When we “impact rate” the plan changes, we also try to make an initial assessment of how much is counterfactually due to us (as well as how much extra impact results non-counterfactually adjusted).
We then to more in-depth analysis of the counterfactuals in crucial cases. Because we think the impact of plan changes it fat tailed, if we can understand the top 5% of them, we get a reasonable overall picture.
We do this analysis in documents like this: https://80000hours.org/2016/12/has-80000-hours-justified-its-costs/
Each individual case is debateable, but I think there’s a large enough volume of cases now to justify that we’re having a substantial impact.
Hi there,
It’s definitely hard for people to estimate.
When we “impact rate” the plan changes, we also try to make an initial assessment of how much is counterfactually due to us (as well as how much extra impact results non-counterfactually adjusted).
We then to more in-depth analysis of the counterfactuals in crucial cases. Because we think the impact of plan changes it fat tailed, if we can understand the top 5% of them, we get a reasonable overall picture. We do this analysis in documents like this: https://80000hours.org/2016/12/has-80000-hours-justified-its-costs/
Each individual case is debateable, but I think there’s a large enough volume of cases now to justify that we’re having a substantial impact.