I like this idea. But why not set up welfare science, an interdisciplinary field including welfare economics, welfare biology, and positive psychology?
I think itās right to think outside econ, but this name doesnāt quite sound right to meāthings that call themselves āX scienceā often arenāt, e.g. Christian science. And there already is an emerging field around āglobal priorities researchā, which seems to me to get closer to the pivotal questions in EA than a narrow focus on econ/ābio/āpsych would.
Yeah, imo the most natural thing is to make āglobal priorities researchā a discipline. Maybe there should also be other (sub)disciplines that are more cause specific, ie related to (human) wellbeing, existential risks, etc.
Or maybe just āpriorities researchā. You could have different researchers focusing on different levels, some on global problems and some on local ones.
Pros:
Easier to digest for most people, who also value solving local issues
We do want prioritisation to also happen at national/āmunicipal levels and not just globally
Perhaps this could even free up budget for more foreign aid, although Iām a bit doubtful
Cons:
Maybe national level research would be much more popular, and thus weād lose an important part of what we want this to achieve
National interests often conflict with global ones
I like this idea. But why not set up welfare science, an interdisciplinary field including welfare economics, welfare biology, and positive psychology?
Or āwellbeing scienceā. Either would be better than welfare economics. Weāre more than economists.
I think itās right to think outside econ, but this name doesnāt quite sound right to meāthings that call themselves āX scienceā often arenāt, e.g. Christian science. And there already is an emerging field around āglobal priorities researchā, which seems to me to get closer to the pivotal questions in EA than a narrow focus on econ/ābio/āpsych would.
Yeah, imo the most natural thing is to make āglobal priorities researchā a discipline. Maybe there should also be other (sub)disciplines that are more cause specific, ie related to (human) wellbeing, existential risks, etc.
Or maybe just āpriorities researchā. You could have different researchers focusing on different levels, some on global problems and some on local ones.
Pros:
Easier to digest for most people, who also value solving local issues
We do want prioritisation to also happen at national/āmunicipal levels and not just globally
Perhaps this could even free up budget for more foreign aid, although Iām a bit doubtful
Cons:
Maybe national level research would be much more popular, and thus weād lose an important part of what we want this to achieve
National interests often conflict with global ones