweight brief but intense suffering. Based on those findings, I created my own metric DCDE (Disabling Chicken Day Equivalent) with different weightings. Under this approach, interventions focused on humane slaughter look more promising, while cage-free campaigns appear less impactful. These results are highly uncertain but show how sensitive conclusions are to how we value different kinds of suffering. My estimates are highly speculative, often relying on subjective judgments from Anima International staff regarding factors such as the likelihood of success for various interventions. This introduces potential bias. Another major source of uncertainty is how long the effects of reforms will last if achieved. To address this, I developed a methodology to estimate impact duration for chicken welfare campaigns. However, I’m essentially guessing when it comes to how long the impact of farm-blocking or fur bans might last—there’s just too much uncertainty. Background In
 ·  · 4m read
 · 
SUMMARY:  ALLFED is launching an emergency appeal on the EA Forum due to a serious funding shortfall. Without new support, ALLFED will be forced to cut half our budget in the coming months, drastically reducing our capacity to help build global food system resilience for catastrophic scenarios like nuclear winter, a severe pandemic, or infrastructure breakdown. ALLFED is seeking $800,000 over the course of 2025 to sustain its team, continue policy-relevant research, and move forward with pilot projects that could save lives in a catastrophe. As funding priorities shift toward AI safety, we believe resilient food solutions remain a highly cost-effective way to protect the future. If you’re able to support or share this appeal, please visit allfed.info/donate. Donate to ALLFED FULL ARTICLE: I (David Denkenberger) am writing alongside two of my team-mates, as ALLFED’s co-founder, to ask for your support. This is the first time in Alliance to Feed the Earth in Disaster’s (ALLFED’s) 8 year existence that we have reached out on the EA Forum with a direct funding appeal outside of Marginal Funding Week/our annual updates. I am doing so because ALLFED’s funding situation is serious, and because so much of ALLFED’s progress to date has been made possible through the support, feedback, and collaboration of the EA community.  Read our funding appeal At ALLFED, we are deeply grateful to all our supporters, including the Survival and Flourishing Fund, which has provided the majority of our funding for years. At the end of 2024, we learned we would be receiving far less support than expected due to a shift in SFF’s strategic priorities toward AI safety. Without additional funding, ALLFED will need to shrink. I believe the marginal cost effectiveness for improving the future and saving lives of resilience is competitive with AI Safety, even if timelines are short, because of potential AI-induced catastrophes. That is why we are asking people to donate to this emergency appeal
Relevant opportunities
24
Donation swap with me please?
Q
Mitchell Laughlin🔸
· · 1m read
0
0
45
The CEA Events Team is Hiring for Three Program Lead Positions
OllieBase
· · 3m read
0
0
32
Contracting Opportunity: Be a shortform video editor for the new 80,000 Hours Video Program (even if you haven't edited before!)
2 authors
· · 2m read
0
0
View more