How Diverse Are EA’s Resource Allocations and Interventions Across Demographics and Regions?

I have been reflecting on the global distribution of Effective Altruism (EA) resources and interventions. A common critique is that EA might unintentionally prioritize certain populations or regions while neglecting others, raising questions about equity and representation. • Are there any statistics or studies showing how EA’s resources are distributed across regions, demographics, and socioeconomic groups? • How does EA account for diversity and inclusion when designing or funding interventions? • What are the community’s thoughts on whether EA has systemic blind spots or biases, and how these might be addressed?

Scenario:

Two individuals propose solutions to improve access to clean water in rural Africa: • A, an African researcher, designs a community-driven solution tailored to local needs, emphasizing sustainability and cultural relevance. • B, a Western researcher, proposes a similar solution using advanced technology and partnerships with international organizations.

Question: Who is more likely to receive funding? Does EA prioritize lived experience and local expertise (A) or global networks and scalability (B)? How can EA balance equity and effectiveness in funding decisions?

I’d appreciate any insights, data, or perspectives on this topic. Thanks!