Firstly, establishing the truth of this claim should be a top priority for EAs who are focused on reducing global poverty. EAs are now moving more than a hundred million dollars every year in this space, so evaluating a crucial consideration such as this is of paramount importance.
Agreed.
Secondly, it is less clear whether advocacy for growth is crowded relative to its scale, which is the more relevant comparison.
I’m not so sure. What matters is not the scale x impact of the problem, but of the intervention, and so the matter is if an additional contribution would scale. I’m pretty sure that economic growth is hugely important and that policies conducing to it must be supported, but the question is if there’s any low-hanging fruit that I can grab myself here. Show me a proposal and I’m gonna ask “why isn’t the government/ banks / World Bank / Bill Gates funding it?” (damn convergent interests and institutional altruists eating all the low-hanging fruit!)
However, I do concede that RD is not very neglected anymore.
Thirdly, we present several suggestions for the kinds of things that could be funded in Appendix 3
Actually, that’d be Appendix 5, right? I liked them, in general. BTW, I’m very curious about what happened to appendix 4.
Agreed.
I’m not so sure. What matters is not the scale x impact of the problem, but of the intervention, and so the matter is if an additional contribution would scale. I’m pretty sure that economic growth is hugely important and that policies conducing to it must be supported, but the question is if there’s any low-hanging fruit that I can grab myself here. Show me a proposal and I’m gonna ask “why isn’t the government/ banks / World Bank / Bill Gates funding it?” (damn convergent interests and institutional altruists eating all the low-hanging fruit!)
However, I do concede that RD is not very neglected anymore.
Actually, that’d be Appendix 5, right? I liked them, in general. BTW, I’m very curious about what happened to appendix 4.