I would do research on whether EA should be a narrow movement of people making significant impact, or a much broader one of shallower impact. It feels like this has been talked about for years, but I’ve not seen actual research so it seems we are going to sleepwalk into making no decision here.
I’ve sometimes wondered whether it would be good for there to be a distinct brand and movement for less hardcore EA, that is less concerned with prestige, less elitist, more relaxed, and with more mainstream appeal. Perhaps it could be thought of as the Championship to EA’s Premier League. I think there are already examples, e.g. Probably Good (alternative to 80,000 Hours), TLYCS and OFTW (alternatives to GWWC), and the different tiers of EA investing groups (rough and ready vs careful and considered). Places where you feel comfortable only spending 5 minutes editing a post, rather than agonising about it for hours; where you feel less pressure to compete with the best in the world; where you are less prone to analysis paralysis or perfect being the enemy of the good; where there is less stress, burnout and alienation; where ultimately the area under the impact curve could be comparable, or even bigger..? Perhaps one of the names mentioned here could be used.
[Note I expect pushback on this, and considered posting anonymously, but I’m posting in the spirit of the potential broader movement. Apologies if I’ve offended anyone by insinuating they are “only” Championship material. That was not my intention—the Championship is still a very high standard in absolute terms!]
I’m planning on doing research not too far off this!
Specifically—researching previous/current social movements (climate, anti-nuclear, civil rights, etc.) and trying to understand how effective mass social movement organisations are or could be. My research will be focused more on the use of protest within movements but I can imagine there will be some overlap. Some things I’m hoping to find are:
Does increasing public attention lead to increased public support?
Does increasing public support lead to positive policy change?
When to be a mass-movement vs when to stay more targeted
The role of different actors (activists, policymakers, NGOs) at different times
What are some internal and external factors that might dictate movement success?
What is the base rate for a successful mass movement?
Going to post some research I’ve been doing on Extinction Rebellion and the climate movement in the next couple of weeks so stay tuned!
This might actually vary by cause area. If it did, I wonder if it would be possible for different causes to adopt different stances or whether that’s just not going to be possible.
I would do research on whether EA should be a narrow movement of people making significant impact, or a much broader one of shallower impact. It feels like this has been talked about for years, but I’ve not seen actual research so it seems we are going to sleepwalk into making no decision here.
I’ve sometimes wondered whether it would be good for there to be a distinct brand and movement for less hardcore EA, that is less concerned with prestige, less elitist, more relaxed, and with more mainstream appeal. Perhaps it could be thought of as the Championship to EA’s Premier League. I think there are already examples, e.g. Probably Good (alternative to 80,000 Hours), TLYCS and OFTW (alternatives to GWWC), and the different tiers of EA investing groups (rough and ready vs careful and considered). Places where you feel comfortable only spending 5 minutes editing a post, rather than agonising about it for hours; where you feel less pressure to compete with the best in the world; where you are less prone to analysis paralysis or perfect being the enemy of the good; where there is less stress, burnout and alienation; where ultimately the area under the impact curve could be comparable, or even bigger..? Perhaps one of the names mentioned here could be used.
[Note I expect pushback on this, and considered posting anonymously, but I’m posting in the spirit of the potential broader movement. Apologies if I’ve offended anyone by insinuating they are “only” Championship material. That was not my intention—the Championship is still a very high standard in absolute terms!]
Some related discussion here.
I’m planning on doing research not too far off this!
Specifically—researching previous/current social movements (climate, anti-nuclear, civil rights, etc.) and trying to understand how effective mass social movement organisations are or could be. My research will be focused more on the use of protest within movements but I can imagine there will be some overlap. Some things I’m hoping to find are:
Does increasing public attention lead to increased public support?
Does increasing public support lead to positive policy change?
When to be a mass-movement vs when to stay more targeted
The role of different actors (activists, policymakers, NGOs) at different times
What are some internal and external factors that might dictate movement success?
What is the base rate for a successful mass movement?
Going to post some research I’ve been doing on Extinction Rebellion and the climate movement in the next couple of weeks so stay tuned!
I agree that questions in this vicinity seem worth someone doing more work on.
Some relevant prior discussion can be found in the Bibliography, tagged posts, and “Discussion” page here: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/tag/value-of-movement-growth
This might actually vary by cause area. If it did, I wonder if it would be possible for different causes to adopt different stances or whether that’s just not going to be possible.