Vasco began by saying that people should give money to the Shrimp Welfare Project. But then, when he began counting the welfare of the roughly billion soil nematodes per person, he concluded that normal GiveWell-style charities beat the Shrimp Welfare Project, because they lower soil nematode populations (though he GiveWell charities are less effective for saving lives than the High-Impact Philanthropy Fund [HIPF]). And heās not even that confident that soil nematodes have bad lives!
Meanwhile, I have become very uncertain about whether increasing agricultural land, such as by saving human lives, increases or decreases the number of soil nematodes. I recommend decreasing the uncertainty about effects on soil animals and microorganisms by making donations to Rethink Priorities (RP) restricted to projects on soil animals and microorganisms.
Vasco estimated that per dollar, HIPF prevents about 5 billion years of soil nematode life (and way more than that many years of bacteria life). But you know whatās a lot more than 5 billion? 10^50.
The future may have 10^50 QALYs of value, but I doubt one could increase future welfare by 10^50 QALY/ā$. Are you aware of any reasonably empirical quantitative model estimating the increase in welfare per $ accounting for longterm effects?
If welfare per human-year was proportional to 2^ānumber of neuronsā, a person with one more neuron than another would have 2 times as much welfare per human-year.
I recommend decreasing the uncertainty about effects on soil animals and microorganisms by making donations to Rethink Priorities (RP) restricted to projects on soil animals and microorganisms.
Readers are welcome to reach out privately if they are interested in funding research on the welfare of soil animals. I know about one project proposal on this, not necessarily from RP.
Thanks for the post, Matthew!
Meanwhile, I have become very uncertain about whether increasing agricultural land, such as by saving human lives, increases or decreases the number of soil nematodes. I recommend decreasing the uncertainty about effects on soil animals and microorganisms by making donations to Rethink Priorities (RP) restricted to projects on soil animals and microorganisms.
The future may have 10^50 QALYs of value, but I doubt one could increase future welfare by 10^50 QALY/ā$. Are you aware of any reasonably empirical quantitative model estimating the increase in welfare per $ accounting for longterm effects?
If welfare per human-year was proportional to 2^ānumber of neuronsā, a person with one more neuron than another would have 2 times as much welfare per human-year.
Does RP have such projects?
Readers are welcome to reach out privately if they are interested in funding research on the welfare of soil animals. I know about one project proposal on this, not necessarily from RP.