Great analysis! I like the way you laid out your reasoning—it was easy for me to understand why you came to the conclusions you did.
You explained that you expect meta-charities like Giving What We Can to have a high impact, but you didn’t say you planned on donating to them. Why not?
I was a bit confused by your conclusion—are you saying you think you should give to ACE-recommended charities, or to ACE itself? Do you believe a donation to ACE itself is more effective than donations to ACE top charities?
I’m counting ACE as metacharity, and I’m planning to donate to ACE itself. I wish I could present a good reason why I think that a (marginal) donation to ACE is even more effective than a donation to its top charities, but it’s in the nature of the beast, the startup, that there’s no solid track record of the effectiveness of its program, and that what track record there is surely still understates its potential.
I think that in the area of farmed animal advocacy:
a lot more research into program cost-effectiveness is needed,
greater awareness for the importance of this research is needed, and
charities are still unsure whether an ACE recommendation is worth the time they’d have to invest in it.
My hope is that once ACE becomes notable enough that 3 becomes a nonissue for most charities, this will encourage 2 and lead to 1. Thus the top charities will become even better and the overall effectiveness waterline in the cause area will also rise as less effective charities at least become aware in which direction they should optimize. All the while donors will put more trust into ACE’s recommendations and thus more money into its top charities, leading to a virtuous circle.
Great analysis! I like the way you laid out your reasoning—it was easy for me to understand why you came to the conclusions you did.
You explained that you expect meta-charities like Giving What We Can to have a high impact, but you didn’t say you planned on donating to them. Why not?
I was a bit confused by your conclusion—are you saying you think you should give to ACE-recommended charities, or to ACE itself? Do you believe a donation to ACE itself is more effective than donations to ACE top charities?
I’m counting ACE as metacharity, and I’m planning to donate to ACE itself. I wish I could present a good reason why I think that a (marginal) donation to ACE is even more effective than a donation to its top charities, but it’s in the nature of the beast, the startup, that there’s no solid track record of the effectiveness of its program, and that what track record there is surely still understates its potential.
I think that in the area of farmed animal advocacy:
a lot more research into program cost-effectiveness is needed,
greater awareness for the importance of this research is needed, and
charities are still unsure whether an ACE recommendation is worth the time they’d have to invest in it.
My hope is that once ACE becomes notable enough that 3 becomes a nonissue for most charities, this will encourage 2 and lead to 1. Thus the top charities will become even better and the overall effectiveness waterline in the cause area will also rise as less effective charities at least become aware in which direction they should optimize. All the while donors will put more trust into ACE’s recommendations and thus more money into its top charities, leading to a virtuous circle.