Assuming a loguniform distribution for the cost-effectiveness of corporate campaigns for chicken welfare as a fraction of the cost-effectiveness of GiveWellâs top charities ranging from 0.5 to 100 k, there would be 75.5 % (= (ln(10^5) - ln(10))/â(ln(10^5) - ln(0.5))) chance of corporate campaigns being at least 10 times as cost-effective as GiveWellâs top charities. So I agree my wording above (âunder almost any plausible assumptionâ) was too strong in light of Lukeâs 2018 guesses. I changed the wording to âunder most plausible assumptionsâ.
Rethink Prioritiesâ welfare range estimates seem roughly in line with the above. Rethinkâs 5th and 95th percentile welfare range for chickens are 0.602 % (= 0.002/â0.332) and 2.62 times (= 0.869/â0.332) the median welfare range I used to estimate corporate campaigns increase welfare 1.71 k times as cost-effective as GiveWellâs top charities. If I had used the 5th and 95th percentile welfare range, I would have concluded corporate campaigns increase welfare 10.3 (= 0.00602*1.71*10^3) and 4.48 k times as cost-effectively as GiveWellâs top charities. In reality, there are uncertainty in other inputs, so maybe the plausible range of values is actually similar to what Luke guesses back in 2018 (one roughly gets Lukeâs interval of 0.5 to 100 k multiplying 10.3 and 4.48 k by 1â20 and 20).
Thanks, Joshua!
Assuming a loguniform distribution for the cost-effectiveness of corporate campaigns for chicken welfare as a fraction of the cost-effectiveness of GiveWellâs top charities ranging from 0.5 to 100 k, there would be 75.5 % (= (ln(10^5) - ln(10))/â(ln(10^5) - ln(0.5))) chance of corporate campaigns being at least 10 times as cost-effective as GiveWellâs top charities. So I agree my wording above (âunder almost any plausible assumptionâ) was too strong in light of Lukeâs 2018 guesses. I changed the wording to âunder most plausible assumptionsâ.
Rethink Prioritiesâ welfare range estimates seem roughly in line with the above. Rethinkâs 5th and 95th percentile welfare range for chickens are 0.602 % (= 0.002/â0.332) and 2.62 times (= 0.869/â0.332) the median welfare range I used to estimate corporate campaigns increase welfare 1.71 k times as cost-effective as GiveWellâs top charities. If I had used the 5th and 95th percentile welfare range, I would have concluded corporate campaigns increase welfare 10.3 (= 0.00602*1.71*10^3) and 4.48 k times as cost-effectively as GiveWellâs top charities. In reality, there are uncertainty in other inputs, so maybe the plausible range of values is actually similar to what Luke guesses back in 2018 (one roughly gets Lukeâs interval of 0.5 to 100 k multiplying 10.3 and 4.48 k by 1â20 and 20).