I think the Forum should have a collection of posts (“sequence”) on global health and development. What posts should we include?
Here’s a very rough preliminary list:
Moral foundations
Ord, Toby (2019) The moral imperative toward cost-effectiveness in global health, in Hilary Greaves & Theron Pummer (eds.) Effective Altruism: Philosophical Issues, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 29–36.
Ord, Toby (2012) Global poverty and the demands of morality, in John Perry (ed.) God, the Good, and Utilitarianism, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 177–191.
Singer, Peter (1972) Famine, affluence, and morality, Philosophy & Public Affairs, vol. 1, pp. 229–243.
Giving
GiveWell (2010) Your donation can change someone’s life, GiveWell.
GiveWell (2016) The wrong donation can accomplish nothing, GiveWell.
GiveWell (2010) Your dollar goes further overseas, GiveWell, September.
Randomista debate
Halstead, John & Hauke Hillebrandt (2020) Growth and the case against randomista development, Effective Altruism Forum, January 16.
Ogden, Timothy (2020) RCTs in development economics, their critics and their evolution, in Florent Bédécarrats, Isabelle Guérin & François Roubaud (eds.) Randomized Control Trials in the Field of Development, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 126–151.
Aid skepticism
Karnofsky, Holden (2015) The lack of controversy over well-targeted aid, The GiveWell Blog, November 6.
MacAskill, William (2019) Aid scepticism and effective altruism, Journal of Practical Ethics, vol. 7, pp. 49–60.
Misc
Kuhn, Ben (2019) Why Nations Fail and the long-termist view of global poverty, Ben Kuhn’s Blog, July 16.
Kaufman, Jeff (2015) Why global poverty?, Jeff Kaufman’s Blog, August 11.
Ord, Toby (2017) The value of money going to different groups, Centre for Effective Altruism, May 2 (updated 19 February 2020).
Banerjee & Duflo ‘Foreign affairs’ article is pretty bad, and contains an interesting error, so maybe it should be removed:
“Between 2014 and 2016, a total of 582 million insecticide-treated mosquito nets were delivered globally. Of these, 75 percent were given out through mass distribution campaigns of free bed nets, saving tens of millions of lives.”
They actually repeat this mistake in their recent book ‘Good economics for hard times’:
“The magazine Nature concluded that insecticide-treated net distributions averted 450 million malaria deaths between 2000 and 2015.”
which probably based on an old GWWC article, but they mix up deaths and cases.
(Says something about their priors that they believe that bed nets have saved half almost half a billion lives and they’re off by two orders of magnitude. It’s the Nobel prize in economics equivalent of believing that Michael Bloomberg could give every American $1m.)
Maybe include ‘Givewell’s Top Charities are increasingly hard to beat’ instead?
Interestingly, I considered removing it after reading it and being unimpressed by it, but distrusted my judgment since (I think) I saw it recommended by a reputable social scientist. The error escaped my attention, though. I will remove it. Thanks.
Per word—and for a particular kind of person—Piper (2015) is one of the most powerful things ever written on the topic. I think about it most months of my life. But I understand why you might not include it in a curriculum.
Roodman (2007)
As an alternative to “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” there is Peter Unger’s Living High and Letting Die, of which Chapter 2 is particularly relevant. It’s more philosophical (this could be a bad thing) and much more comprehensive than Singer’s article.
Thanks. A related option would be to list The Singer solution to world poverty, which describes both Singer’s drowning child example and some of Unger’s thought experiments. (I thought that article was pretty powerful when I first read it, but that was over a decade ago.)