I don’t know what the actual grantmakers think, but if I was deciding about the funding
- you can get funding to do EA localization basically in any country, if you come up with a reasonable strategy & demonstrate competence and understanding of EA - difficulty of coming up with a reasonable strategy in my view varies between places; e.g., if you wanted to create, for the sake of discussion, EA Norway, a reasonable strategy may be ‘just’ supporting people in attempts to do impactful work, supporting uni groups, routing donations and maybe engaging with Norway’s policy sphere. What you end up with could be pretty close to what’s done in Oxford or London. In contrast, if you wanted to create, for the sake of discussion, EA Nepal, I don’t think you should focus on routing donations or tell people they should follow 80k career advice. (And if you ask for funding to do that, I don’t think you should be funded.) - some locations could be obviously important, but that may mean actually higher bar for the efforts there
With this decision model in mind, - I would be confused how to react to confused and extremely straw models (e.g. GDP of the country or per capita? neither) - I think I would find it pretty difficult to produce the type of artifacts some commenters here demand (i.e. some ranked lists of countries?) - Even when I would be able to list some ‘obviously important places’, the interpretation of what does that mean would not be ‘you should do community building there’ or ‘community building there should get funding’, but more like “it’s important to get this right”.
I don’t know what the actual grantmakers think, but if I was deciding about the funding
- you can get funding to do EA localization basically in any country, if you come up with a reasonable strategy & demonstrate competence and understanding of EA
- difficulty of coming up with a reasonable strategy in my view varies between places; e.g., if you wanted to create, for the sake of discussion, EA Norway, a reasonable strategy may be ‘just’ supporting people in attempts to do impactful work, supporting uni groups, routing donations and maybe engaging with Norway’s policy sphere. What you end up with could be pretty close to what’s done in Oxford or London. In contrast, if you wanted to create, for the sake of discussion, EA Nepal, I don’t think you should focus on routing donations or tell people they should follow 80k career advice. (And if you ask for funding to do that, I don’t think you should be funded.)
- some locations could be obviously important, but that may mean actually higher bar for the efforts there
With this decision model in mind,
- I would be confused how to react to confused and extremely straw models (e.g. GDP of the country or per capita? neither)
- I think I would find it pretty difficult to produce the type of artifacts some commenters here demand (i.e. some ranked lists of countries?)
- Even when I would be able to list some ‘obviously important places’, the interpretation of what does that mean would not be ‘you should do community building there’ or ‘community building there should get funding’, but more like “it’s important to get this right”.