I find that surprising. Any thoughts on why that might be? Do you think that groups don’t know that they can apply or that most groups aren’t really doing much in the way of activities that would benefit from funding?
I don’t really have relevant data – my guess is the effect is 65% due to simply fewer such groups existing in the first place, and 35% due to such groups being less aware that they can apply for funding.
(Though I think this split depends a lot on how broad we consider the relevant population of groups to be – e.g., if we counted all university groups having anything to do with animal welfare, whether or not they are particularly effectiveness-minded, then the claim that fewer such groups exist may be false.)
But my guess is very uncertain since I have very little familiarity with what kind of groups are existing at universities in the English-speaking world, so I’d be very interested in hearing from someone who might have a more informed impression.
I find that surprising. Any thoughts on why that might be? Do you think that groups don’t know that they can apply or that most groups aren’t really doing much in the way of activities that would benefit from funding?
I don’t really have relevant data – my guess is the effect is 65% due to simply fewer such groups existing in the first place, and 35% due to such groups being less aware that they can apply for funding.
(Though I think this split depends a lot on how broad we consider the relevant population of groups to be – e.g., if we counted all university groups having anything to do with animal welfare, whether or not they are particularly effectiveness-minded, then the claim that fewer such groups exist may be false.)
But my guess is very uncertain since I have very little familiarity with what kind of groups are existing at universities in the English-speaking world, so I’d be very interested in hearing from someone who might have a more informed impression.