Executive summary: Minimizing cost per life saved in global health philanthropy risks adverse selection by systematically biasing towards saving lives in countries with worse overall quality of life, necessitating adjustments for factors beyond just disability-adjusted life years (DALYs).
Key points:
Simply minimizing cost per DALY saved ignores significant variations in quality of life between countries.
Cheaper life-saving interventions are often available in countries with worse political institutions, fewer freedoms, and lower prospects.
Factors like institutional quality, individual liberties, and future growth prospects should be considered when valuing lives saved.
Quantifying quality of life differences is challenging but necessary, potentially using metrics like subjective well-being or migration patterns.
This analysis may favor interventions in poor but improving countries over those stuck in bad equilibria.
Depending on adjustment magnitudes, this could shift focus away from life-saving in developing countries towards other interventions.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, andcontact us if you have feedback.
Executive summary: Minimizing cost per life saved in global health philanthropy risks adverse selection by systematically biasing towards saving lives in countries with worse overall quality of life, necessitating adjustments for factors beyond just disability-adjusted life years (DALYs).
Key points:
Simply minimizing cost per DALY saved ignores significant variations in quality of life between countries.
Cheaper life-saving interventions are often available in countries with worse political institutions, fewer freedoms, and lower prospects.
Factors like institutional quality, individual liberties, and future growth prospects should be considered when valuing lives saved.
Quantifying quality of life differences is challenging but necessary, potentially using metrics like subjective well-being or migration patterns.
This analysis may favor interventions in poor but improving countries over those stuck in bad equilibria.
Depending on adjustment magnitudes, this could shift focus away from life-saving in developing countries towards other interventions.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, and contact us if you have feedback.