If this were the case, I would expect to see the most cost-effective cases saturated (leading to reduced marginal cost-effectiveness), but with tremendous improvement reducing child mortality globally. But that apparently hasn’t happened, when looking at the income for those charities.
Is it really justified to say that this hasn’t happened? After all, after you saturate all the most cost-effective interventions, all the previously-second-most cost-effective interventions become the most cost effective ones. There’s always something that is most cost effective and unfunded.
Child mortality has in fact dropped sharply in the last few decades, and I believe at least some of that is due to international aid work and health improvements. An example I hold in my head (that is years old now, so possibly stale) is that vaccine distribution is extremely cheap as a way to save lives, and the only reason it’s not an EA cause area is that it’s already funded by existing institutions, and the only remaining things to fund in vaccine access are the cases that are very difficult to reach, or more indirect things like improving take-up among populations that have access.
(To be clear I’m not saying this to let billionaires off the hook; I agree that in general many / most of them are failing their moral obligations. I’m not sure how much of the above work was funded by philanthropists rather than governments or grassroots movements. But I think it’s relevant context nonetheless.)
Is it really justified to say that this hasn’t happened? After all, after you saturate all the most cost-effective interventions, all the previously-second-most cost-effective interventions become the most cost effective ones. There’s always something that is most cost effective and unfunded.
Child mortality has in fact dropped sharply in the last few decades, and I believe at least some of that is due to international aid work and health improvements. An example I hold in my head (that is years old now, so possibly stale) is that vaccine distribution is extremely cheap as a way to save lives, and the only reason it’s not an EA cause area is that it’s already funded by existing institutions, and the only remaining things to fund in vaccine access are the cases that are very difficult to reach, or more indirect things like improving take-up among populations that have access.
(To be clear I’m not saying this to let billionaires off the hook; I agree that in general many / most of them are failing their moral obligations. I’m not sure how much of the above work was funded by philanthropists rather than governments or grassroots movements. But I think it’s relevant context nonetheless.)