Hi,

Are you a young researcher who conducts research aimed at addressing global challenges within the fields of health, development, environment and equality in all aspects of human life?

Or do you know of someone who might fit this description? 

If so, you/they can apply for The Letten Prize.

Prize money at 2,5 MNOK (~235 000 USD).

Interested? View the criteria for applying here: 
https://lettenprize.com/criteria/

Disclamers:
* I've been involved with the EA community since 2017, eg. established EA Oslo and served on the board of EA Norway. 
* I am currently working freelance for The Young Academy of Norway, as well as serving on the board of the Letten Foundation. This research prize are a result of a collaboration by the two parties. I see why this may be seen as "spam". However, I truly believe that we have several great candidates within our community who could contend for the prize.
* I will serve as the secretary of the prize committee, but have no influence on the committees decision.

39

0
0

Reactions

0
0
Comments7


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

This sounds like a cool opportunity! Any idea how many people are competing?

This might be interesting for people who are also interested in the Cause Innovation Bootcamp.

 

(P.S. I took the liberty of reformatting your post because I think it might help. Feel free to copy or ignore as you see fit.)

(P.P.S. I appreciate that your term for "young researcher" means "under 45" ^^)


Hi,

Are you a researcher under 45 who conducts research aimed at addressing global challenges within the fields of health, development, environment and equality in all aspects of human life?

Or do you know of someone who might fit this description? 

If so, you/they can apply for The Letten Prize.

Prize money: 2,5 MNOK (~235 000 USD).
Deadline: February 6th, 2023.

Interested? View the criteria for applying here: 
https://lettenprize.com/criteria/

Disclamers:

  • I've been involved with the EA community since 2017, eg. established EA Oslo and served on the board of EA Norway.
  • I am currently working freelance for The Young Academy of Norway, as well as serving on the board of the Letten Foundation. This research prize are a result of a collaboration by the two parties. I see why this may be seen as "spam". However, I truly believe that we have several great candidates within our community who could contend for the prize.
  • I will serve as the secretary of the prize committee, but have no influence on the committees decision.

Thanks for the tip! I will get in touch with CIB as well!

Thank you also for the suggested changes!

How many are competing for the prize? 
Of course, it will depend on the number of applications we receive this year. But if the last call for application is a benchmark, we received around 50 applications.

I think it's well worth stating that there were only 50 applicants last round. That's 50000kr for a random draw, and I think some readers of this forum are well above chance.

To be clear, are you mostly evaluating based on past performance (e.g. stuff already published), such that there's not much candidates have time to achieve before February to increase their chances? Or are you weighting recent work more?

I'm not able to answer that. It will be up to the committee, however, you can view the committee guidelines here:

https://lettenprize.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Guidelines-for-the-Letten-Prize-Committee.pdf

The committee will not receive further instructions, and it will be up to them how to evaluate the mandate.

(Taking the post at face value) this is surprising this has so few upvotes . 

  • From this post at least, the OP seems to have a lot of competency (besides getting funding/using resources/networking from EA) and that is rarer these days.
  • For the object level content of the prize/activity itself, this seems useful and could bring in outside resources (not just money) into EA.

Hi Charles,

I must admit I have not followed the international EA movement closely at all the years I've been involved, so I'am a bit confused by your statement. If you have the time, I would like to know what you mean by the statement that it is rare fore EA's to have competency (out side of EA-stuff).

Am I to understand that people don't take jobs/work outside of EA-related organizations?

My LinkedIn if you are interested in my background: https://www.linkedin.com/in/hsandbakken/ (In Norwegian, but I'm sure you have a translate-function in your browser).

My statement which discussed "competency" was wrong as written. It was noise without information. Additionally, my original claim did not involve people primarily being in EA-related organizations.

Sorry for the distraction. Thank you for your informative post.

Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 20m read
 · 
Advanced AI could unlock an era of enlightened and competent government action. But without smart, active investment, we’ll squander that opportunity and barrel blindly into danger. Executive summary See also a summary on Twitter / X. The US federal government is falling behind the private sector on AI adoption. As AI improves, a growing gap would leave the government unable to effectively respond to AI-driven existential challenges and threaten the legitimacy of its democratic institutions. A dual imperative → Government adoption of AI can’t wait. Making steady progress is critical to: * Boost the government’s capacity to effectively respond to AI-driven existential challenges * Help democratic oversight keep up with the technological power of other groups * Defuse the risk of rushed AI adoption in a crisis → But hasty AI adoption could backfire. Without care, integration of AI could: * Be exploited, subverting independent government action * Lead to unsafe deployment of AI systems * Accelerate arms races or compress safety research timelines Summary of the recommendations 1. Work with the US federal government to help it effectively adopt AI Simplistic “pro-security” or “pro-speed” attitudes miss the point. Both are important — and many interventions would help with both. We should: * Invest in win-win measures that both facilitate adoption and reduce the risks involved, e.g.: * Build technical expertise within government (invest in AI and technical talent, ensure NIST is well resourced) * Streamline procurement processes for AI products and related tech (like cloud services) * Modernize the government’s digital infrastructure and data management practices * Prioritize high-leverage interventions that have strong adoption-boosting benefits with minor security costs or vice versa, e.g.: * On the security side: investing in cyber security, pre-deployment testing of AI in high-stakes areas, and advancing research on mitigating the ris
 ·  · 15m read
 · 
In our recent strategy retreat, the GWWC Leadership Team recognised that by spreading our limited resources across too many projects, we are unable to deliver the level of excellence and impact that our mission demands. True to our value of being mission accountable, we've therefore made the difficult but necessary decision to discontinue a total of 10 initiatives. By focusing our energy on fewer, more strategically aligned initiatives, we think we’ll be more likely to ultimately achieve our Big Hairy Audacious Goal of 1 million pledgers donating $3B USD to high-impact charities annually. (See our 2025 strategy.) We’d like to be transparent about the choices we made, both to hold ourselves accountable and so other organisations can take the gaps we leave into account when planning their work. As such, this post aims to: * Inform the broader EA community about changes to projects & highlight opportunities to carry these projects forward * Provide timelines for project transitions * Explain our rationale for discontinuing certain initiatives What’s changing  We've identified 10 initiatives[1] to wind down or transition. These are: * GWWC Canada * Effective Altruism Australia funding partnership * GWWC Groups * Giving Games * Charity Elections * Effective Giving Meta evaluation and grantmaking * The Donor Lottery * Translations * Hosted Funds * New licensing of the GWWC brand  Each of these is detailed in the sections below, with timelines and transition plans where applicable. How this is relevant to you  We still believe in the impact potential of many of these projects. Our decision doesn’t necessarily reflect their lack of value, but rather our need to focus at this juncture of GWWC's development.  Thus, we are actively looking for organisations and individuals interested in taking on some of these projects. If that’s you, please do reach out: see each project's section for specific contact details. Thank you for your continued support as we
 ·  · 3m read
 · 
We are excited to share a summary of our 2025 strategy, which builds on our work in 2024 and provides a vision through 2027 and beyond! Background Giving What We Can (GWWC) is working towards a world without preventable suffering or existential risk, where everyone is able to flourish. We do this by making giving effectively and significantly a cultural norm. Focus on pledges Based on our last impact evaluation[1], we have made our pledges –  and in particular the 🔸10% Pledge – the core focus of GWWC’s work.[2] We know the 🔸10% Pledge is a powerful institution, as we’ve seen almost 10,000 people take it and give nearly $50M USD to high-impact charities annually. We believe it could become a norm among at least the richest 1% — and likely a much wider segment of the population — which would cumulatively direct an enormous quantity of financial resources towards tackling the world’s most pressing problems.  We initiated this focus on pledges in early 2024, and are doubling down on it in 2025. In line with this, we are retiring various other initiatives we were previously running and which are not consistent with our new strategy. Introducing our BHAG We are setting ourselves a long-term Big Hairy Audacious Goal (BHAG) of 1 million pledgers donating $3B USD to high-impact charities annually, which we will start working towards in 2025. 1 million pledgers donating $3B USD to high-impact charities annually would be roughly equivalent to ~100x GWWC’s current scale, and could be achieved by 1% of the world’s richest 1% pledging and giving effectively. Achieving this would imply the equivalent of nearly 1 million lives being saved[3] every year. See the BHAG FAQ for more info. Working towards our BHAG Over the coming years, we expect to test various growth pathways and interventions that could get us to our BHAG, including digital marketing, partnerships with aligned organisations, community advocacy, media/PR, and direct outreach to potential pledgers. We thin