First and foremost, I also think that E2G is generally/globally neglected within AW (the sub area of EA I know most about, not sure about EA more broadly) and that its potential is biggest in the Global North.
I also agree that we don't necessarily need local donors to increase local participation - this bottleneck can be solved differently (Vasco's point and Mo's examples).
I do think it's important to distinguish E2G from EG. People can do the latter without doing the former. As you know, I've become excited about people taking jobs in government, corporations, etc. to drive change for animals from the inside (forcontext). This could be combined with some (modest) giving. What do you think about these paths?
Regarding the other constraints you mentioned (lack of knowledge about impactful opportunities, tax deductibility, etc.): We're currently thinking about how we can help solve these through AAA. Will keep you posted!
Thanks Vasco! Do you mean something like a local funding committee? Someone suggested this to me before to increase local participation in grantmaking. I've been thinking about it.
See my reply to Nick on the effectiveness side of things. I think that is indeed a big challenge.
Your response focuses primarily on "mass appeal" of this idea. You also mention HNWIs. But I think there may be a "middle group": What do you think about targeting higher-earning segments of the population, but not at HNWI level? Like the software developer in Accra or lawyer in Nairobi?
Thanks Nick for sharing your perspective/experiences. It fits with a lot of things I've seen/heard. Giving is a huge part of many people's lives, it's the effective part that may be particularly challenging. I also have my doubts about animal welfare being a motivating factor for many, but at least we've seen traction with some people.
One thing I'd challenge is that people would necessarily donate to an international NGO. Many EA orgs operate within LMICs. So why not just help people find the most effective orgs within their country? Or maybe even region? For example, people on our course seemed very eager to do something about factory farming in Africa. I doubt they would be as excited to donate to shrimp welfare work in Asia or broiler welfare in Europe.
If a software developer in Germany can pay for a German animal welfare campaigner, can't a Kenyan software developer also just pay a Kenyan campaigner? The relative differences in earnings should be similar.
How did I miss tractability?!? Such a good addition. Seems like I did not see the forest for the trees...
Neglectedness also seems so obvious! Seems easier to pick low-hanging fruits when there haven't been too many travellers on your road before...
The Optimizer's Curse is a really nice addition too. I wouldn't say you should avoid those peaks though. Rather: be skeptical of outliers in the terrain and prefer broad mountains over needle-like peaks, esp. when it's foggy.
Thanks Mo! I am no expert on moral uncertainty and how to deal with it, so I'm sure there are much more knowledgeable people than myself to judge. That's also why I don’t want to imply that robustness is the uniquely correct approach. I do like the metaphor of robustness as “directions that are uphill on most maps” and this is the kind of visualisation I hoped the post could spark. I'd be curious to hear more about how different approaches of dealing with moral uncertainty would "aggregate over maps".
Thanks Felix, I agree with many of your points.
First and foremost, I also think that E2G is generally/globally neglected within AW (the sub area of EA I know most about, not sure about EA more broadly) and that its potential is biggest in the Global North.
I also agree that we don't necessarily need local donors to increase local participation - this bottleneck can be solved differently (Vasco's point and Mo's examples).
I do think it's important to distinguish E2G from EG. People can do the latter without doing the former. As you know, I've become excited about people taking jobs in government, corporations, etc. to drive change for animals from the inside (for context). This could be combined with some (modest) giving. What do you think about these paths?
Regarding the other constraints you mentioned (lack of knowledge about impactful opportunities, tax deductibility, etc.): We're currently thinking about how we can help solve these through AAA. Will keep you posted!
Thanks Vasco! Do you mean something like a local funding committee? Someone suggested this to me before to increase local participation in grantmaking. I've been thinking about it.
Thanks!
Thanks for your perspective, Aïda!
See my reply to Nick on the effectiveness side of things. I think that is indeed a big challenge.
Your response focuses primarily on "mass appeal" of this idea. You also mention HNWIs. But I think there may be a "middle group": What do you think about targeting higher-earning segments of the population, but not at HNWI level? Like the software developer in Accra or lawyer in Nairobi?
Thanks Nick for sharing your perspective/experiences. It fits with a lot of things I've seen/heard. Giving is a huge part of many people's lives, it's the effective part that may be particularly challenging. I also have my doubts about animal welfare being a motivating factor for many, but at least we've seen traction with some people.
One thing I'd challenge is that people would necessarily donate to an international NGO. Many EA orgs operate within LMICs. So why not just help people find the most effective orgs within their country? Or maybe even region? For example, people on our course seemed very eager to do something about factory farming in Africa. I doubt they would be as excited to donate to shrimp welfare work in Asia or broiler welfare in Europe.
If a software developer in Germany can pay for a German animal welfare campaigner, can't a Kenyan software developer also just pay a Kenyan campaigner? The relative differences in earnings should be similar.
I love it, thanks for playing along!
Thanks Mo! I am no expert on moral uncertainty and how to deal with it, so I'm sure there are much more knowledgeable people than myself to judge. That's also why I don’t want to imply that robustness is the uniquely correct approach. I do like the metaphor of robustness as “directions that are uphill on most maps” and this is the kind of visualisation I hoped the post could spark. I'd be curious to hear more about how different approaches of dealing with moral uncertainty would "aggregate over maps".
Thank you, Vasco!
Thanks Ben. Excited to hear about your research! Please do share that with me/us, as soon as it's ready :)
100% agreed on starting early. And then growing the capacity as fast as we can effectively!