Thanks for your extensive answer and insight. What you are saying makes sense, especially the points of charities competing for limited resources and the fact that the best charities are many times more-cost effective. The latter makes it incredibly difficult to make the example of Organisation 2 work. Considering that the top intervention is over ten times more cost-effective than the average, focusing on cost-effectiveness seems to be the best choice currently! (imagining to increase the amount of people spending/amount of dollar spending by 900% is completely impossible, and if it would be possible, very counterproductive since charities compete for limited resources)
The link you shared is really helpful to me, thank you!
However I still think that research and insight towards “charity decision-making and reward” to increase the amount people spend for charity and the amount of people spending for charity can prove very useful, in particular to the cost-effective organizations.
Thanks for your extensive answer and insight. What you are saying makes sense, especially the points of charities competing for limited resources and the fact that the best charities are many times more-cost effective. The latter makes it incredibly difficult to make the example of Organisation 2 work. Considering that the top intervention is over ten times more cost-effective than the average, focusing on cost-effectiveness seems to be the best choice currently! (imagining to increase the amount of people spending/amount of dollar spending by 900% is completely impossible, and if it would be possible, very counterproductive since charities compete for limited resources)
The link you shared is really helpful to me, thank you!
However I still think that research and insight towards “charity decision-making and reward” to increase the amount people spend for charity and the amount of people spending for charity can prove very useful, in particular to the cost-effective organizations.