Executive summary: The author offers five experience-based proposals for improving development charity work in 2026—ranging from reducing car use to lowering NGO salaries—arguing that many current practices are inefficient, distort local systems, and undermine long-term, cost-effective impact.
Key points:
The author argues that NGO car ownership in low-income countries is usually economically inefficient, socially distorting, and sets unrealistic norms compared to cheaper alternatives like public transport or motorbikes.
Short-term, time-bound projects are criticized as inefficient and sometimes harmful, with the author arguing charities should instead fund long-term solutions delivered by organizations that do one thing well.
The author claims cost-effectiveness analysis should be standard in development sectors and suggests EA has positively influenced wider donor attention to cost-effectiveness.
Donor funding should be bimodal, focusing on small-scale testing of new ideas and large-scale funding of proven interventions, rather than large unproven projects.
The author argues that high NGO salaries reduce cost-effectiveness, distort local labor markets, and pull talent away from government and business, and suggests paying closer to market rates.
The post emphasizes that these recommendations are not universally applicable but reflect practical lessons from the author’s on-the-ground experience in development work.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, and contact us if you have feedback.
Executive summary: The author offers five experience-based proposals for improving development charity work in 2026—ranging from reducing car use to lowering NGO salaries—arguing that many current practices are inefficient, distort local systems, and undermine long-term, cost-effective impact.
Key points:
The author argues that NGO car ownership in low-income countries is usually economically inefficient, socially distorting, and sets unrealistic norms compared to cheaper alternatives like public transport or motorbikes.
Short-term, time-bound projects are criticized as inefficient and sometimes harmful, with the author arguing charities should instead fund long-term solutions delivered by organizations that do one thing well.
The author claims cost-effectiveness analysis should be standard in development sectors and suggests EA has positively influenced wider donor attention to cost-effectiveness.
Donor funding should be bimodal, focusing on small-scale testing of new ideas and large-scale funding of proven interventions, rather than large unproven projects.
The author argues that high NGO salaries reduce cost-effectiveness, distort local labor markets, and pull talent away from government and business, and suggests paying closer to market rates.
The post emphasizes that these recommendations are not universally applicable but reflect practical lessons from the author’s on-the-ground experience in development work.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, and contact us if you have feedback.