Very interesting post, thank you for the research.
Based on your model, should Open Phil etc. be aiming for 50% research in every year? Or should it be aiming for a very high level of research funding now, knowing that it can take actions on better opportunities in the future? Maybe the research percentage by year should be something like 100%, 95%, 90% etc?
The recommendation of 50% already takes into account that better opportunities will be available in the future. This statistic means that the amount of money we invest into research in total across time and funding agencies should be roughly equal to the total amount of money that has been or will be invested into existing interventions. This global, long‐term 50-50 split can be achieved in many ways. One or more EA funding agencies temporarily investing much more than 50% into research could be a good way to implement it.
Very interesting post, thank you for the research.
Based on your model, should Open Phil etc. be aiming for 50% research in every year? Or should it be aiming for a very high level of research funding now, knowing that it can take actions on better opportunities in the future? Maybe the research percentage by year should be something like 100%, 95%, 90% etc?
The recommendation of 50% already takes into account that better opportunities will be available in the future. This statistic means that the amount of money we invest into research in total across time and funding agencies should be roughly equal to the total amount of money that has been or will be invested into existing interventions. This global, long‐term 50-50 split can be achieved in many ways. One or more EA funding agencies temporarily investing much more than 50% into research could be a good way to implement it.